Charlie Walsham

Has BBC Verify done more harm than good?

(Photo: Getty)

As an increasingly jaded BBC hack, I reacted to the creation of BBC Verify last May with temple-rubbing despondency. The definition of ‘verify’ is to ‘to prove that something exists or is true, or to make certain that something is correct’. This is, in essence, the most basic rule of journalism. Yet here we were, having to reassure our increasingly distrustful audiences that we weren’t just broadcasting any old rubbish without checking it properly. Now why might that have become necessary?

Regrettably, some areas of journalistic inquiry have been, in effect, ‘cancelled’ at the BBC

One need look no further than the BBC’s coverage of Covid-19. The BBC seemed to jettison all pretence at balance during the pandemic. Unverified and often misleading claims about the virus, the efficacy of lockdowns, face-coverings and other non-pharmaceutical interventions were broadcast on a daily basis. When vaccines arrived, the BBC refused to countenance even the mildest journalistic curiosity.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in