Biased Broadcasting Corporation: UKIP

I complained to the BBC about it not giving coverage to UKIP, over the Norwich by-election, while it gave coverage to the Greens - a fringe party, if ever there were one.

Here is the BBC's response:

Please accept our apologies for the delay in replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and we are sorry you have had to wait on this occasion.

I understand you continue to feel our coverage of UKIP's Norwich North by-election campaign was not conducive with the party's level of support.

On the general issue of balance, there is an argument that in any election, all candidates standing should be given similar levels of coverage.
However, such an approach would mean that frivolous candidates, or those who might use an election to promote particular causes or commercial interests, would receive the same amount of coverage as those who had a realistic chance of victory. Therefore, the BBC takes the view that the best interest of the licence-payers - and voters - is served by giving appropriate levels of coverage to each candidate or party.

Normally, the most significant past result to take into account would be the last equivalent election - in this case, the 2005 General Election - but other subsequent and different elections can be taken into account in assessing levels of support for parties. In the case of Norwich North, the judgement was that the local and European results were so recent that they should be given rather more weight than normal.

It is by no means a straightforward calculation to arrive at this conclusion though. Norwich North falls across two different local authorities, so ward and division boundaries do not necessarily coincide, which means an approximation of voting patterns is necessary.

Although election results are not the only measure of past and/or current support, the calculation is normally made by looking at evidence of the electorate within the actual constituency. Therefore in the case of the European elections it would not be based on the whole of the Eastern Region
- only on how people in the Norwich North constituency voted.

The judgement about levels of coverage, respectively, for the Greens and UKIP, had to be looked at separately and on the evidence of past/current electoral support and other relevant factors, it was a reasonable judgement that the Green Party - in this by-election - merited a similar level of coverage to the main three parties.

Based on the same criteria, UKIP had not demonstrated sufficient evidence of electoral support in the Norwich North constituency to justify them being given similar levels of coverage to the main three parties. The Chief Adviser, Politics advised however that they had demonstrated a level of electoral support in the constituency sufficient to receive some coverage, in proportion to those parties.

This was based on the following evidence:

From the European elections, on 4 June, it is possible to break down the voting by local authority. These are the approximate percentage shares of the vote for the leading 6 parties in each of the two authorities covering the constituency:

Norwich City

Broadland

Cons 17.5 36

Lab 17

10.5

Lib Dem 15

16

UKIP 12

25

Green 25

11.5

BNP 4.5

6

(This is exactly how the table was formatted in their email - I can't make sense of it, either)

Although the analysis of the county council elections is more complex, a study carried out by the Eastern Daily Press early in the campaign set out the following (rounded) approximation of percentage share of the vote in the local elections within the Norwich North constituency:

Cons 40
Lab 18.5
Lib Dem 16.5
Green 16
UKIP 8 (did not stand in all wards)
BNP 1

In local government the Greens have established a significant and improving track record of support in Norwich - some of that within the Norwich North constituency. By contrast, UKIP have no track record of success locally in the same area.

Additionally, a telephone opinion poll was taken in Norwich North just before the campaign began. It was carried out by ICM with a sample of just over 500 and the results were as follows:

Conservative 34%
Labour 30%
Liberal Democrat 15%
Green 14%
UKIP 4%

Whilst being careful not to give undue weight to this survey in respect of levels of support in Norwich North, it did appear to provide some evidence of levels of electoral support consistent with the evidence of real voting in the local elections, which are normally more closely in line with Westminster than European elections. So in making the calculation about coverage of the by-election, the ICM survey was taken into account.

The BBC's approach is entirely consistent and takes no account whatsoever of what the particular policies of different parties are. In the June 09 European election campaign, UKIP received similar levels of coverage to the three main parties. This was based primarily on the party's strong showing in the 04 European election, when they won 12 seats and a higher share of the vote than the Liberal Democrats.

The fact that, in the event, UKIP secured more votes in the Norwich North by-election than the Greens does not invalidate the original assessment in any way. Judgements about levels of coverage can only be taken using existing evidence, they cannot speculate about future voting, without supporting evidence.

We are confident that we reported the UKIP campaign proportionately and in line with our Editorial Guidelines and the specific editorial guidance circulated to news teams by our Chief Advisor, Politics. This guidance is included below for your information:

"The Norwich North by-election takes place on July 23rd, the writ having now been moved.

From now on, in any pieces directly concerning the by-election, the constituency or the candidates, on TV, radio or online (either network or local/regional programmes broadcast in the constituency), output should take care to ensure due impartiality in the context of an Election Period.

The three main parties, Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats, should receive similar levels of coverage. On the basis of evidence of past and current electoral support in the constituency, the Green Party should receive a similar level of coverage to the three main parties. UKIP have also demonstrated a level of electoral support in the constituency sufficient to receive some coverage, in proportion to the main parties.

Other parties which can demonstrate some electoral support, including the BNP, should receive some coverage - proportionate to the main parties - over and above those candidates or parties with little evidence of electoral support, on programmes which cover the by-election.

The relative levels of coverage between the parties will depend on the context, format and duration of the output concerned - for further advice, please contact me on the numbers below.

As normal, any output about the by-election or candidates which does not mention all the candidates should - as a minimum - refer the audience to the website (link below) listing all candidates (until close of nominations, those so far declared).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/8127025.stm

This advice should be read in conjunction with Editorial Guidelines ("Broadcasting During Elections"):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/edguide/politics/broadca
stingdur.shtml"

I appreciate you may continue to hold differing views regarding this matter; however should you now wish to proceed to the second stage of the complaints process, it's now open to you to write to the Director of BBC
News:

HelenBoadenComplaints@bbc.co.uk

Helen Boaden
Director
BBC News
Room 5601
Television Centre
Wood Lane
London W12 7RJ

Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Regards

Liam Boyle
BBC Complaints

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

---------Original Message-------------


I have received a response to a complaint under reference xxxxxxxxxx and am not satisfied with the response.

In your response you claim that because there are so many candidates in the Norwich North by-election you allocate coverage to candidates based on evidence of past and/or present support".

In the election last month UKIP came second, ahead of Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens. Labour no longer controls a single county council in England and the Lib Dems control only one. Labour lost three quarters of their councillors in England and now have less that the Lib Dems. The Greens continue to be an irrelevance in local, national and EU elections.

Glenn Tingle's opponent in Norwich North, Craig Murray, says on his website that more people are telling him that they will be voting UKIP than any other party which confirms that Glenn Tingle is the leading candidate.

So the BBC has clearly not based its election coverage on "evidence of past and/or present support". I am very unhappy at the unfair promotion of Labour, the Lib Dems and the Green Party at the expense of UKIP and at being lied to in the response to my original complaint.

A sizeable essay which does not convince. Did they not take into account the recent election results and poll results?