I tweeted about this earlier , but want to add a bit more detail.

Earlier this evening on BBC Radio 4 , there was a profile of the recommended candidate for  Chairman of the BBC Board of Trustees, Rona Fairhead.  I should make the point that I have nothing against her personally. Indeed I had never heard of her till the other week when her name came up for this absolutely key role. I was interested to learn more about her, as I used to be a big supporter of the BBC ( and I should note — a lot of what it produces is still rather good).

Actually the one thing I had read previously was that she was / is a director of HSBC. She has been a non-executive director there since about  2004; well before the 2008/9 etc.,(and still partially unresolved)  banking crisis. I guess that position has taken up a good part of her career. She is apparently a member of the Bank’s “Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee ( no,I have no idea either, but the wording is taken from the bank’s website).

I have no idea either whether she has done a good job in that role, she may well have been an excellent non-executive. She may be the right candidate for this position, again I have no idea at all and that is not my concern here. The question for the BBC, and I will be sending them this piece if someone else doesn’t tweet it to them, is a perfectly obvious one .

How can the BBC hold itself out as an objective supplier of information if it mentions nothing about her role at HSBC in its 15 minute profile of Ms. Fairhead? To say the BBC keeps shooting itself in the foot is maybe an understatement . If it can’t be objective factually  on such a seemingly simple issue, what hope for the difficult stuff ,such reporting from Israel /Gaza, or [….pick your own subject].

Again, making an obvious point, there is so much distrust around so many of our public institutions at the moment; matters such as this just don’t do anything to help.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *