Retention! Retention! Retention! - How UK’s Media Can Solve Its Diversity Problems

Retention! Retention! Retention!

The only three words anyone wanting to increase diversity and representation in the media need to know. 

Last week David “Sideman” Whitely, a DJ and presenter on BBC1’s Radio 1Xtra resigned from the corporation citing the broadcaster’s use and, possibly more importantly, defence of the use of the N-word.

His resignation made both national and international news being reported in almost every major British news publication as well as in the New York Times and across Africa. Within 24 hours of his resignation the BBC dramatically reversed its decision and admitted it had made a mistake and instituted a new editorial process. 

There has been a lot of discussion around the rights and wrongs of the BBC’s use of the N-word and what prompted the BBC to reverse its initial decision. These discussions are important however I want to focus on an aspect of recent events that might seem more mundane at first but I believe is more important if we really want to increase racial representation in the UK media in general and the BBC specifically.

Black People Keep Leaving The BBC

David “Sideman” Whitely is not the first Black person to resign from the BBC.

Other Black people may have not resigned in such dramatic fashion and their departure might not have made global news but every year Black people leave the BBC in greater numbers than their White counterparts. If one looks at the statistics the BBC has hemorrhaged Black and Asian talent. 

In 2016 the situation became so bad that The Times ran a piece headlined, “Black and Asian executives quit ‘snowy white peak’ BBC” describing “an exodus of ethnic minority executives and staff” (I was part of that infamous cohort of departing execs).

Unlike Sideman’s resignation, there is rarely one event that Black people can point to for the reason they leave. Angela Ferriera, another Black senior executive who left the BBC, described the reasons Black people leave, not just the BBC but the whole industry, recently in a webinar comment to Kevin Lygo, the head of ITV Studios, “..people were either worn out, sidelined, glass ceilinged, patronised, had a nervous breakdown, or all of these and left the industry”.

Has There Been Progress?

Most of us working in the industry know on an intellectual level that the BBC, and media industry, has a retention problem but sometimes the scale of the problem is difficult to fully grasp on an emotional level.

This was brought home to me when the organisation “We Are Black Journos”, decided to do a Tweet thread highlighting and celebrating the Black people currently working at the BBC. It is a great thread and I recommend that people should click through the link and follow everyone of the people featured. 

But it also made me realise that twenty years ago, before social media, we could have made an equally impressive list of Black people working at the BBC and so I started to post my own list of Black people who were working at the corporation twenty years ago. Other people saw what I was doing and started sending me more names. I tried to keep the criteria of the list quite tight - so they had to be working at the corporation for a sizable amount of time and have been employed on or around twenty years ago.

You can check out the current list on Twitter (which keeps on growing) here.

Interestingly, although direct comparisons between the “veterans” list and the present Black BBC employees list is difficult, what is notable is the veterans list seems to contain senior editorial positions such as Channel Executives, Department Heads and Commissioners at a far greater level. And importantly the vast majority of people on the veterans list have not reached retirement age and so all things being equal would be at the height of their powers now.

But my point is not to pitch one generation against the other. 

Retention Is Key To Solving Diversity

For me the veterans list is a graphic example of how important retention is when it comes to diversity.

If the BBC had simply been able to retain the talent in the “veterans” list, combined with the current Black employees the corporation’s “diversity problems” would be literally halved. But it is not just about numbers. As I alluded to earlier, looking at the positions Black people were at when they left, and assuming standard career progression, you could argue the BBC wouldn’t have a “diversity problem” at all, at least with regards to ethnic diversity. You would have a critical mass of senior Black people who would naturally address many of the diversity issues the BBC is currently grappling with.

Sideman’s resignation may have caused the BBC to apologise and reverse its decision on the use of the N-word, but what it should also do is focus the corporation's attention on retention.  Because Sideman’s resignation meant one less Black employee at the BBC and the truth is... they just keep on adding up. 

How the BBC can solve its N-word problem

Apologies are good - solutions that fix the problem for good are better.

Over the course of less than a week the BBC broadcast two incidents of their presenters using the N-word (see my last blog post for details).

Ofcom (the industry regulator) has confirmed that they have received almost 400 complaints for its use in the BBC news programme and the BBC has received 18,600 complaints so far and counting. There have been calls for the BBC to apologise, a petition organised, and some established Black actors have even called for the people involved in taking the editorial decision to be sacked.  

At the same time the BBC has not only refused to apologise but issued a statement explaining their editorial reasoning behind their decision to use the word in the news programme and why they stand by the decision. It should be noted that Lucy Worsley, the presenter of American History’s Biggest Fibs, who also used the N-word, did issue a public apology in a personal capacity.  

There is also the argument that the incidents illustrate the lack of non-White people at the BBC in positions of editorial responsibility making these kinds of decisions. An argument I support and continue to campaign for. But the reality is this is unlikely to change any time soon to a significant degree.   

So where does this leave us?

One side arguing for the corporation to apologise and for those responsible to be disciplined while those on the other side (mainly BBC management) standing firm by their decision and refusing to admit any fault. 

While I think the BBC should issue a formal apology I also believe this may be the perfect opportunity to take advantage of the old adage “never let a good crisis go to waste”. The phrase was popularised by the American Democratic politician Rahm Emanual, and the full quote is; “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” So what is the “thing” that needs to be done that we thought could not be done before?

The BBC needs to write formal procedures into its editorial guidelines as to how to deal with racial slurs.

