BBC Provisional findings

[Jocky Broon 207]

For what it's worth got this today. Smacks of a cover up to me.

British Broadcasting Corporation White City, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TS

Telephone: 020 8743 8000 Email: ecu@bbc.co.uk

Editorial Complaints Unit

Sportsound, BBC Radio Scotland, 4 September 2013

The Editorial Complaints Unit has conducted an investigation into the above programme after receiving a number of complaints about comments made by the presenter, Jim Spence.

The context for the comments was a discussion about the proposed addition of four members to the board of The Rangers International Football Club plc (the company which owns and operates all business and football matters related to the club). Early in the discussion, Mr Spence said this:

We understand, we’ll come to many of the aspects including things like fit and proper person and all the rest of it shortly, Billy Dodds. But, I mean, you know, we’re looking at potentially four being added. John McClelland who was the chairman of the, the old club, some people will tell you the club, well the club that died, possibly coming back in terms of the new chairman, and I can already see the Tweets coming in on that one. Paul Murray, Frank Blin and Sandy Easdale. Now there were attempts, we understood, to remove Craig Mather, Brian Stockbridge who is the finance director, and the non-executive director Bryan Smart. Craig Mather, of course, being the chief executive. What have you made of all of this?

The majority of complainants said it was inaccurate and misleading to refer to "the old club" and "the club that died" in the context of Rangers Football Club because, although the company which previously owned Rangers FC had gone into liquidation, there had been no change to the status of the football club originally founded in 1872. Many referred to a previous finding by the BBC Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee published in June 20131 regarding a number of articles on the BBC website. Taking this finding as a guide to what would constitute due accuracy in this area, we noted that the Committee had said:

1 http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/appeals/esc_bulletins/2013/apr_may.pdf

…where the purpose of the item of output is to discuss football and the club, then it was not appropriate to make a distinction between an "old", "new" or "relaunched club". Conversely, the Committee agreed that if the item of output related to the companies that owned the club and, for example, financial performance or corporate structures, then distinguishing between the "old" and "new" company could be integral to the subject.

And again:

The Committee therefore concluded that where…the BBC had made the distinction between an "old" and "new" Rangers in output referring to and related to football

and the club as opposed to the "old" and "new" company, the BBC had not used clear, precise language and due accuracy had not been achieved such that the guidelines on accuracy had been breached.

In the light of this distinction between the coverage of footballing matters and the coverage of company matters, we noted particularly that the discussion which had given rise to the complaints, like the words of Mr Spence quoted above, was entirely given over to the composition of the board of The Rangers International Football Club plc and its possible consequences for the running of the company, and did not at any point touch directly on football or matters on the pitch.

We also noted that BBC Scotland’s Editor of Sport had acknowledged in response to the complaints that Mr Spence’s comments "could have been better phrased" and had expressed regret for any offence occasioned by them. We agreed that there was an element of unclarity in his use of the word "club" which, if taken in isolation could have been understood as referring to the sporting entity and which, if so taken, could have caused offence to some listeners. However, taken in the context of the remarks which surrounded it, of a discussion focused entirely on corporate rather than footballing matters, and of a broader context in which the circumstances surrounding the change of ownership of Rangers FC had been very extensively discussed over many months, it seemed to us that the likelihood of listeners in fact being misled was very limited; as one of the participants in the discussion, the former Rangers player Billy Dodds, put it, "We all know the story of Rangers through and through now".

For these reasons, we came to the provisional view that Mr Spence’s comments did not fall foul of the requirements for due accuracy set out in the Committee’s finding. We also came to the provisional view that the factors which limited the possibility of misunderstanding also tended to limit the scope for offence, and that there was no breach of editorial standards in either respect.

We went on to consider the argument put forward by some complainants that Mr Spence’s comments (whatever their accuracy) manifested bias, not only because they were in terms which they took to reflect a hostile attitude on Mr Spence’s part but also because there was no particular need to refer to the demise of the former company at all. In relation to the first aspect of this argument, we noted that he introduced the phrase "the club that died" as an instance of what "some people will tell you", and it seemed to us that this element of attribution, though unspecific, served to guard against the impression that he was stating a personal view. In relation to the second, we considered that the comments in question pointed to a legitimate topic for consideration, which indeed arose later in the discussion – the wisdom or otherwise of appointing to the board of the new company some of those who had presided over the old company at the time leading up to its liquidation – and we thought it legitimate to do so in terms which called to mind the upset caused to Rangers supports (or indeed the gratification caused to some supporters of rival clubs) by the old company’s demise. For these reasons we reached the provisional conclusion that there was no breach of editorial standards in relation to impartiality.

As this is a provisional finding, it won’t be finalised until complainants have had an opportunity to comment on it. We’ll be happy to consider any comments you may wish to make so long as you can let us have them by 17 October 2013

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

In other words "we know where you are coming from but we will leave it at that" ?

[DietofWorms 2,081]

They've found Provisionals in the BBC, didn't they?

[Jocky Broon 207]

In other words "we know where you are coming from but we will leave it at that" ?

At a guess I think behind the scenes Spence has had a kick in the baws. He doesn't mention Rangers on his Twitter account anymore. Maybe we have shut the fucker up.

[sprotson11 147]

I would not say it is necessarily a cover up per se, but they are using the finer detail of the Trusts decision to try to worm their way out of this situation.

