Mostly green

It's really quite extraordinary, but not surprising, how the usual suspects in the press have lined up to describe the Mid-Term BBC Charter Review as a kicking for the BBC. Nut surprising that Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer likes that spin. But she needs to think a few things through... 

Govt says there’s evidence of bias at the #BBC ?

But Culture Sec @lucyfrazermp can't quite find the words or examples…#KayBurley FC pic.twitter.com/I0Xocpf7PK

— Kay Burley (@KayBurley) January 22, 2024

I append the full list of "recommendations", and have added green to those recommendations which have clearly emerged from the BBC and Ofcom, to those which have already been implemented and to those which are merely acknowledgments. 

1.1 We conclude that the unitary board model has been effectively implemented and is working well. Issues raised during the course of the MTR can be addressed within the current governance framework.

1.2 We recommend that the Board keeps the information it receives under regular review so that it continues to maximise its ability to make decisions on the right balance of information.

1.3 We conclude that the sub-committee structure adds value, with clear delegated powers from the Board, and the vast majority of the committees are delivering effectively.

1.4 We conclude that the Board is fulfilling its reporting responsibilities effectively.

1.5 We welcome the positive feedback received about the induction process for new NEMs.

1.6 We recommend that the BBC Board, including the NEMs, play an active role in monitoring the impact of work to ensure the Board is sufficiently visible to staff in the rest of the organisation.

1.7 We recommend that the BBC publishes information to explain how it ensures the editorial whistleblowing policy and process continues to deliver effectively.

1.8 We recommend that the BBC’s Annual Report and Accounts continues to summarise the conclusions of future external Board effectiveness reviews, and summarises the conclusions of future internal Board effectiveness reviews, and confirms how recommendations are to be taken forward.

1.9 We will look again at how the BBC’s governance has evolved, and how the BBC has evaluated the effectiveness of that governance, during the next Charter Review. We expect the BBC to provide us with sufficient information to do that in due course, including internal documentation.

Editorial standards and impartiality

2.1 The impartiality of the BBC, as a publicly funded broadcaster, goes to the heart of the contract between the Corporation and all the licence fee payers whom it serves.

2.2 We recognise that the concept of impartiality is complex. We conclude that there is clear evidence that adherence to impartiality and editorial standards is now at the heart of the BBC’s priorities, but also that the BBC and Ofcom need to continue to strive to fulfil their responsibilities.

2.3 We recommend that the Board ensures detailed, timely reporting of progress against the 10-point action plan’s commitments, with clear deadlines and milestones, impact, and more detail on how it intends to respond to Ofcom’s challenge that the BBC needs to maintain its focus on impartiality to maintain audience trust, and how commitments are being embedded in long-term plans. We intend to assess progress during the next Charter Review.

2.4 We also recommend that the effectiveness of the EGSC external Editorial Advisers is kept under review by the BBC to ensure they continue to have the right powers to fulfil their responsibilities, and that this is** reported on regularly as part of the BBC’s wider work to provide updates on its impartiality efforts.

2.5 We recommend that the BBC continues to ensure it has the right governance structures to drive its work on implementation of the 10 point action plan and long-term continuous improvement. We will assess whether this has been the case as part of Charter Review.

2.6 It is right that the BBC commits to undertaking internal content reviews. We recommend the BBC publishes more information about the methodology used to undertake its internal content reviews.

2.7 We recommend that the BBC publishes a summary of the key themes emerging from a set of internal content reviews, on an annual basis, including how the BBC is taking action as a result.

2.8 We recommend that the BBC continues to set out in the public domain the methodology for its external thematic reviews.

2.9 We recommend that Ofcom continues to be consulted by the BBC on potential topics for future external thematic reviews.

2.10 We recommend that the BBC publishes information about what its Safeguarding Impartiality training includes, how it is conducted and intended outcomes.

2.11 We agree that Ofcom should have early notification from the BBC of potential serious editorial breaches, and note that a protocol has been developed between the BBC and Ofcom to underpin this change. We recommend that the BBC considers how best to make this commitment clear to audiences.

2.12 We recommend that EGSC members continue to meet Ofcom at a working level every 6 months.

2.13 We also recommend that the Chair of the EGSC and the 2 independent expert advisers attend a meeting of the Ofcom Content Board annually, and a summary of the discussions at that annual meeting is published.

