A Seismic Moment Shows the Rift above the BBC

This is seismic. To lose the Director General and CEO of BBC News at the same time is unprecedented. This is a unique moment in the history of the BBC.

It cannot be taken lightly.

On the face of it, the resignation of Tim Davie explains.

I wonder for a while if he’s weighing how long he wants to stay in a job that’s so stressful.

There were occasions when I interviewed him this year, as ridden with controversy, and he seemed to be his usual Tigger-Ish Self.

In his resignation statement he mentioned “the intense personal and professional demands of managing this role for many years in these febrile times”.

My assessment is that the latest controversy felt a bit too much after the succession of crises (two documentaries on Gaza, he didn’t have enough oil in a fight.

As the former head of BBC comms, John Shield put it to me “the DG Job is one of the most difficult in public life”.

“It’s been relentless for him. He’s a brilliant leader who inspires real change, but at some point it just doesn’t make sense.”

I’m told there was genuine surprise when Tim Davie shared his decision with colleagues at the weekend.

Deborah Turness’ statement made it clear that she resigned on a point of principle. With the ongoing controversy around President Trump Panorama causing damage to the BBC, he said “I remember the Buck – and I got the decision to offer my launch to the Director General last night”.

But, like any quitter, and there are certainly two, I can’t help but think there’s more to it than meets the eye. And there is another story emerging about the workings and making of the BBC board and its role in what happened.

It appears that there is a rift between the board and the division of the news with some who argue that the BBC has an orcasura orcasura when the corporation that claims the two big skins.

For the best part of a week, since the Telegraph first broke its story, I couldn’t understand why the BBC didn’t get in front of the headlines.

This should divide the allegations into two separate stories.

The first, regarding the editing of the Trump Spect in the Panorama Program, requires an immediate response. Either way there was a swift apology – or indeed a case made as to why the BBC believed it did not misrepresent the President’s words.

That’s what allows the BBC to go out so much for its journalism. Remember, this is charged with institutional bias. In a lack of impartiality. Accusations cut to the heart of the news operation.

With an apology for the error around the panorama (or a strong defense), it can try to reject other claims about institutional bias.

It could be said that the BBC is already taking steps to ensure editorial bias, and has already done so with BBC Arabic issues.

Instead the BBC allowed the story to languish – and we ended up in a situation where the Trump White House called the BBC “fake news” and it got some traction.

My understanding from several sources within the BBC is that a panorama statement will be ready to go in several days.

The BBC plans to say that Trump’s edit was not intended to mislead the public, but that in the light of looking at it again, we believe that there should be some kind of white flash or wiping the audience that these are two different parts of speech.

I understand that Deborah’s hygiene became more and more angry and angry as the week went on because the board prevented her from rejecting the apology.

However the BBC board decided in a letter to the culture and sport committee the way to go.

Many, both inside and outside the BBC, see the failure to respond as a serious mistake. The Telegraph’s leak of the allegations was devastating – and the BBC didn’t solve the problem.

I was told that the shelter then went into a board meeting on Thursday to discuss the crisis around the telegraph stories and was “targeted”, as some mentioned.

Those who call BBC journalism into question will call that accountability.

But another source described it as the end of a “two-year relentless criticism of BBC journalism by board members and advisers – all of the same political persuasion”.

They appointed Robbie Gibb, a former BBC editor who left Downing St Director of communications for Theresa May and who is now a board member.

Former Sun Editor, now BBC Presenter David Yelland called it “nothing short of a coup”. He claimed that the BBC board was depleted and “elements close to it were working with hostile journalists, a former PM and enemies of the public service”.

But another former Sun Editor, Kelvin Mackenzie, has a very different take. Speaking to the BBC News Channel, he said that leaving was “the right thing to do – it’s an issue that won’t go away”.

Editing the speech, he said, could lead to suing Trump or the BBC being banned from the White House. “If you can’t be trusted with that [the speech of the US president] What is your confidence? ” he said.

And the US president himself weighed in on the debate for the first time. In a post on his truth social platform, he celebrated the resignations and accused the BBC of “Doctoring” his speech and “trying to step on the scales of the presidential election”.

I was struck by a line in Tim Davie’s statement. He said this about the BBC: “We should have started it, not dragged it along.”

Tonight, some asked if the resignation of the Director General and CEO of the news suggested the BBC weapon.