Few realise just how angry former President Donald Trump is over the BBC’s editing of his January 6, 2021 remarks.
Panorama famously spliced together two separate phrases, 54 minutes apart, to imply he deliberately incited violence.
According to Trump, this was a blatant misrepresentation.
Shortly after the broadcast, I met Trump at Mar-a-Lago.
“Is this how you treat your closest ally?” he asked, exasperation clear.
It’s easy to understand his frustration — an organisation that once prided itself on impartiality now seems intent on distorting facts for effect.
A Once-Respected Institution in Crisis
The BBC, founded in 1922 by Lord Reith to “inform, educate and entertain,” has strayed far from that mission.
From the Jimmy Savile scandal to other shocking revelations about staff misconduct, the corporation’s reputation has taken repeated hits.
Even celebrated presenters like Gary Lineker have sparked controversy by comparing political debates on immigration to Nazi Germany, while musical acts like Bob Vylan have aired anti-Semitic messages live on BBC broadcasts.
In short, the organisation is widely seen as corrupted from the inside out, and many believe a reform is long overdue.
Reform, Not Abolition
Contrary to some rumours, Reform UK does not want to abolish the BBC completely.
Its news coverage and the World Service remain vital.
However, drama, entertainment, sports, and educational content could be separated from public funding, relying instead on subscriptions, advertising, or a mix of both.
Such a model would allow the BBC to compete openly in the media market, relying on creativity rather than guaranteed licence-fee revenue.
The goal is to maintain the best parts of the BBC while making the organisation more accountable to the public.
Funding and Accountability
Currently, a third of the BBC World Service is already funded by the foreign affairs budget, demonstrating alternative funding methods are possible.
News provision, whether funded by subscriptions, adverts, or general taxation, could cost far less than the current licence fee — currently £174.50 per household annually.
Importantly, continued public funding must come with a commitment to impartiality, fairness, and the promotion of British values.
The licence fee, a flat tax regardless of wealth, is widely regarded as regressive, with women disproportionately affected among those prosecuted for non-payment.
Political Resistance to Change
Attempts at reform have historically met resistance.
Former Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries, now a member of Reform UK, sought to overhaul the BBC ahead of the 2027 Royal Charter renewal.
Cabinet members and backbench Conservatives pushed back hard, fearful of challenging the established institution.
Reform UK remains committed to changing the BBC, ensuring it reflects the public’s interests rather than serving as an elite cultural monolith.
BBC’s Cultural Disconnect
Even amid scandals, the BBC continues seemingly unchanged.
The Mail on Sunday recently reported that this year’s Reith Lectures will be delivered by Rutger Bregman, a Dutch author who has compared both Trump and myself to 1930s fascists.
For licence-fee payers, this illustrates the disconnect between public funding and the content delivered.
Once, the BBC closed broadcasts with the National Anthem.
Today, many feel it instead broadcasts contempt for British history, culture, and sovereignty — all while charging viewers steeply for the privilege.
A Vision for the BBC Beyond 2027
The BBC can survive and thrive after 2027, but only as a streamlined national news broadcaster accountable to the public.
Its remit should focus on impartial reporting and promoting British values, not elitist commentary or cultural critiques.
For the licence fee to continue, the organisation must genuinely serve the people who fund it.
Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn