Complaint
The programme included a discussion about the future of populism after the defeat of Donald Trump in the US presidential election. Mark Wallace, Chief Executive of the website ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ, complained that it was inaccurate for one of the contributors to take ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ alongside “the Tea Party…or other similar movements†as an example of “the way in which the equivalent of Africanised bees…have invaded decent political partiesâ€, ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ not being a “m´Ç±¹±ð³¾±ð²Ô³Ùâ€, nor having an agenda of “i²Ô±¹²¹»å¾±²Ô²µâ€ a political party, nor deserving of the implication that it was less than “d±ð³¦±ð²Ô³Ùâ€. He also complained that a later comment by the same contributor wrongly associated ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ with conspiracy theorists, and argued that both misconceptions should have been corrected on air. The ECU considered the complaint in the light of the Â鶹ԼÅÄ’s standards of accuracy.
Outcome
In the ECU’s view, the contributor’s comments about conspiracy theorists, in which ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ was not mentioned, were sufficiently separated from his earlier reference to the website for there to be little prospect that they would lead listeners to associate the two, and this aspect of the complaint was not upheld.
In relation to the comments which named ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ, the ECU noted the website’s description of itself as a forum designed “to champion the interests of grassroots Tory members and to argue for a broad conservatismâ€. The ECU found no grounds for regarding that description as controversial, and agreed with Mr Wallace that it was the contributor’s description which was inaccurate. Although the inaccuracy was not pointed out on air, the presenter of the item did describe the comments as “a very particular characterisation of populismâ€, which would have indicated that listeners should not take them as definitive, and Â鶹ԼÅÄ News subsequently posted the following entry on the Corrections and Clarifications page of the Â鶹ԼÅÄ website:
In a discussion about the impact Donald Trump has had on populist politics a contributor referred to the role played by the Tea Party, ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ â€˜and other similar movements’. ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ has been in touch to make clear the company is a media outlet, staffed by journalists who write about the Conservative Party and Conservative politics, that it is not a ‘movement’ and it is not in any way equivalent to or similar to the Tea Party or any ‘other similar movements’.
In the ECU’s judgement, this would have sufficed to resolve the issue of complaint but for the fact that, while generally dissociating the website from populist movements, it did not address the characterisation of ConservativeÂ鶹ԼÅÄ as invasive and as standing in contrast to “decent political parties†– the elements of the comments which, in the ECU’s view, made them objectionable as well as merely inaccurate. The ECU therefore upheld this aspect of Mr Wallace’s complaint.
Partly upheld
Further action
The finding was reported to the Board of Â鶹ԼÅÄ News and discussed with the programme-makers concerned.