15/12/2017 Newswatch

watching?

I will be there! I'm so

excited!

You are a very lucky woman.

Thank you very much for joining us

tonight, Emma Bullimore. Now, it is

time for Newswatch.

Hello, welcome to Newswatch

with me, Samira Ahmed.

Today we've got a special

edition of Newswatch.

We're devoting the whole show

to an exclusive interview

with the outgoing director of news

and current affairs, James Harding.

We ask him about his record

during his four years in the role,

and what advice he has

for his successor, Fran Unsworth,

who's just been appointed.

So, come the New Year,

BBC News will have a new boss.

James Harding is off to set

up his own news media venture.

But who is he and what

challenges has he faced?

James joined the BBC in 2013, having

left his previous role as editor

of The Times newspaper

the year before.

It was his first job

in broadcasting, heading up

the largest broadcast news operation

in the world.

He presided over BBC News during one

of the most divisive times in recent

British political history.

The Scottish independence

referendum, Brexit,

and two general elections.

He's also had to deal with a series

of pay rows at BBC News,

including the pay gap between male

and female presenters.

But he is credited with

the appointment of the BBC's first

female political editor,

Laura Kuenssberg.

James's replacement

will be Fran Unsworth,

a long-term BBC journalist

who is currently his

deputy, and director

of the BBC World Service.

Well, I've been speaking

to James Harding and began

by asking him about Brexit,

and what he says to the many viewers

who thought the BBC was part

of the establishment

during the EU referendum.

Clearly favouring Remain.

I think that the referendum was,

of course, an incredibly

polarising time, as you say,

Samira.

But actually what's interesting is,

of course, we've had

complaints from both sides

and what we try to do,

and I think when you look back

and you look at the coverage,

what we actually did do,

was set about trying to explain

what the choice was,

trying to report out

what the choice was.

If you look back over the last few

years, there have been

an extraordinary number

of democratic moments, two

referendums, two general elections,

a host of others around the world.

I think one of the real lessons

of the last few years is you can't

predict what's going to happen.

You can't rely on either political

predictions or polls,

and that means for us we have to do

what we're here for,

we've got to make sure that people

get a sense of what the choice is.

You mention the need for the BBC

to provide informed news about that

issue, and there was a big

accusation from many viewers

that the BBC was in fact,

during the referendum,

too timid in calling out things,

notably statistical claims

being made by one side or another

that just weren't true.

There's no question at all,

the BBC and, as a news organisation,

a group of journalists,

what we set out to do

is to understand the world presented

to us and make choices.

In that there is no question

at all that the BBC has to make

judgments, and we do.

I suppose that on the issue

of statistics, the specific question

you're asking about numbers,

actually, we made a very clear

choice to try and challenge those

numbers, question those numbers,

and more than that, we didn't do it

in a sort of ad hoc way,

we took something called reality

check, right, which was our system

for fact checking, we really

increased the resources,

the number of people working on it

and we've made that a permanent part

of the way in which we cover

politics and policy.

So, rather than stepping back

from analysing statistics

and numbers, we've actually

stepped into it.

With hindsight, should the BBC have

done representation of different

political views differently?

We've had many complaints from some

viewers over the years about,

for example, too much Nigel Farage.

So, I think it's a really good

and important issue, this,

and one that we spend an enormous

amount of time thinking about.

So, if you got into the team,

for example, on Question Time,

which would be a good place

to start, we are really

careful in trying to think

about where we hold the programme,

so we get the best possible

spread of audiences,

who's on the panel,

not just in the context

of who's on the panel

on a particular Thursday night,

but who's on the panel over

the course of a year,

over the course of an entire

political or electoral cycle.

So, we do really think

about it a great deal.

And actually if you look over time,

if you look over all of the BBC,

what we call output,

all of the BBC programmes,

it's something that we think

really carefully about.

Actually, if it's all right

with you, I think there's something

different that is really

worth thinking about.

It's not about the representation

of political parties, it's about

the representations of views

and personal points of view that

are not necessarily captured

by political parties

but are captured by groups of people

come individuals who feel

as though their voice should be

heard on the BBC.

One of the things we've really tried

to do is change that, too.

Trust in BBC News has been eroded

under your watch, hasn't it?

Well, actually, it moves, so

the truth is with trust, it moves.

I think that obviously

I arrived here on the back

of Savile and McAlpine, and those

were big issues facing the BBC

and confidence in BBC News.

Actually, that trust and confidence

was significantly restored.

But you're right, there's also

a very profound argument

going on around trust in the media

generally in the light of what's

happening politically.

I don't just mean party politically,

I don't just mean Brexit and Trump,

I mean the extent to which people

feel as though they're seen by,

if you like, the system.

By politicians, by the media.

In your resignation letter,

you said you were going to set up

a media company with

a clear point of view.

Does that mean you think the BBC's

aim of impartial news isn't working

in the age of fake news?

No, no, it doesn't, it means

exactly the opposite,

it means that the BBC's offer

is working and should be what it is,

which is impartial, but not

necessarily taking a position.

The public funds, we are funded

by the licence fee payer,

and everyone who pays

the licence fee, I think,

has a decent expectation

that the BBC should operate in such

a way that it reports what's

happening but doesn't

take a position.

Doesn't take a stand in the way

in which newspapers or websites

or other individuals might do.

No, actually, I really

believe in it.

If you look at the BBC's

trust, the BBC trust

levels are so much higher

than any other news organisation.

That's the simple fact.

And we still have to keep

on working on trust,

but it is the thing that is the most

impressive about the BBC and the

public's relationship with the BBC.

The first female political editor

was employed under your

watch, Laura Kuenssberg.

Why do you think she has been

getting unprecedented levels

of vitriol and hatred?

I don't know, I think it's

shameful that she is,

because she is an unbelievably

impressive journalist.

She is one of the most extraordinary

journalists I've ever worked with.

If you look at just

the thoughtfulness, the diligence

and the quality of the work,

I'm just amazed that

people are so personal,

even if they don't like the politics

they see in front of them.

The fact they're willing

to attack Laura, the fact

they're willing to do that,

I find is really shocking,

and is bad for the way

in which journalism is conducted

and public debate.

So, all I can say is that I know

a few people do this.

I do also have to say that I'm

in a happy position that many people

come up to me and say

what an extraordinary

job she's doing.

We get lots of complaints

from viewers that the BBC

is anti-Jeremy Corbyn and focused

on Labour Party divisions.

Do you agree that the BBC has

collectively failed on the whole

to treat him fairly and seriously?

No, I don't think that, although I

do think there is a really

interesting lesson in the coverage

of Jeremy Corbyn.

There was obviously great disquiet,

great opposition to him

within the Parliamentary Labour

Party.

And we reported that,

we reported obviously not just

the opposition to him,

but the efforts that

were made to get rid of him.

There were leadership contests that

were precisely about that.

The question is, did we get that mix

right alongside the mix

of changes that were happening

within the membership

of the local Labour Party,

and people who were not members?

So, I would say the in course

of the 2017 general election,

we really DID capture that mood.

If you go and you look at the way

in which we were covering

Jeremy Corbyn's rallies,

we were the people saying

the polls might say X,

but look what's happening in terms

of the rallies.

We also, I like to think, really got

to grips with the questions that

were the heart of Jeremy Corbyn's

proposal to the country

in the nature of the manifesto.

Once again trying to

examine the choice, rather

than the horse race.

But there is a question

which is, from the time

Jeremy Corbyn was elected

through to 2017, there are obviously

changes within some of those

constituency Labour Party...

Parts of the constituency

Labour Party, and a politics

element of that that is

also really interesting.

But also to the mood of certain

parts of the electorate,

and particularly young people.

And getting to that and making sure

we continue to get to that I think

is really important.

Briefly, do you have any regrets?

Oh, yeah, I'm sure

I have a fair few.

I'm not sure that Newswatch

is the most brilliant place to,

sort of, unburden myself

of all of them.

I think it is.

Licence fee payers...

All right, let's have a go at it.

I think that the...

The biggest issues I've got

are the one I raise about how

are we going to change

an organisation when the behaviour

of people around news

is changing so fast?

So, that's a long way of saying,

we still have huge audiences

for the 6pm and 10pm News.

The Today programme,

5 live and Newsbeat.

Yet we can also see people changing

the way in they consume news.

Are we moving fast enough

to make those changes?

And not just in terms

of the devices, also

the way we tell stories.

Your successor, Fran Unsworth,

is an internal candidate.

Which some might say

reflects the decision to go

a different way for the BBC.

Do you have any advice for her?

Well, I chose Fran when I joined

as my deputy, and she has been

an extraordinary person

to work with.

For people who don't know her,

Fran has worked at the BBC

for pretty much her entire career

and knows and understands it.

Most recently she was running

the BBC World Service.

What you see with Fran

is an incredibly thoughtful

manager of people.

A really intelligent judge

of news, and a fantastic

ambassador for the BBC.

But most of all, she has

the capacity to enable great people

to do exceptional work.

And when you are the director

of news and current affairs,

that's the thing you really

want to do, it's not what you do.

The leadership of the organisation

is enabling other people to do great

things and no-one does that better

in my experience, than Fran.

So I think she will be

a brilliant director of news

and current affairs.

I've loved working with her

and a great many people

in the BBC feel the same way.

Thank you, James Harding.

Thank you very much.

And that's all from us this week.

If you want to share your thoughts

on what James Harding had to say

or any aspect of BBC News

and current affairs,

you can call us on...

Or e-mail...

You can find us on Twitter...

And do have a look at our website

for previous interviews.

The address for that is...

We're off now till the New Year,

but do join us again on January 5th.

Until then, from all of us

on the programme, have a very

Merry Christmas and a happy

New Year.