The BBC has rejected the complaints (Image: Getty)
The BBC has been accused of a “systemic failure” to balance pro- and pro-EU views in its coverage of Britain’s exit from the .
David Keighley, head of the media monitoring group News-Watch, submitted three complaints to the broadcasting regulator Ofcom between July 7, 2020, and February 10, 2021. He claimed the lacked due impartiality and favoured pro-EU voices.
He is now bringing a legal challenge against Ofcom’s decision not to investigate his complaints and has asked the High Court to make Ofcom reconsider them.
Thomas Roe KC, acting for Mr Keighley, said in written submissions on Wednesday that the complaints refer to the ‘s general output rather than any specific programme or series, which he described as a “more serious problem”.
The has rejected the complaints while Ofcom said enforcing due impartiality in a broadcaster’s general output falls outside its jurisdiction.
Ofcom was sent three complaints about the BBC’s coverage of Brexit (Image: Getty)
The High Court in London heard Mr Keighley’s first complaint was made after he looked at 14,000 hours of programming between 1999-2020 and concluded the broadcaster had “seriously underreported and misrepresented the case for withdrawal from the EU”.
The second complaint, on October 19, 2020, related to a “random” period between July 6-13, 2020. The third complaint said ” output generally and not just news and political output continues to favour, unduly, pro-EU and anti- opinion and to seriously underreport pro- and anti-EU perspectives”.
Mr Roe said Ofcom’s decision on March 23, 2022, not to investigate “fails to engage with the substance of the complaints”.
Jessica Boyd KC, for Ofcom, said in written submissions that the regulator receives tens of thousands of complaints about broadcasters’ output each year and it has been required to regulate the only since March 2017.
Don’t miss… [REPORT] [POLL]
David Keighley studied 14,000 hours of BBC programming (Image: Getty)
She added Ofcom did not investigate Mr Keighley’s complaints because those about general output “do not, as a matter of principle, fall within Ofcom’s enforcement jurisdiction under the Broadcasting Code”.
Investigating the ‘s general output for impartiality would mean having to examine such a large sample size that it would be “disproportionately costly of Ofcom’s time and resources”, the court heard.
Ms Boyd also said Ofcom agreed with the ‘s conclusion of Mr Keighley’s analysis, that counting the number of pro- contributions against pro-EU ones was “divorced from analysis of the context and nature of the programming in question” and “is not on its own capable of establishing a breach of due impartiality requirements”.
Ofcom insists responsibility for ensuring due impartiality across general output lies with the Board. Ms Boyd said Ofcom’s job was to enforce due impartiality at the level of individual programmes or series and the regulator’s conclusion was “well-reasoned and sound”.
She told the court: “Broadcasters are permitted to have a certain perspective as long as alternative views are met. Ofcom is charged with evaluating that.
“It does not require broadcasters to be completely neutral on matters of public policy, industrial or political controversy.”
The hearing continues.