Exoneration by resigning will not give Mr Bashir or BBC management absolution. They must face the consequences.
Surely after this report any vestige of respect anyone has for the BBC must be in the gutter along with the Corporation's principles, its standards, its journalistic integrity and its right to exist as the State broadcaster.
Because what Lord Dyson’s enquiry has exposed is the BBC’s willingness not just to trade in lies and deceit whatever the human cost - in this case it turned out to be Diana’s life - but its lack of principle in covering it up.
The six-month investigation produced many startling revelations, the most damning of which was that Bashir’s interview put Diana on a path that eventually led to her death.
Prince William believes that, as does Diana’s brother, Earl Spencer, as do, I bet, the vast majority of the British people.
How did an organisation that has always hailed itself as the rightful occupier of the moral high ground, a bastion of truth, decency and integrity to which the rest of the media should aspire, find itself with blood on its hands over Diana’s death?
For decades, the BBC has been allowed to sneer at the rest of the media from its taxpayerfunded pedestal, proclaiming it is better, more trustworthy than the rest of us. Hah!
Sky news interviewee thinks the BBC is being weakened for a wider purpose and that other news outlets would have done anything to secure an interview with Diana.
Believes they should not be hypocritical but conceded that the BBC had to maintain higher standards as the national broadcaster.
Going under cover, masking identities, concocting fables may be necessary to expose misconduct and villainy. “There are cases, and undercover is one of them,” stated former Panorama editor Tom Giles to the House Communications Committee in 2012, “where technically, we break the rules. Technically we break the law whether it is on privacy or on giving a misleading CV in order to ensure that we are able to go undercover.” For Giles, there had to be “very clear prima facie evidence that this is something that is of significant public interest.”
The eternal flame of the Diana Cult is one that constantly threatens purges and censorship. Only hagiographers are welcome to the shrine. Prince William is keen to take the purging further. The interview, he demands, should be scrubbed from the historical record. “It is my firm view that this Panorama programme holds no legitimacy and should never be aired again.” The concern now is how far that purging will go in the battles over what can, or can’t, be reported.
Good question. Perhaps a panel involving independent judges within it would be an idea. This would mitigate any potential legal proceedings afterwards.
In any case, IMHO the Bashir interview was of interest and not in the public interest, and hence not “necessary” for the common good.
BBC chairman Richard Sharp has said there will be an investigation into why Martin Bashir was rehired by the broadcaster in 2016 after initially departing in 1999.
‘It may seem like a long few days but it is also worth us reflecting and deliberating on the reactions and making sure that our response is appropriate and comprehensive to satisfy those concerns.’
Have to be certain of singing from the same hymn sheet. He was the religious editor.
Martin Bashir should be asked to answer questions, unlikely, but the others will not have anything new to add.
A defiant Mr Bashir said in a statement last month: 'This is the second time that I have willingly fully co-operated with an investigation into events more than 25 years ago.
'I apologised then, and I do so again now, over the fact that I asked for bank statements to be mocked up.
‘It was a stupid thing to do and was an action I deeply regret. But I absolutely stand by the evidence I gave a quarter of a century ago, and again more recently.’
Sorry a meaningless word, sorry the truth about him has been revealed.
Forgery or [mock up] is the making of a false document in order that it may be used as genuine.
Committed a crime, admitted to it, will not face criminal investigation?
To my mind, there’s no “should be asked” in it. He must be told, on pain of a prison sentence, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Asked what consequences senior BBC managers should face for the fact Bashir used forged documents to secure the interview, Sir Richard said: 'I simply don’t know what possible punishment there is except shame. I mean, I think that Tony Hall has suffered excessively from the revelations and has apologised.
'I think John Birt has played a very good hand because of course, he was editor in chief so I feel he has to take responsibility for what happened.
‘But what punishment can there be? It was 25, 26 years in the past. The punishment is public shame.’
Discussing if there should be broader consequences for the corporation, Sir Richard said: 'Politicians have never liked the BBC. They can’t bear the idea that a state broadcasting company is independent of the state and doesn’t obey the mandate of the state.
'Also they hate the idea that it’s paid by a hypothecated tax, so the Treasury can’t play around with a tax.
'What can they do? Well, they can cut the legs off the BBC. That would be an act of massive cultural vandalism.
‘The BBC is the most important cultural organisation in the world. And I very much hope that it’s going to have the power to remain so.’
In fact, I’d be surprised if there turns out to be much public support these days for the television licence full stop, at least in its present form in which the money goes exclusively to the BBC and all other TV companies are obliged to self-fund through advertising.
