Key Highlights
- The prime minister needs to make clear this is unacceptable,” Davey said. Stephen Kinnock, a health minister, said it was “right that the BBC stand firm” against Trump’s claims of defamation and that he hoped “they will continue to do so”.“I think they have apologised for one or two of the mistakes that were made in that Panorama programme, but they’ve also been very clear that there is no case to answer in terms of Mr Trump’s accusations on the broader point about libel or defamation,” Kinnock told Sky News.“The government is a massive supporter of the BBC, the Labour party will always stand up for the BBC as a vitally important institution.”“Yes, there were some mistakes made in that particular piece of film, but I think the broader argument that they were making; they’re right to stick by their guns on that and I hope that they will continue to do so.”In a complaint filed on Monday evening, Trump sought $5bn in damages each on two counts: alleging that the BBC defamed him, and that violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The US president alleged the broadcaster “intentionally, maliciously, and deceptively” edited his 6 January speech before the insurrection. The Panorama edit, which was broadcast just over a year ago and took sections of his speech almost an hour apart, suggested Trump told the crowd: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you, and we fight.
- We fight like hell.”The BBC has previously acknowledged the editing was an “error of judgment” and apologised to Trump, but insisted there was no legal basis for a defamation claim.
- Tim Davie, the BBC’s director general, and Deborah Turness, the head of BBC News, resigned over the controversy last month. Christopher Ruddy, the chief executive of the Trump-supporting US network Newsmax, said he thought the BBC should “figure out a quick and easy settlement”.“I don’t think it’s good for the BBC for this to go forward,” Ruddy said, adding that “the purpose here for the president is not to get $5bn, it’s to demonstrate a point – and maybe also get some money”. He predicted the case would ultimately settle for $10m and said the cost of the litigation for the BBC would be between $50m and $100m.“Just having the case go on, probably the BBC would lose in the sense of public perception,” Ruddy told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.
- “When an American case like this goes forward the court usually gives the plaintiff – in this case the president – very significant powers of discovery.”“They’ll get emails, and conversations, and private things that were said by BBC executives about him, about his campaign that may not be very flattering and may have shown an intent to harm him in the production of this … Rather than go through that the defendant.
