If politicians cheat, can journalism do it too?

The BBC is embroiled in a serious diplomatic incident with the White House. It turns out that a former member of the committee that monitored the broadcaster's journalistic standards has compiled a nineteen-page dossier detailing various controversial cases. One of the most striking involves the program PanoramaIn a broadcast just before the US elections, the BBC edited together two phrases Trump uttered an hour apart on the day of the Capitol storming, presenting them as a single sentence. With meticulous editing, it appeared as if the president was inciting the crowd to violently storm the chamber where popular sovereignty resides. Opposition leader Kemi Badenoch has already called for dismissals at the BBC, and the voices that have been pressuring for years to drastically reduce its funding (because they believe it works against them) have been revived. Certainly, such editing is unacceptable, especially since it was presented as a single sentence when it was actually a Frankenstein's monster. However, it's worth remembering that the meaning of all the bravado Trump spouted on that fateful day pointed in the same direction. He was careful not to utter the magic words "Raze the Capitol," but without his carefully crafted incendiary rhetoric, the mob would not have mobilized with such intensity. A single instruction from him would have stopped the riots.

Precisely because populist politicians master the art of rhetoric that produces results but evades criminal responsibility—just look at how racist speeches always come padded—journalism must be extremely careful with its approach. Because approach is the real battle. However unfair it may be, the BBC should have warned viewers that it was doing a max-mix of his speech. Although only cynics would question the meaning of it all.