YouthNet blog
An insight into youth issues, volunteering trends, charity life and more from the UK charity YouthNet
All | Events | Youth | Technology | Volunteering | YouthNet | Charity World
Thursday Jul 19, 2007
The eye of transparency rests on the BBC
Imagine being in the audience on a game show, willing on the contestants to win the prize of a lifetime (or just feeling jealous that it's them up there not you – either works).
Having watched one of the lucky contestants win, imagine finding out that in fact, they weren't a member of the public, but one of the production team on the show.
It's not a particularly great feeling, but it's pretty similar to how some people are feeling today, after the BBC 'fessed up to several breaches in editorial policy on various programmes. In particular, interactive competitions on Children in Need and Sport Relief were mentioned as being won by members of the production team, for various reasons (such as calls from the public being "lost").
In the voluntary sector we're pretty obsessed with transparency and accountability, and in a way it's comforting to know that an institution like the BBC is grappling with the very same issues that we're trying to get to grips with (indeed, we were mentioned in a very interesting debate over on Intelligent Giving this week. In fact, whilst we're on Intelligent Giving, this isn't the first time the BBC, in the form of Children in Need, has fallen under the transparency spotlight).
I was particularly dismayed to hear about one of the BBC programmes mentioned yesterday – Sport Relief. Sport Relief ran what to my mind is one of the very few successful SMS fundraising campaigns back in 2002 – at the time it was fantastic to see a new fundraising technique being used to such good effect, and I remember feeling inspired and slightly jealous of the resources and platform at Sport Relief's disposal.
I don't know the details of the breach in editorial standards on Sport Relief, but it would be pretty tragic if those early interactive campaigns that generated significant funds for a great cause were rigged (even if the decisions were taken as a result of huge production pressures).
I haven't been a big fan of endless reporting on funding, in particular when it is purely driven by the needs of the funder, as opposed to a set of mutually beneficial outcomes, but this episode has really brought home how vital transparency is.
It's also shown how important it is to be open when things have gone wrong, and I think the BBC have done an admirable job in coming clean and drawing a line in the sand about the consequences of any future breaches in policy.Posted by Sam Thomas ( 10:57 AM ) Link to this post Comments[0]