2.14 We will extend Ofcom’s regulatory responsibilities to elements of the BBC’s online public service material, and make changes to the Framework Agreement in order to implement this policy.

2.15 We recommend that Ofcom continues to discuss research methodology relating to impartiality (particularly audience perceptions) widely ahead of future research to maximise consensus.

Complaints

3.1 We will review the complaints process at Charter Review and consult on alternative models to BBC First. We will invite the cooperation of both the BBC and Ofcom in this process.

3.2 We will amend the Framework Agreement in line with the BBC’s proposal to give the BBC Board explicit responsibility for overseeing the Executive’s handling of complaints.

3.3 Following the government’s request to the BBC that it considers moving the reporting line from the ECU, the BBC has created a direct reporting line between the Director of Editorial Complaints and Reviews and the Director General.

3.4 Following the government’s request to the BBC that it considers giving the EGSC a more enhanced, active role, the BBC has committed to both giving the EGSC greater oversight of the complaints process (including the processes of the ECU), and the ability to commission research to improve the EGSC’s access to information.

3.5 We recommend that Ofcom conducts regular reviews of a representative sample of the ECU’s complaints decisions and makes public a summary of its findings. This new regulatory function will be made a formal requirement through an amendment to the Framework Agreement.

3.6 We conclude that Ofcom has a role to play in raising awareness of BBC First, and recommend Ofcom collaborates with the BBC on relevant initiatives to improve awareness. We recommend that Ofcom’s future research into BBC First should seek to better understand which specific audience groups have lower awareness of BBC First, and that Ofcom and the BBC should work together on strategies to better enfranchise relevant groups within the complaints process.

3.7 It is right that the BBC has produced video content explaining how the BBC handles complaints. We recommend that the BBC continues to find creative means to communicate what the complaints process delivers - both for the Corporation and for audiences - to increase confidence in, and audience engagement with, BBC First.

3.8 It is right that the BBC has committed to consistently and clearly flagging to a complainant what their next step might be in its response to complaints at each stage.

3.9 We recommend that Ofcom and the BBC work together to better communicate to complainants their respective roles in the complaints process. We encourage creative approaches to ensure the information is digestible for complainants.

3.10 We conclude that the BBC’s approach to Stage 1A is proportionate, and recommend that the BBC continues to make clear to complainants what kind of response they can expect at each stage of BBC First. The BBC must continue to make appropriate use of its procedures to fast-track editorial complaints on a case-by-case basis.

3.11 It is right that the BBC has committed to improving the quality of responses at Stage 1B, and removing tones of defensiveness. We recommend that the BBC continues to address the wider defensive culture highlighted by the Serota Review, and reflect this in its guidance for editorial teams to ensure Stage 1B replies reflect an openness to learning from complaints.

3.12 We note that Ofcom has recently increased the BBC’s complaints reporting requirements. It is right that these changes are made to increase the transparency of the BBC’s complaints decision-making.

3.13 We recommend that the BBC makes public information about how the ECU makes fair decisions that are both independent from programme-makers, and independent from the organisation’s reputational interests, in order to increase licence fee payers’ confidence in both Stage 2 and BBC First more broadly.

3.14 We note that, following the Banatvala report, the BBC has sought to increase the diversity of the ECU. The Corporation’s ongoing commitment to further increase diversity in complaints handling is sensible.

3.15 It is helpful that Ofcom has committed to review BBC First again before Charter renewal. We recommend Ofcom engages with stakeholders on the approach and scope of any quantitative research that will form part of that review.

3.16 It is helpful that Ofcom has committed to conducting further mystery shopper research on BBC First. We recommend this continues on a regular basis, and the results feed into any future review of BBC First.

3.17 It is helpful that Ofcom has begun to think about what kind of communication about BBC First audiences would value. We recommend that Ofcom continues to work with audiences in its efforts to improve the transparency of its complaints decision-making at Stage 3.

3.18 We recommend that, when the BBC has identified a breach in its own editorial standards and therefore upheld or partly upheld a complaint regarding its broadcast or on demand content, the breach should be publicly and transparently recorded by Ofcom, which has the choice whether or not to launch its own investigation under its Broadcasting Code. Should Ofcom decide not to launch an investigation into an upheld BBC complaint, the regulator should clearly state its rationale for taking no further action in its online bulletin.

3.19 We conclude that the current complaints framework, which limits Ofcom’s standards enforcement role to complaints about single broadcast items or editorially-linked content, is proportionate. We encourage Ofcom to continue to make use of its other regulatory tools to hold the BBC to account.

Competition and market impact

4.1 We agree with Ofcom’s recommendation to change the Framework Agreement so that Ofcom has discretion over whether or not to conduct a BCA or a shorter assessment following a BBC PIT.

4.2 We agree with Ofcom’s recommendation to change the Framework Agreement so that Ofcom has the power to use a shorter assessment to approve a BBC change with conditions.

4.3 We agree with Ofcom’s recommendation to change the Framework Agreement so that new BBC services are not automatically considered material changes.

4.4 Publication of Ofcom’s high-level view on the BBC’s position within the audiovisual and audio sectors is helpful, as is Ofcom’s commitment to use its Annual Report on the BBC to confirm its current view, or update that view based on any market changes that have taken place.

4.5 We recommend that Ofcom should annually publish its view on the BBC’s position in the local news sectors, and set out its approach to considering the competition impact of changes to BBC local news services. Ofcom should do this for the first time by November 2024, and subsequently use its Annual Report on the BBC to update this view alongside its views on the audio and audiovisual sectors.

4.6 We recommend that the BBC does more to demonstrably and transparently take account of its obligation to undertake partnerships, including with its competitors in the creative economy. The BBC should publish a partnerships strategy, and the objectives of that strategy should clearly align with its obligation to support the creative economy, and demonstrate how it plans to meet that obligation.

4.7 We recommend that the BBC provides clear entry routes for organisations who wish to partner with the BBC.

4.8 Over the remainder of this Charter the BBC must clearly demonstrate how it is delivering on its requirement to provide distinctive output and services.

Commercial governance and regulation

5.1 We recommend that the BBC monitor the effectiveness of the BBC Commercial Board as the new governance arrangements bed in.

5.2 We consider the regulation of the BBC’s commercial activities to be working effectively.

Diversity

6.1 The BBC says it understands the importance of reflecting, representing and serving all communities and has set out a clear commitment to improving the diversity of the organisation, both on and off screen. We acknowledge the BBC’s evidence that it has made good progress towards meeting its diversity commitments although note concerns we have heard that the BBC is not accurately reflecting diversity of thought and opinion across the organisation, set out below.

6.2 We expect the BBC to follow the advice set out in Ofcom’s Annual Report on the BBC for 2021/22 to improve workforce representation of disabled people and people from lower socio-economic backgrounds.

6.3 We expect the BBC Board to continue overseeing the organisation’s plans to increase diversity, and to consider how diversity of thought and opinion could be better reflected in decision-making.

6.4 We expect the BBC to continue conducting appropriate engagement to understand the needs of specific audience groups, particularly groups who feel underserved. The BBC Board should keep this under review to ensure engagement is sufficient, and the BBC should set out how it plans to respond if it identifies that more is needed.

6.5 We recommend that the BBC’s Nations Members publish more detailed retrospective information about the engagement they have carried out with diverse communities within the nations, as well as priorities for future engagement. Ideally this information would include information on engagement with audience members, representative organisations and industry experts. Doing so will allow audiences to continue to understand what engagement has taken place.

6.6 We conclude that Ofcom does not need any additional powers to regulate the BBC’s obligations with regards to diversity, such as giving Ofcom the ability to sanction the BBC in the event it does not meet targets and commitments it has set for itself.

Transparency

7.1 We recommend that the BBC continues to learn from recent experiences where announcements about service changes have led to criticism about the BBC’s approach to transparency.

7.2 We also recommend that the BBC publishes details of its strategy for communicating with audiences which explains improvements to its communications approach already made, but also how it identifies any changes needed so that audiences and staff can be confident that future service changes and their impact will be explained clearly.

7.3 We recommend that the BBC looks at what information audience members find valuable to hold the BBC to account, including through audience engagement. We recommend the BBC publishes information about what it has heard in these sessions and how it intends to respond, to show it takes the principle of audience members holding the BBC to account seriously. We will assess the BBC’s transparency in the information it provides for audiences as part of Charter Review.

7.4 We recommend that Ofcom continues to maintain a high level of transparency in how it scrutinises the BBC, making clear at the outset when explaining how it intends to examine a specific issue, what that will look like in practice e.g. the regulatory mechanisms and processes it will use, and anticipated timescales for completion.