On the morning of the 9th November 2021 I received an MBE for Service for Media Diversity. In the afternoon of the same day I met the BBC's Director General, Tim Davie, who alleged blocked me from a senior journalistic appointment due to my work on media diversity.
In the evening of the same day I then delivered a speech addressing concerns and misunderstandings around journalistic impartiality and championing the ideals of diversity.
News organisations who do not champion media diversity, and make diversity and inclusion part of their core "news values", are not only poorer for it but are hurting ll journalists from underrepresented groups.
Read my speech in full here...
Good evening, friends and fellow journalists, media practitioners and academics
Before I start I want to start by thanking Simon Albury and the Campaign for Media Diversity for organising tonight’s event, Manori Ravindran the international editor of Variety for taking part and of course the Right Honourable Matt Hancock for hosting this event - which was originally meant to take place in Portcullis House in Parliament before an outbreak of Covid struck.
But most of all I would like to thank all the people who have shown me so much support over the years, and especially in the last few weeks, as I have became a centre of a small but significant media storm – I especially want to thank the Sir Lenny Henry Centre for Media Diversity for all their support.
Today I want to briefly talk about the issue of media diversity and journalistic impartiality.
Firstly, as imperfect and problematic as the concept of journalistic impartiality is - it is something I deeply believe in. Like many principles in life it is more of a journey – something we strive for – rather than an absolute destination. But I believe it is something worth striving for and an ideal worth fighting for.
Without it we cannot trust our news and the information about the world. As a society we become more fractured and divided as competing groups just believe in their own partial facts.
And just like justice, not only does our journalism need to be impartial, the people delivering it need to be seen to be impartial.
That does not mean there isn’t a place for comment and opinion, but for reporting of facts we need impartial journalists who are seen to be impartial – especially when it comes to our national broadcaster like the BBC - or anywhere there is only a few news providers that people rely on to get their facts – and in the UK that means broadcast news in general.
Evidence of how dearly I hold this idea to my heart - in 2014 I oversaw the BBC Scotland’s current affairs programmes covering the Scottish independence referendum. I voted in that referendum because I believe in the democratic process - but with the exception of my wife - I have never revealed to anyone how I voted in that referendum – to this day.
Similarly, even though I had left the UK and was no longer working at the BBC by the time the Brexit referendum took place I have never tweeted or publicly said whether I am a 'Brexiteer' or 'Remainer' because I have always thought one day I may return to political journalism in the UK.
I am an avid user of social media but you would struggle to find anything overtly party political in any of my tweets.
And yet despite this, despite the fact I have never been a member of a political party, despite the fact that I can count Conservatives, SNP, Liberal Democrats and Labour members among my friendship circle.
The news broke that my impartiality was being questioned and whether I could be a senior journalist at the BBC.
Now I am not going to go into my particular case because the BBC has publicly denied that I was ever blocked. But what I do know to be the case is hundreds of journalists of colour fear their careers being blocked, being disciplined by their employer, or even fired for breaching impartiality guidelines, for doing exactly what I have done.
And what have I done?
I have spoken out and championed the need for greater diversity, inclusion and equity in the UK media industry. I have spoken out for the need for more women in positions of power as according to Directors UK only 25% of TV programmes are directed by women. I have given evidence to the House of Lords for more programmes to be made out of London, I have published academic studies looking at how to increase the number of disabled people in our industry which for the uk film industry currently stands at less than 5% according the BFI. And I have advised the BBC, Channel 4, and the Guardian on how to increase ethnic and racial diversity in their organisations - and without breaking any confidence if you were around London Bridge three weeks ago you might have seen me walking into the News UK offices.
Today I even received my MBE for services to media diversity. The work I have done and the values I have championed are being recognised in the highest places of the state.
And so why are journalists – and specially journalists of colour frightened to speak out about the need for greater media diversity?
It is because there seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding by many people about what impartiality really is.
The truth is news organisations are not trying to achieve impartiality but they are – correctly – trying to achieve “due impartiality”
Let me read to you what the BBC’s own editorial guidelines say about “due impartiality”
Quote “Due impartiality… does not require absolute neutrality on every issue or detachment from fundamental democratic principles, such as the right to vote, freedom of expression and the rule of law.” End quote - That is from BBC Editorial Guidelines: Section 4 Impartiality - Introduction
Take climate change. This week we are in the middle of Cop26 - due impartiality means we report on climate change as an accepted scientific fact. Our journalism and reporting on climate change is better because we do not look for “absolute neutrality” on the issue - balancing climate change fact with climate change deniers.
For me, and millions of people in the UK the principle of being anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-disablist also does not require; quote unquote “absolute neutrality” .
Championing the need for a more representative, diverse and equitable media is not an impartiality issue – it is why Ofcom - the media regulator who passes judgment on matters of broadcasters’ impartiality - also champions these ideals. It is why the BBC and ITN can state them as core values without compromising their ability to deliver impartial objective news.
It is what we teach journalism students are “news values” and without news values any media organisation is morally bankrupt.
So let me tell you - journalists of colour are scared – I have spoken to journalists who literally - and I am using the word literally correctly here – literally look over their shoulder when they talk about diversity - on Zoom at home because they are so scared. They are scared of losing their jobs. They are scared of being backlisted as a trouble maker.
And what are some of the activities they are scared of being exposed about.
They are scared of being exposed as one of the millions of people who went on a Black Lives Matter protest in the summer of 2020. They are scared that they liked a picture of an England footballer taking the knee during the Euros. They are scared that they did not delete their black square in memory of George Floyd on Instagram quickly enough. These are all real and specific examples.
They are worried they liked a blog post by me analysing the BBC’s or Ofcom’s publicly available data highlighting the industries failings when it comes to diversity
They are worried that doing any of these things will bring their impartiality into question and by extension be used against them when they go for promotion or worse be used as ammunition against them in a disciplinary hearing.
These fears are real.
It is why irrespective of the facts around my particular case my story struck a chord with so many because it played right into these fears. And these fears cannot be dismissed by simply saying – the Daily Mail, the Guardian, the Times, and the Independent all got it wrong. And the rumours around Marcus Ryder aren’t true.
They can only be dismissed when broadcasters send out a very clear message that they believe in media diversity - and do not believe individuals championing media diversity impacts on a journalist’s ability to be impartial any more than championing the right to vote or any of our basic human rights.
Broadcasters can do this by saying – yes journalists can cheer the England football team taking the knee.
Broadcasters - like the BBC can achieve this by publishing the diversity figures for their Editorial policy teams and Editorial complaints units who decide on these matters and most importantly their seniority by salary.
And lastly broadcasters can do this by appointing people who have publicly championed the values I have publicly championed, people who look like me, to senior editorial roles in news.
Actions speak louder than denials.
Journalists of colour need to hear and see their employers champion diversity not just in their public statements but in the way their journalism covers stories and the appointments made in their newsrooms.
Because fundamentally more diverse and inclusive newsrooms will deliver better news for everyone.
Thank you to all the journalists of colour who work tirelessly to produce amazing journalism despite the challenges they face.
Thank you to all the journalists from under-represented groups who live the values of inclusion and diversity.
And thank you to all journalists - irrespective of their backgrounds - who recognise that diversity is not additional to their journalistic objectivity but key to them achieving the goal of due impartiality.