Currently there are only three words which warrant mandatory referral to higher editorial consideration and must be approved by the relevant channel controller/editor before they are broadcast. These are; “c***, m*****f***** and f*** or its derivatives”. 

The guidelines state: “Any proposal to use the strongest language (c***, m*****f***** and f*** or its derivatives) must be referred to and approved by the relevant channel controller/editor, who should consider the editorial justification. Editorial Policy may also be consulted.” (my use of asterisks)

Now is the perfect opportunity to insert a new line into the guidelines to address the issue of the N-word and the explicit use of other racial slurs. 

The new updated guidelines would simply state; “Any proposal to use the strongest language (c***, m*****f***** and f*** or its derivatives) or use explicit racial slurs including n***** and p*** must be referred to and approved by the relevant channel controller/editor, who should consider the editorial justification. Editorial Policy may also be consulted.”

Ideally any such decision would also have the input of at least one person of colour.

Now you might wonder why I am focusing so much on the BBC Editorial Guidelines. The reason is that all the UK’s Public Service Broadcasters including ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 use the BBC’s guidelines as a reference for their own editorial decisions and practices. And so how the BBC decides to address this issue will affect the whole of UK broadcasting.

The BBC made a mistake in broadcasting the N-word. 

I believe they should apologise. 

But using this opportunity to create a system where this cannot happen again could be the silver-lining to a very ugly cloud.

I made a BBC presenter apologise for the use of the N-Word in 2014. It was wrong then, and it’s wrong now

In the last week alone, the N-word has been broadcast in two separate programmes on the BBC.

The first during a news report about a racist attack against an NHS worker, in which Fiona Lamdin, a white journalist, used it in reported speech. The second time a few days later in the repeat of the programme, American History’s Biggest Fibs, in which white presenter Lucy Worsley used the word, quoting a historical figure.

The BBC was wrong on both occasions to broadcast the word.

How can I be so confident and definitive in saying so?

Because I worked at the BBC for 24 years, the last eight of them as a senior executive. I am fully aware that BBC itself says use of strong words in general are wrong in its own editorial guidelines under section 5: “Harm and Offence”.

The guidelines state: “Programmes broadcast on UK television between 5.30am and 9pm must be suitable for a general audience including children.” and goes on to say “any proposed exceptions must be referred to the channel controller/editor.”

The news report of the racist attack was aired at 10.30am, “American History’s Biggest Fibs” was aired at 8.00pm.

I do not think I am being controversial when I say that the N-word is not “suitable for a general audience including children”. One can argue that there might be times when racial slurs, just like some of the worst swear words, are editorially justified in a programme after 21.00, (personally I don’t think either of the two examples warranted it). But you need to take a pretty radical stance to justify the use of the word when it is assumed children could be watching.

So how could the BBC make such a bad mistake – twice?

Breaching their own editorial guidelines – twice?

To answer that, I want to share a little story.

Six years ago I was the editor of Scotland 2014. The programme was a nightly political programme that replaced Newsnight in Scotland during the independence referendum. One night, we had an item on racism in the country and one of the nice liberal guests used the N-word to supposedly illustrate his point of how abhorrent the word is – bear in mind this was live and after 10.30pm when children have all gone to bed. When the word was used, I was in the back of the studio gallery. I was not only the most senior editorial figure on duty but I was also the only non-white person.

I told the presenter to immediately go to the next item which was a short film. While the film was running I explained to the studio guests that they can’t use that language and when the film finished, the presenter then apologised to the viewers for any offence caused – while still acknowledging the point the guest was trying to make.

The whole affair lasted a few minutes and it is now just an anecdote I sometimes tell at dinner parties.

However, the story is incredibly rare.

It is very uncommon that the most senior editorial figure on a British television news production is black and understands the full meaning of the word on both an analytical and emotional level.

To my knowledge, there is not a single major television news bulletin on the BBC, Channel 4 or ITV where the editor-in-chief is black, Asian or from an ethnic minority. In fact, there is not a single major television current affairs programme, such as Panorama or Dispatches, where the top executive producer or editor in charge behind the scenes has been a non-white person.

But the issue goes deeper than news and current affairs.

The 2020 Bafta Television Awards were recently lauded for its range of ethnically diverse winners including “When They See Us” for best international television and The End Of The F***ing World's Naomi Ackie for best supporting actress. However, just two weeks prior, Bafta held their “Craft Awards” for the directors and writers and people who actually make the programmes. Not a single winner came from an Asian or Black background.

And so, what you have at the BBC specifically, and in British television in general, is a situation where remarkably, few of the key editorial decision-makers who rule on racially sensitive issues, from the use of the N-word to how to cover Black Lives Matter protests, are non-white.

It has created a situation where veteran news reporter Jon Snow lamented the inability of journalists to cover the issues surrounding Grenfell before it burned down due to the media’s “own lack of diversity”. An ineptitude which some would say resulted in the deaths of 72 people, the majority of whom were non-white, in so much as good journalism on a respected platform often causes issues to be addressed.

It is important for all of us to hold our national broadcaster to account when it makes mistakes. Use of the N-word is a case in point.

But if we want all of our media to stop making these kinds of mistakes, we must go to the root cause, and that is to ensure that there is better representation of people from all different backgrounds in positions of real editorial power. The consequences of failing to make that happen can be and often are a lot worse than broadcasting the N-word when children could be listening.

(This piece originally appeared in the Independent comment section.  https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bbc-n-word-lamdin-worsley-apology-racism-black-a9652876.html )