At the end of the day IMO, there was no need for Spence to say - some people will tell you the club, well the club that died,

He may as well as said, the club that is supported only by sectarian facists, as some delusional people also believe that.

By doing so he was being mischievous at the very least.

[ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895]

:lol:

These cunts at BBC must get sick of copying and pasting these replys back everyday. Think of how many complaints the BBC get everyday. I bet they see BBC Scotland as a nuisance though because the big shots of the BBC in London have bigger things to deal with than the no marks at BBC Scotland.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

There's another part where he says old club without qualifying it with "some might say". So their defence on that basis is limited to their current focus, but not that other bit.

Furthermore, his Nazi allusion and Spiers' use of Stasi-like, both on Twitter, are also offensive and should be reported.

[JäGERmeister 33]

Think they've kind of missed the point some what. We are the same club - fact - as confirmned by a long list of official bodies and individuals (UEFA, LNS, etc); there isn't a debate to be had. Who are the "some people [that] will tell you" otherwise and why is their opinion of such importance that it merits mention over those that agree we are the same club? What are we talking here; a disgraced carer, a lawyer that stole from his clients. Perhaps Spence could educate me otherwise?

[ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895]

Got sent the same aswell.

[cushynumber 25,178]

If putting "some people will tell you", in front of a sentance guards against "the impression that he was stating a personal view" then thats all he needs to do to say what he likes.

I wonder how FoCuS would react to that if people started to add that to particularly vitriolic on-line comments. It is after all a complete "get out of jail free card".

[choochooblue 342]

"Some people will say" was served to guard himself against personal opinion on it ! Bbc don't need to go back to far to the night he used his personal opinion with the line "Rangers fans can argue the toss all they want, but effectively they are a new club" . It won't be too long before he lets his hatred for us ooze out from his pores once more and puts himself in more bother!

[54andcounting 627]

Seams to me they are keeping both happy by saying the original Trust decision is right and that he has not contravened it! We have not got him however the original Trust decision is confirmed and that is very important given BBC Scotland view and a GIRFUY to the Drum.

"and we thought it legitimate to do so in terms which called to mind the upset caused to Rangers supports (or indeed the gratification caused to some supporters of rival clubs) by the old company’s demise"

Therefore, It would be wrong for him as a BBC Scotland employee to say we are not the same Club! Rangers 1872!!!

Let't not throw the baby out with the bathwater! I will go back to them and point a few thing out but I don't wont the original Trust decision challenged!!!

[sonofbear 398]

Fantastic news ! Lets get the famine song back.

Some people will say

Why don't you go home

The famine is over

Why don't you go home

[Jocky Broon 207]

Fantastic news ! Lets get the famine song back.

Some people will say

Why don't you go home

The famine is over

Why don't you go home

Unfortunately the BBC wont be ruling on that one no matter how appropriate it is in Spence's case.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Its a reasonable response - spence has had the shot across his bows - lets all move on

[ianb1547 3,776]

They make the distinction of the company and the (football) Club.....so surely he should have said...the old COMPANY that died......but by saying the old Club, that in itself refers to football...no?

[MaddistonKnight 1,577]

What a lot of tripe.

Are they really trying to say that all this technical and legal information was in his head at the time and he was truly stating things from said legal background?

Oh dear, some people would say they think we all came up the Clyde in a banana boat, the old boat not the new boat.

[Smile 26,624]

At a guess I think behind the scenes Spence has had a kick in the baws. He doesn't mention Rangers on his Twitter account anymore. Maybe we have shut the fucker up.

I think that is the best we can hope for to silence these clowns.

[Dutchy 1,200]

All complaint systems are nothing but a sham and this just goes to prove the nature of the cover-up culture we now live in. Some people will say he should just be snuffed out, but I'd never say that.

[Muirheadbear 1,483]

Another thread attracting a lot of outsidhers.

[Redwhiteandblue 3,330]

If putting "some people will tell you", in front of a sentance guards against "the impression that he was stating a personal view" then thats all he needs to do to say what he likes.

I wonder how FoCuS would react to that if people started to add that to particularly vitriolic on-line comments. It is after all a complete "get out of jail free card".

Some might say he's a dirty fenian cunt, I would never dream of saying that though

[The Educator 1,572]

This is a mix of covering their own backs and giving their man the benefit of the doubt. I don't, I feel Spence knew what he was saying would cause controversy and used the "some may say" bit as his get out clause. Spence has been broadcasting for long enough to know when to describe the club and when to describe the PLC. To me there was a deliberate blurring of the lines to get a reaction. Wasn't that the same week we heard about people appealing the ASA verdict and mutterings about transferring fines from the Old Co to the new parent company? So, so, many coincidences.

[Carsons Army 4,146]

I got the same e-mail this morning from colin.tregear.01@bbc.co.uk

They are hoping that most people will be fobbed off and give up. I certainly won't and I have informed them I wish to take my complaint to the next level

[Wafflesniffer 402]

Got the same email this morning. Disappointing to say the least - as previous posters have suggested the BBC are basically squirming their way out of it. More bollocks.

[jimgers 565]

It's not a final decision though, you can still add your thoughts as to their thinking on it. You could add in your reply some people think "the BBC is full of Pedophiles because of recent events with Saville and others " but that would be unfair and misleading equally Jim Spence remark was that some people think Rangers are a new club is wrong and misleading too.