Alison Rowat: Queen or Nicola Sturgeon, make the contest for coverage fair

Adding to the surreality of the evening was the presence of Tom Cruise, there to pay tribute to the monarch and to plug his new movie, Top Gun: Maverick. “Incredible,” said Schofield, giving the film an impromptu review. “It’s everything you would want it to be and more.” Cruise paid tribute to the Queen’s devotion and dignity, how respected she was around the world, and her kindness, in similarly glowing terms.

Out in the grounds of Windsor Castle, actors cantered through hundreds of years of history, getting things wrong as one viewer, a Mr David Torrance of London (the very same), pointed out on Twitter. “So between the accession of King James VI of Scotland to the English throne in 1603 and the English Civil War,” he wrote, “ITV’s Platinum Jubilee Celebration speaks of England, Wales, Ireland & Scotland ‘coming together as one nation’ in an ‘Act of Union’ – did no one google this in advance?”

The real stars of the night were the horses and the Queen, who seemed to be enjoying herself, which was nice to see. All through the evening Union flags had fluttered, filling the screen with reds, whites and blues. A cynic might have seen The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee Celebration as one long advertisement for the Union, or indeed for Scottish independence. It could have worked both ways. The point is, though, that the coverage was massive and, save for a relatively few complaints, this went unquestioned.

It will be the same again on June 4. This time it will be the BBC giving hours of coverage to the Platinum Party at the Palace, featuring Diana Ross, Duran Duran, Andrea Bocelli, Sir Cliff Richard and others. Expect more flag waving, and if wall-to-wall reporting in the media does not follow, I will eat my paper crown.

Now we come to the other personage in our tale. She is not an actual queen, you understand. The term is used in its modern, informal sense, to denote any woman of standing in her field. As the First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon is a significant figure, not to mention an elected one. When she goes to Washington DC and meets Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (another queen, small Q) it is a story of interest, is it not? Indeed, when Ms Pelosi attended last year’s G7 Speakers’ Summit hosted by Sir Lindsay Hoyle in Chorley, Lancashire, the coverage was extensive and wholly positive.

Ms Sturgeon’s US visit did secure coverage, just not as much as her supporters felt was warranted. Some have accused BBC Scotland, and in particular its website, of purposely ignoring the trip for political reasons. The BBC did not see it that way. It said the trip, including the First Minister’s comments on climate change, was the lead story on the website for much of the day, with mention of Ms Sturgeon moving further down the story as a fresh line, a comment from COP26 President Alok Sharma, was added.

This did not convince some observers, one of whom, Stewart Easton, said coverage of the US trip had been “noticeably and wrongly absent” from BBC Scotland news coverage. Mr Easton is a former head of news at BBC Radio Scotland. He is also, as his Twitter biog says, a former head of communications for the SNP at Westminster.

Both sides in the argument have a point, but on balance BBC Scotland could and should have done more. As a rough guide, if Nancy Pelosi thinks someone’s visit is newsworthy enough to tweet about, you should be giving it big licks too. Moreover, the subjects raised by the FM, including Nato membership and Ukraine, should have been of global interest given what Scotland houses in its backyard.

As for whether the BBC’s actions amounted to a cock-up or conspiracy, I’m inclined towards the former. BBC Scotland cannot win in such cases. Too little coverage and it gets pelters; too much and the same would happen, but from the other side. The ideal, Goldilocks formula would be just enough coverage across all media outlets to make for a balanced whole, but it is not in the interests of those who want a fight to take such a broad view.

As wearying as such fights can sometimes be, they are worth having, if only to keep all sides on their toes. Sometimes, that old saw, just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you, is true. Take, for example, that utterance by the Queen during the last Scottish independence referendum, when she hoped “people will think very carefully about the future”.

According to David Cameron’s memoirs this was the raising of the royal eyebrow he had asked for to bolster the No campaign. Buckingham Palace, however, was reportedly “displeased” by his interpretation of the Queen’s words. Whatever, it happened, and who can know what impact it might have had.

Reporting should be objective but coverage, how much, and where in the running order an item goes, is often subjective. Times and priorities change. Pre Covid and Ukraine, for instance, the Vardy-Rooney libel trial would likely have been given more prominence. There is some appetite for it, but not nearly as much as might once have been the case. People are far more interested in how they are going to heat their homes this winter.

The coverage given to the platinum jubilee celebrations will be too much for some, just as the amount afforded the First Minister’s US trip was, for others, too little.

There is no harm in pointing out either of these things, albeit with a little less fervour than there has been in the past. Just as the BBC does itself no favours by always appearing defensive, so its critics are too quick to see conspiracy when there is none.