Michael Grade is bursting with rage at the BBC for what they did. But also quite a bit about what they didn't.
Grade seems to have accepted the BBC's apology and the findings of the complaints unit. The unit, in particular, upholds complaints that way other news outlets spoke about the original World Service programme might have led to fair-minded listeners getting the wrong impression about what it found.
It makes it odd, then, that Grade's interviews today see him talking about the Editorial Complaints Unit judgement in a way which might have led to fair-minded listeners getting the wrong impression about what it found:
Former BBC chairman Michael Grade, a trustee of the Band Aid Trust, said Assignment had "sexed up" its story by "trying to smear Live Aid through this programme through the use of all the music from Live Aid and using Bob Geldof's name".Except, that's not what the ECU said:
OutcomeSo no "sexing-up"; no intent to smear anyone. It might be thought a bit misleading to go round claiming that there was.
The ECU found as follows:
* The programme [Assignment] gave the impression that the claims of diversion related, inter alia, to Band Aid/Live Aid money (and the programme-makers acknowledge that such an impression, though unintended, might have been formed by a fair-minded listener). However, the programme's evidence did not relate to Band Aid/Live Aid money, and the impression given by the programme in this respect was therefore unfair to the Trust.
* There was no evidence that the programme's allusions to Band Aid were motivated by a desire to sensationalise the story.