The BBC breached accuracy and impartiality rules with a News At Six report by Laura Kuenssberg on Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's policy on shoot to kill, its governing body has said.
The item, which aired on November 2015, discussed the UK government's proposed security measures following the Paris terror attacks which left 130 people dead.
A viewer complained that the use of a comment by Mr Corbyn misrepresented his views on the use of lethal force and wrongly suggested that he was against the government's proposed security measures.
Earlier this month, the Herald revealed that the BBC Trust had provisionally upheld the complaint.
In the item, the BBC's political editor Kuenssberg said: "Earlier today I asked the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn if he were the resident here at Number 10 whether or not he would be happy for British officers to pull the trigger in the event of a Paris style attack."
Corbyn was seen to respond: "I'm not happy with a shoot-to-kill policy in general. I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often be counter-productive."
The clip was taken from a longer interview conducted earlier in the day.
In the longer interview, the BBC's political editor had asked him: "If we saw the kinds of horror in Paris, here, if you were Prime Minister, would you order security services on to the street to stop people being killed?"
Mr Corbyn had responded: "Of course you'd bring people on to the streets to prevent and ensure there is safety within our society".
Mr Corbyn had stated: "I'm not happy with a shoot-to-kill policy in general" when asked the question "if you were Prime Minister, would you be happy to order people - police or military - to shoot to kill on Britain's streets?"
A viewer complained that the report had given the "politically damaging" and misleading impression that Mr Corbyn was opposed generally to police being able to use lethal force, where they considered it necessary, to stop terrorists attacking the public.
The BBC said that Mr Corbyn's remarks were not taken out of context, that the Labour leader fully understood the nature of the questions and that his comments were reported accurately and impartially.
The BBC Trust said that there was no deliberate attempt to mislead audiences and said that the BBC had published the whole unedited interview, before News At Six aired, on its website.
But it said that the BBC "was wrong in this case to present an answer Mr Corbyn had given to a question about 'shoot to kill' as though it were his answer to a question he had not in fact been asked."
Concluding that the news report breached accuracy rules, it said: "The United Kingdom's response in the event of a Paris style attack here was a critical question at a time of extreme national concern. The audience would have an expectation that a scripted item on one of the BBC's prime time television news programmes on such a day would reflect with the greatest accuracy what the Leader of the Opposition had said on the matter."
The Trust also said that the news report was "not duly accurate" in using Mr Corbyn's answer on shoot to kill to say that the Prime Minister's message and the Labour leader's "couldn't be more different."
Trustees said the report also breached impartiality rules, concluding: "The breach of due accuracy on such a highly contentious political issue meant that the output had not achieved due impartiality. Trustees agreed they had seen no evidence of bias. However, the Committee decided on balance that because of the breaches of accuracy as a consequence, the item was also not duly impartial."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel