|
Post by Admin on May 20, 2021 21:26:12 GMT
Prince William has issued a statement following a report’s findings into Martin Bashir's explosive 1995 Panorama interview with his mother, Princess Diana. The Duke of Cambridge said: “It is my view that the deceitful way the interview was obtained substantially influenced what my mother said. The interview was a major contribution to making my parents’ relationship worse and has since hurt countless others.”. Report by Iain Jones. Prince William Statement Following Lord Dyson Report: Report of The Dyson Investigation by The Right Honourable Lord DysonAnnexes Annex 1 - Terms of Reference and Process ProtocolAnnex 2 - Table of individuals involved in events referred to in the ReportAnnex 3 - Index of documents referred to in reportAnnex 4 - Extracts from TranscriptsThe lies and fake documents used by Martin Bashir to secure his famous BBC interview with Princess Diana were covered up by corporation executives in a woeful failure that breached its own integrity rules, a damning report today revealed. In a scathing demolition of the way the interview was secured and the support given afterwards to Bashir, the former High Court judge Lord Dyson found that the journalist deceived Earl Spencer with fake bank statements to gain access to the Princess. He said that Bashir also lied three times about what had happened before finally admitting the truth. Lord Dyson said that before this a succession of senior executives, including former director general Lord Hall, had been too willing to accept the “uncorroborated assertions” made by Bashir as he attempted to conceal what he had done. But the judge said that even when the lies were confirmed, the BBC covered up what had happened.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 21, 2021 4:14:43 GMT
Prince William responds to 'bombshell' report BBC duped Diana to get interview
How London’s high streets have reopened safely “Without justification, the BBC fell short of the high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark by covering up in its press logs such facts as it had been able to establish about how Mr Bashir secured the interview and failing to mention Mr Bashir’s activities or the BBC investigations of them on any news programme,” his report states.
Bashir, who was the BBC News religion editor, announced last week he was quitting the BBC on health grounds as he has been seriously unwell with Covid-19 related complications.
The damning findings published on Thursday afternoon follows months of controversy surrounding Bashir’s interview with Princess Diana in which she famously declared that ‘there were three of us in this marriage’ in a reference to Prince Charles’s ongoing relationship with his now wife Camilla.
Lord Dyson was commissioned by the BBC to investigate the circumstances that led to the interview and what followed in the wake of a succession of claims that Bashir gained access to the Diana by presenting her with false evidence.
His report points out that Princess Diana had become keen on the idea of giving an interview and “would probably have agreed to be interviewed by any experienced and reputable reporter in whom she had confidence.”
But the judge says that Bashir managed to secure what became “a sensational triumph” for himself and the BBC by commissioning fake bank statements from a freelance graphic designer and showing them to Earl Spencer to gain access to Diana.
“By showing Earl Spencer the fake … statements and informing him of their contents, Mr Bashir deceived and induced him to arrange a meeting with Princess Diana,” the report states.
“By gaining access to Princess Diana in this way, Mr Bashir was able to persuade her to agree to give the interview. This behaviour was in serious breach of the 1993 edition of the BBC’s Producer Guidelines on straight dealing
The judge goes on to criticise the BBC executives Tim Suter, Richard Peel and Lord Hall for concluding that Bashir’s dealings with Princess Diana were “absolutely straight on fair” on the basis of his “uncorroborated assertions”
He also says concludes that although a note from Princess Diana saying that she had not seen the fake documents appeared to be genuine, Bashir lied several times in an attempt to conceal that he had shown them to Earl Spencer.
The retired judge adds that the BBC executive Tim Gardam was one of those duped and that he had “too readily accepted that Bashir was telling the truth about the fake documents”.
A subsequent investigation by Lord Hall and another BBC manager, Anne Sloman, was “woefully ineffective”.
Lord Dyson said one reason was the failure to interview Earl Spencer and rejected the arguments made by Lord Hall and Mrs Sloman in their defence, as well as those put forward by Lord Birt, the former BBC director general.
The report adds: “Lord Hall could not reasonably have concluded, as he did, that Mr Bashir was an honest and honourable man.”
In response to the findings, Bashir issued an apology saying the faking of bank statements was a “an action I deeply regret” but added he felt it had “no bearing whatsoever on the personal choice by Princess Diana to take part in the interview”.
His statement further added: "I also reiterate that the bank statements had no bearing whatsoever on the personal choice by Princess Diana to take part in the interview.
“Evidence handed to the inquiry in her own handwriting (and published alongside the report today) unequivocally confirms this, and other compelling evidence presented to Lord Dyson reinforces it.
“In fact, despite his other findings, Lord Dyson himself in any event accepts that the Princess would probably have agreed to be interviewed without what he describes as my 'intervention'.
"It is saddening that this single issue has been allowed to overshadow the Princess' brave decision to tell her story, to courageously talk through the difficulties she faced, and, to help address the silence and stigma that surrounded mental health issues all those years ago.
“She led the way in addressing so many of these issues and that's why I will always remain immensely proud of that interview."
Lord Hall said the BBC’s 1996 investigation into how Bashir obtained the interview “fell well short of what was required” and he was “wrong to give Martin Bashir the benefit of the doubt”.
He said: "I have read Lord Dyson's report, and I accept that our investigation 25 years ago into how Panorama secured the interview with Princess Diana fell well short of what was required.
"In hindsight, there were further steps we could and should have taken following complaints about Martin Bashir's conduct.
"I was wrong to give Martin Bashir the benefit of the doubt, basing that judgment as I did on what appeared to be deep remorse on his part.
"Throughout my 35-year career at the BBC, I have always acted in ways I believe were fair, impartial and with the public interest front and centre.
"While Lord Dyson does not criticise my integrity, I am sorry that our investigation failed to meet the standards that were required."
BBC director general Tim Davie said the corporation accepted Lord Dyson’s findings in full. He added: “Although the report states that Diana, Princess of Wales, was keen on the idea of an interview with the BBC, it is clear that the process for securing the interview fell far short of what audiences have a right to expect. We are very sorry for this. Lord Dyson has identified clear failings.
“While today’s BBC has significantly better processes and procedures, those that existed at the time should have prevented the interview being secured in this way. The BBC should have made greater effort to get to the bottom of what happened at the time and been more transparent about what it knew.
“While the BBC cannot turn back the clock after a quarter of a century, we can make a full and unconditional apology. The BBC offers that today.”
BBC Chairman, Richard Sharp said: “The BBC Board welcomes the publication of Lord Dyson’s report which it unreservedly accepts.
“There were unacceptable failures. We take no comfort from the fact that these are historic. The BBC must uphold the highest possible standards. I want to thank Lord Dyson for the thoroughness and diligence of his work.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 21, 2021 18:08:24 GMT
Princess Diana interview was 'staggering' ethical failure for BBC: Douglas Murray
Douglas Murray, associate editor of The Spectator, discusses reports that BBC journalist Martin Bashir forged documents to get an interview with Princess Diana.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 21, 2021 22:56:36 GMT
Executive Summary of the Report of The Right Honourable Lord Dyson (the numbers in square brackets below refer to paragraph numbers in the Report) The interview with HRH Diana, Princess of Wales that was aired on 20 November 1995 was a sensational triumph for the BBC and Martin Bashir, both nationally and internationally [151]. Whatever reservations she may have had about it later, Princess Diana was pleased with the interview at the time. By early to midAugust 1995 at the latest, she was keen on the idea of a television interview. She would probably have agreed to be interviewed by any experienced and reputable reporter in whom she had confidence even without the intervention of Mr Bashir [24], [25] and [148]. In this Report, I describe in considerable detail the way in which Mr Bashir commissioned fake bank statements from Matt Wiessler [59] to [70]. These documents purported to show payments by Penfolds Consultants and News International into the bank account of Alan Waller, a former employee of Earl Spencer, Princess Diana’s brother. Mr Bashir showed the documents to Earl Spencer on a date early in September 1995. Mr Wiessler is an entirely reputable graphic designer who did freelance work for the BBC. Nobody has criticised him for accepting the commission. A few days later, probably on 14 September, Mr Bashir also produced to Earl Spencer other bank statements which, he said, showed payments into the account of Commander Patrick Jephson (Princess Diana’s Private Secretary) and Commander Richard Aylard (the Prince of Wales’ Private Secretary). It is likely that these statements were created by Mr Bashir and contained information that he had fabricated [56]. By showing Earl Spencer the fake Waller and Jephson/Aylard statements and informing him of their contents, Mr Bashir deceived and induced him to arrange a meeting with Princess Diana [105] to [117]. By gaining access to Princess Diana in this way, Mr Bashir was able to persuade her to agree to give the interview. This behaviour was in serious breach of the 1993 edition of the BBC’s Producer Guidelines on straight dealing [135] to [142] and [147]. On seeing the interview on screen, Mr Wiessler immediately made the connection between the Waller bank statements and the interview. He was concerned that he might have played a role in obtaining the interview by deception [152]. Acting responsibly and appropriately, he reported his concerns to the BBC. A detailed account of how the BBC responded is set out at [149] to [182]. The matter was eventually referred to Tim Gardam (Head of Weekly Programmes in BBC News and Current Affairs). Mr Gardam’s investigation culminated in a meeting between himself (and two other senior BBC persons) and Mr Bashir [171]. Mr Bashir gave them an account of the faking of the documents. Crucially, he told them that he had not shown them to anyone. They accepted that he was telling them the truth, but asked him to provide independent evidence that Princess Diana had not been shown the documents. Within a few hours, Mr Bashir obtained a note dated 22 December 1995, signed by her which supported what he had said1. I am satisfied that the Diana note is a genuine document [150]. Mr Gardam did not then know that Mr Bashir had lied when he said that he had not shown the documents to anyone and did not know that he had in fact shown them to Earl Spencer in September 1995. Mr Bashir was to repeat this lie twice in March 1996. It was only on 23 March 1996 that Mr Bashir admitted that he had lied [190]. Mr Gardam did not consider the possibility that Mr Bashir secured the interview with Princess Diana indirectly by showing the documents to Earl Spencer [179]. In the light of what he knew at the time (and in particular the Diana note), I do not consider that it would be reasonable to criticise Mr Gardam for failing to ask Earl Spencer for his version of the facts [181]. But Mr Gardam too readily accepted that Mr Bashir was telling the truth about the fake documents [182]. There were rumours in early 1996 that something had been amiss about the interview. The Mail on Sunday took the lead in carrying out further investigations which led to Mr Bashir admitting to Mr Gardam that he had shown the fake Waller statements to Earl Spencer. The BBC now decided that it must find out the entire truth behind Mr Bashir’s activities [183] to [193]. Mr Bashir was interviewed by Tim Suter (Managing Director of Weekly Programmes in BBC News and Current Affairs) and Richard Peel (Head of Communications and Information) on 28 March 1996 [194] to [196]. The conclusions that were reached after this meeting were expressed in a letter to Mr Bashir dated 4 April 1996, which was drafted by Mr Suter and agreed by Tony Hall (now Lord Hall, then Managing Director of News and Current Affairs at the BBC) but probably not sent [197] to [200]. One of their conclusions was that Mr Bashir’s dealings with Princess Diana in securing the interview were absolutely straight and fair; but that his use of some material in the early preparation of the programme was in breach of the BBC Producers’ Guidelines on straight dealing and justified a reprimand. This conclusion was not justified, even on an interim basis. It was based in large part on the uncorroborated assertions of Mr Bashir. This error was compounded by their failure to approach Earl Spencer once they knew that Mr Bashir had shown the Waller statements to him [200].
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 21, 2021 23:07:56 GMT
In early April 1996, the press continued to ask searching questions about the methods used by Mr Bashir to secure the interview. The BBC gave evasive answers to these questions [201] to [209]. On 7 April 1996, The Mail on Sunday published an article which asked whether Mr Bashir had intended to show the fake Waller statements to Earl Spencer and thereby convince him that he (Mr Bashir) was the right person to interview Princess Diana [203]. Suggestions by the press that the Princess Diana interview had been secured by deception persisted [223]. Lord Hall recognised that it was important for the BBC to conduct a full inquiry into what Mr Bashir had done and why he had done it and to resolve the matter once and for all [227]. To that end, he arranged to meet Mr Bashir together with Anne Sloman (successor to Mr Gardam). The meeting took place on 17 April 1996. Mr Bashir was unable or unwilling to give Lord Hall and Mrs Sloman any credible explanation of why he had commissioned the faking of the Waller statements and why he had shown them to Earl Spencer. They did not approach Earl Spencer to ask him for his version of what had happened. They accepted the account that Mr Bashir gave them as truthful. The investigation conducted by Lord Hall and Mrs Sloman was woefully ineffective for the following reasons [259] to [282]: (i) they failed to interview Earl Spencer: this was a big mistake and the points they (and Lord Birt, the former Director-General) have made to justify their not doing so are rejected [266] to [275]; (ii) they did not scrutinise Mr Bashir’s account with the necessary degree of scepticism and caution: they knew he had lied three times when he said that he had not shown the fake statements to Earl Spencer (these were serious lies for which he gave no explanation); they knew that he been unable to provide any credible explanation of why he had commissioned the fake statements (which was a serious breach of the BBC’s Producers’ Guidelines on straight dealing); and they knew that Mr Bashir’s account of what happened was largely uncorroborated [276] and [277]; and (iii) without knowing Earl Spencer’s version of the facts; without receiving from Mr Bashir a credible explanation of what he had done and why he had done it; and in the light of his serious and unexplained lies, Lord Hall could not reasonably have concluded, as he did, that Mr Bashir was an honest and honourable man [278] and [279]. Without justification, the BBC fell short of the high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark by (i) covering up in its press logs such facts as it had been able to establish about how Mr Bashir secured the interview [201] to [298] and [300]; and (ii) failing to mention Mr Bashir’s activities or the BBC investigations of them on any news programme [291] to [300].
|
|