BBC officials appear to have found a way to turn self-criticism into an art form, using parliamentary hearings as a canvas to paint a picture of utter self-loathing.
At the latest session of the Commons culture committee, three senior BBC executives - chair Samir Shah, board member Robbie Gibb, and former adviser Michael Prescott - answered questions about a leaked memo that led to the resignations of the director general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness. The memo, written by Prescott, was intended as a constructive critique aimed at improving standards within the BBC.
However, it appears the memo never stood a chance of being implemented before its contents were splashed across the front pages of several newspapers, including the Daily Telegraph, which has been vocal in its criticism of the BBC's perceived left-wing bias. The media organization's editorial stance on Trump, Gaza and gender issues seemed out of place for the subject matter.
Prescott himself looked bewildered by the memo's fate, stating he had never intended it to be shared publicly, and that he was merely trying to help the BBC improve its impartiality. His response only added fuel to the fire, with some critics accusing him of being naive about how his words would be received.
Shah fared little better, as he repeatedly apologised for any perceived shortcomings while struggling to explain how a memo meant to boost standards ended up causing high-level departures. Despite acknowledging the BBC's flaws, Shah seemed stuck in self-reflection mode, highlighting how internal politics and personal biases can sometimes override the corporation's stated goals.
Gibb, meanwhile, deflected blame onto others, insisting that those with left-wing leanings had failed to leave their politics at the door when entering the BBC. His responses were laced with a sense of detachment, as if he genuinely believed himself to be above criticism - a sentiment that is both puzzling and concerning.
In the end, it's hard not to wonder whether this exercise in self-criticism has achieved anything other than reinforcing the notion that some individuals within the BBC are more concerned with appearing virtuous than actually implementing meaningful change.
At the latest session of the Commons culture committee, three senior BBC executives - chair Samir Shah, board member Robbie Gibb, and former adviser Michael Prescott - answered questions about a leaked memo that led to the resignations of the director general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness. The memo, written by Prescott, was intended as a constructive critique aimed at improving standards within the BBC.
However, it appears the memo never stood a chance of being implemented before its contents were splashed across the front pages of several newspapers, including the Daily Telegraph, which has been vocal in its criticism of the BBC's perceived left-wing bias. The media organization's editorial stance on Trump, Gaza and gender issues seemed out of place for the subject matter.
Prescott himself looked bewildered by the memo's fate, stating he had never intended it to be shared publicly, and that he was merely trying to help the BBC improve its impartiality. His response only added fuel to the fire, with some critics accusing him of being naive about how his words would be received.
Shah fared little better, as he repeatedly apologised for any perceived shortcomings while struggling to explain how a memo meant to boost standards ended up causing high-level departures. Despite acknowledging the BBC's flaws, Shah seemed stuck in self-reflection mode, highlighting how internal politics and personal biases can sometimes override the corporation's stated goals.
Gibb, meanwhile, deflected blame onto others, insisting that those with left-wing leanings had failed to leave their politics at the door when entering the BBC. His responses were laced with a sense of detachment, as if he genuinely believed himself to be above criticism - a sentiment that is both puzzling and concerning.
In the end, it's hard not to wonder whether this exercise in self-criticism has achieved anything other than reinforcing the notion that some individuals within the BBC are more concerned with appearing virtuous than actually implementing meaningful change.
. I mean, it's good that they're taking responsibility and acknowledging their flaws, but sometimes I think they're beating themselves up over things unnecessarily.
.
. And Robbie Gibb's response about people bringing their politics to work just feels like a cop-out to me 
.
.
They're painting a picture of utter self-loathing on the Commons canvas, but it seems like they're just stuck in their own reflections, unable to move forward and make any real progress. It's almost as if they're trying to convince everyone else of how virtuous they are, rather than actually working towards positive change within the BBC. The whole thing is pretty puzzling, especially when you consider that "the truth will set you free" 
but in this case, it seems like they'd rather be stuck in their own biases and self-doubt.
. Prescott was totally right about not sharing it publicly, but that's not the point - the point is how the BBC handled it internally 
. Gibb's whole "others are the problem" vibe is just weird 
.
. Like, come on guys, you got caught up in a big mess and now you're just beating yourselves up over it 
. The fact that Prescott thought sharing his memo was a good idea in the first place is a red flag 
️. And Shah's constant apologizing is like, okay we get it, you messed up 
.
Like, I'm reading this article and the BBC executives are just beating themselves up over this memo thingy... and it's like, they're not even owning up to their own flaws. They're just trying to justify why everything went wrong. 
I mean, Prescott was genuinely trying to help the BBC improve, but his words got twisted around and ended up causing more harm than good. It's like, can't we just focus on moving forward instead of dwelling on our past mistakes?
? Seriously though, it's like they're more interested in looking good than actually fixing the problems. Samir Shah is straight-up being dishonest, Robbie Gibb is dodging responsibility like a pro 
, and Michael Prescott... poor guy just got trampled by his own memo 
. And honestly, if you can't even share a constructive memo without it getting torn apart, maybe you shouldn't be in charge 
.
. I mean, come on, if you wanna fix the standards issue, you gotta take ownership of it and stop playin' the victim card 
. Otherwise, you just end up like Prescott, bewildered by how things went down 
.
And what's with Shah's apologies? Is he trying to win an Oscar for most creative excuses? 
... But instead of being honest about their own biases and flaws, they're just apologizing for everything without taking any real responsibility 
. And when you have someone like Prescott, who genuinely wanted to improve the BBC's standards, and his words end up being used against him... it's just really frustrating 
.
and then gibb tries to deflect but it's just too much 
.