BBC admits interview was flawed

THE BBC was embroiled in a fresh political row last night after the director general, Mr John Birt, admitted there were "shortcomings…

THE BBC was embroiled in a fresh political row last night after the director general, Mr John Birt, admitted there were "shortcomings" in the treatment of Chancellor Kenneth Clarke during a radio interview.

The Tory party chairman, Dr Brian Mawhinney, had written to the BBC accusing presenter Anna Ford of being "openly hostile" to Mr Clarke during a Radio 4 interview. Yet the Labour leader, Mr Tony Blair, had been treated with "kid gloves" when he was questioned during the same programme, Dr Mawhinney claimed. Mr Birt's admission came in a letter responding to Dr Mawhinney.

Last night, Labour accused the BBC of backing down in the face of pressure from the Tory party after Mr Birt wrote back to Dr Mawhinney admitting that Ms Ford had interrupted the Chancellor too often. A Labour frontbencher, Mr Brian Wilson, accused the BBC of "caving in" to the Tories and said it gave the "green light" to all political parties to complain.

The row comes as intense pressure is put on broadcasters by all parties in the battle for valuable media time in the run up to the British general election.

READ MORE

The disputed interviews took place on September 16th, when Mr Clarke was probed over tax and the "demon eyes" poster campaign against Labour.

In his letter, the director general wrote: "The editor of the programme has already made clear his view that there were more interruptions than were appropriate and, with hindsight, Anna Ford agrees."

Dr Mawhinney claimed that Ms Ford's final comment in which she said to Mr Clarke, "So you are not going to elevate the debate?" had been a "disgraceful lapse from impartiality into blatant editorialising".

Mr Birt said her question had not been intended as a statement of her personal view, but admitted that it "clearly misfired", adding: "There is no doubt that the end of the interview was unsatisfactory."

But he insisted: "Despite these shortcomings, my view is that Mr Clarke, robust as ever, was not inhibited from putting over his points to Today's audience."

Last night a BBC spokesman said that the "unsatisfactory" ending of the interview had occurred because Mr Clarke, in the radio car, had either been cut off or failed to recognise the statement as a question because they were not face to face. It was hence a technical rather than an editorial lapse.

The Tory chairman had also complained that Mr Blair was given far gentler treatment on the same programme by interviewer James Naughtie.

Mr Birt insisted that the Labour leader had been tested, but added: "The editor of Today accepts that more thought should have been given to ensuring greater consistency of approach to two major political interviews in the same edition of the programme.