ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

The stories covered by ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ London are a matter for its editors, and decisions will be based on a number of variables. The story’s perceived newsworthiness was therefore not a matter for the ECU to consider as it did not raise the prospect of a beach of editorial standards .Β 

However, the manner in which it was done was relevant.Β  The Editorial Guidelines commit the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ to β€œdue accuracy” and β€œdue impartiality” and the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ also publishes regular Election Guidelines.

The election period for England began on 28 March 2022 and as the Editorial Guidelines state in relation to providing impartial news: β€œthere is a special responsibility to audiences who are about to vote in elections or referendums”.Β  The Mound was undoubtedly a major political issue in the Westminster City Council election.Β 

The ECU did not accept the report was misleading in its overall portrayal, as the overwhelming weight of opinion on this subject appears to have been critical of the attraction, reflected in a critical internal review by the Council. Nevertheless, there was a clear obligation to represent an appropriate range of political opinion. The ECU understood ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ London did approach the Conservative Group but its members refused to comment. That refusal, quite rightly, did not lead to the item being dropped, as the Election Guidelines allow, and the reporter attempted to add the missing strand of argument by quoting from a Council Official. But whilst referring to the officers of the Council may have been relevant, it remained essential to provide an appropriate range of political opinion or, if a spokesperson from an individual party was unavailable, to state they had refused to comment. This did not happen, leading to a lack of due impartiality in the piece.

The complainant also highlighted the following remarks made at the end of the item:

Reporter:Β  It’s fair to say it’s not going to be remembered by many particularly fondly, in fact by most as something of a monumental mistake.

Presenter:Β  I think that’s fair comment, Luke.

The ECU agreed these comments did cross into personal opinion, breached due impartiality and were not suitable for a report during an election period.
Partly Upheld