THE BBC has weathered a PR nightmare this week. It was criticised by leading SNP figures and others after the YouTube channel of Stuart Campbell – who runs the pro-independence blog Wings Over Scotland – was shut down over complaints about copyright breaches. The channel was then reinstated with the BBC pledging to carry out a review into how it carries out copyright claims of videos with political content.

Alongside that, there came the news that Radio 4’s Today programme has lost 839,000 listeners in a year. The BBC said the steep decline could be attributed to a "quieter news agenda’’ in the second quarter of this year.

However, some view this mass switch-off as a symptom of growing frustration with the BBC’s editorial approach. There is palpable anger from those who believe there has become an over-representation of those from the fringes of politics. Where does a desire for balance begin and reckless promotion of political beliefs rooted in prejudice end?

The main beneficiaries seem to be those individuals who gather under the umbrella of what we now call “the far-right”. The term itself has been rendered almost meaningless; a catch-all to describe a broad – and increasingly extreme – assortment of people and views.

As an avid consumer of the BBC’s news products across all its platforms it’s difficult to escape the creeping feeling of dismay that far-right politics and talking points are show-cased by the broadcaster. Its argument is that such views are challenged on air when they are discussed.

It’s impossible to imagine that Nigel Farage would have succeeded in becoming one of the most recognisable figures in politics had he not been given much more air-time than his leader-of-a-minor-party status deserved.

Of course, far-right extremists are not created on a diet of Radio 4 and BBC Breakfast: their hateful ideology is cultivated through the dark recesses of the internet and among those who are most susceptible to it.

When this rhetoric seeps into public discourse the BBC should pause and ask itself hard questions about inflating its reach and influence – and whether or not it thinks it has a duty to resist some of this. The BBC is more, much more, than a news organisation. It holds a unique position in our public and thus has a responsibility – and an opportunity – to lead the wider media in shaping an effective response to new challenges.

Much of the criticism of the BBC has developed over time, as an unintentional consequence of the BBC’s ethos and purpose: to provide balanced, impartial broadcasting. Of itself ‘balance’ is a noble and worthwhile aim. The BBC’s fixation with conveying the opinions of “both sides” though, has led us to a troubling place.

The goal is neutrality and impartiality: the unfortunate result is a skewed perspective in debates and discussion. When the opinions of experts are given equal weight to those with strongly held, though misinformed, views, the public is ill-served. During turbulent political times, both at home and abroad, it’s important that we separate commentary from reporting; the experts from the charlatans.

For many, a tipping-point in their frustration has been reached, due partly to the alarming decline of truth in Donald Trump’s America. Demagogues don’t even need to be accomplished orators – so long as they say “fake news!” often enough they are able to reduce provable fact to mere debating points.

The UK shouldn’t delude itself into thinking it is immune from such a bombastic approach to politics. We’ve already seen promises that were made during the EU referendum campaign proven to be lies. Government ministers seem more intent on serving their own ends when it comes to Brexit than being honest with the public about what lies ahead.

It’s ironic that during the referendum campaign we were told the public were apparently sick of experts. Now many wish that a grown-up would come along and cut through all the noise and misdirection.

The BBC should value truth beyond making sure everybody has their say. It is an authority, not someone who holds the jackets. Experts from Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis shouldn’t have to mitigate the misinformation spouted by men’s rights activists when they are invited to speak about the statistical reality of violence against women. Neither should any other expert in their field.

Too often when the BBC is criticised there’s an (understandable) reaction from its journalists who think that their integrity is being questioned. It’s a sad truth that some are often abused, particularly on social media. The majority who raise concerns about the editorial decisions of the BBC, though, are doing so because they want to see it thrive and modernise.

I don’t believe that a memo circulated around BBC staff directing them to talk up Nigel Farage or to give a platform to racists or their ideology: but the cumulative effect of the drip, drip, drip and normalisation of certain extreme positions is eroding trust and confidence.

The BBC cannot please everybody. For each individual complaining their coverage is weighted in favour of the right another will lament perceived left-wing bias. Leavers and remainers; Yes and No; left and right: the polarisation of politics makes it impossible always to get it right.

The solution lies in recognising the real danger of faith in our national broadcaster diminishing to a point where it becomes unrecoverable. This cannot be allowed to happen. More than ever, we desperately need impartial, responsible journalism to steer us through the social and cultural challenges up ahead.