Trump doubles down on his threat against the BBC and talks of a lawsuit for up to $5 billion

LondonDonald Trump continues to threaten the BBC over alleged defamation. But now he has upped the ante even further. Aboard theAir Force One During his trip to Florida on Friday night, he confirmed that "we will sue [the BBC] for between $1 billion and $5 billion, probably next week."

The announcement came less than 24 hours after the corporation issue an apology statement for editing a video of his speech from January 6, 2021, the day of the assault on the CapitolThe montage aired shortly before the 2024 election as part of an episode of the program. Panorama in which phrases spoken more than fifty minutes apart were spliced together, and which could give the impression that Trump had called for violence.

The president has dismissed the BBC's apologies. "They wrote me a very nice letter saying they apologize. But when you say it was unintentional, I guess if it was unintentional, you don't apologize." It is a "stupid" claim to say that viewers were "unintentionally" misled, he added. It was the corporation's chairman, Samir Shah, who sent Trump the personal letter to which the Republican referred.

The BBC acknowledged that "the editing unintentionally created the impression that we were showing one continuous clip." Trump had indicated earlier this week that if the network did not rectify the situation, retract its statement, and compensate him financially for the alleged reputational damage, would sue the UK public entity for one billion dollarsThe BBC refused to pay.

This new threat is part of the tycoon's usual tactic of pressure and blackmail against the media, which, to avoid going to court, end up reaching financial settlements to resolve any litigation. This was the case, among others, of the CBS following an interview with Democratic candidate Kamala Harriswho paid him $16.5 million. Trump's initial demand was for $10 billion, arguing that the staged interview lent credibility to the Democrat's claims.

Aboard Air Force One, Trump also said he had not yet discussed the matter with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, but that he would do so this weekend, adding that he was "very embarrassed." Further elaborating on his claims, he added: "I think I should [sue the BBC]. They've even admitted they cheated... They changed the words that came out of my mouth. The people of the UK are very angry about what happened, as you can imagine, because it proves that the BBC spreads fake news."

Despite the words of a tycoon accustomed to using the courts to corner his enemies, despite the mistakes that journalism professionals may make, and the inevitable political pressures to which the corporation is subjected in one way or another, despite its apparent independence from sources, the BBC remains a global entity.

The corporation's reasons

The case of the program Panorama It became known last week following a leak to Daily Telegraph, an ultraconservative newspaper that has targeted the public broadcaster for years – like much of the right-wing media and politics – and which provoked the resignation, on Sunday night, of the CEO, Tim Davie, and the news director, Deborah Turness.

Days later, the same Telegraph revealed that another news program on BBC2,NewsnightThe BBC, which airs daily from Monday to Friday, starting at 10:30 p.m., broadcast an almost identical edit of the same speech in 2022. Regarding the chances of success for Trump's potential defamation lawsuit, most experts consulted by British media these days believe it has very little chance of success. Trump is legally resident in Florida, and the statute of limitations there for filing this type of lawsuit is two years. In theory, then, legal action is possible. But his lawyers will have to prove that the BBC distributed the edited version to a Florida audience, that there has been reputational damage, and that there was actual malice—in other words, explicit knowledge of the falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. In the BBC's letter to Trump's lawyers rejecting the financial compensation, the corporation outlined five arguments to justify why there was no reason to pay any damages. First, the network did not have the rights to distribute the episode of Panorama on its US channels, and that, in fact, it did not. Moreover, when the documentary was available on the BBC iPlayer platform, it could only be viewed in the UK.

Secondly, he maintained that the documentary did not harm Trump, since he was re-elected. Thirdly, he asserted that the clip was not edited with the intention of deceiving, but simply to shorten a very long speech. Fourthly, he argued that the fragment was not intended to be considered in isolation, since it was only twelve seconds within an hour-long program that also included numerous voices favorable to Trump. Finally, he recalled that opinions on matters of public interest and political speech are strongly protected by US defamation laws.