Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has been on BBC Breakfast this morning to say that she was in daily conversations with the Chair of the BBC, Samir Shah.
However, she said that Donald Trump’s demands for $1bn in compensation were a “question for the chairman of the BBC, not for the government.”
It was revealed last night that the BBC had apologised to the US President for a Panorama episode that edited together 2 parts of his speech on 6th January 2021, but it rejected his claims for compensation.
His lawyers had threatened to sue the BBC for $1bn (£759m) in damages, unless they issued a retraction, an apology and compensation.
READ MORE – Donald Trump’s $1bn BBC tantrum – could it really happen?
In a statement last night, a BBC spokesperson said:
“Lawyers for the BBC have written to President Trump’s legal team in response to a letter received on Sunday.
“BBC Chair Samir Shah has separately sent a personal letter to the White House making clear to President Trump that he and the Corporation are sorry for the edit of the President’s speech on 6 January 2021, which featured in the programme.
“The BBC has no plans to rebroadcast the documentary ‘Trump: A Second Chance?’ on any BBC platforms.
“While the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited, we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim.”
READ MORE – 30,000+ rally behind BBC with petition to fight Trump “meddling”
The BBC outlined 5 reasons why it believes it doesn’t have a case to answer:
- The BBC did not have the rights to, and did not, distribute the Panorama episode on its US channels and when it was on the iPlayer, the documentary was restricted to viewers in the UK only;
- It believes that the documentary didn’t cause Trump harm, as he was reelected;
- It said that the clip was “not designed to mislead,” but instead was to shorten a long speech – the edit was “not done with malice.”
- The clip was “never meant to be considered in isolation.” Instead it was 12seconds within an hour-long show – which “contained lots of voices in support of Trump.”
- Opinion on a matter of public concern and political speech is heavily protected under defamation laws in the US.
Lisa Nandy told the BBC this morning that she was “confident” that the corporation was giving it the “seriousness that it demands.”
She added:
“The BBC guards its independence from government very fiercely for a reason. They’re there to hold the spotlight, not just to the country, but to us as a government as well.”
Speaking separately to Radio 4, she said that they would be looking at political appointments to the BBC Board:
“There is a real concern, which I share, that political appointments to the board of the BBC damaged confidence and trust in the BBC’s impartiality.
“That’s something that we will be looking at as part of the charter review, which sets the terms for the BBC for the next decade, and which this government is about to kick off.”
The BBC had been given a deadline of 22.00 today to respond to Trump’s lawyers.
