[ad_1]
“Never complain, never explain yourself.” The phrase, coined by former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, is said to be an unofficial motto of the British royal family. Mystical part, stiff upper lip part.
But 25 years ago this weekend, all of that would change when Princess Diana made it clear that she saw no strength in silence. The most photographed woman in the world decided to speak.
And when it did, there was very little to hold back. Her adultery, her husband’s adultery, her battle with an eating disorder, Prince Charles’s suitability for the throne. The princess chose to open the lid on the inner workings of the royal family in a way that had never been seen before, nor since.
By any measure, it was the news scoop of the decade, if not the century. The fact that the princess had agreed to speak to Martin Bashir of the BBC’s Panorama program was known to very few on the station beforehand. It was secretly filmed in the princess’s home at Kensington Palace, and when it was revealed it was explosive.
Twenty-three million people tuned in that night to hear what Diana had to say. The debate raged not only around what she had said, but why she had said it.
Was it your last revenge on ‘The Firm’? At the height of the Prince Charles divorce, did you see it as your last chance to have your opinion before a deal that might have involved a confidentiality clause?
Twenty-five years later, and why and how the interview happened is back in the news. But this time it is the BBC that has questions to answer. The corporation has announced an investigation into how Martin Bashir obtained the interview, amid accusations by Charles Spencer, Princess Diana’s brother, that his sister was tricked into speaking on camera.
Earl Spencer has said that Martin Bashir showed him bank documents that suggested both he and his sister were being spied on. He has also suggested that there was “another hoax” involved in persuading him that an interview would be a good idea. The earl has said that this was a factor in which he introduced his sister to Mr. Bashir, which ultimately led to the interview.
However, the bank documents were later proven to be false. The graphics expert who produced them at Martin Bashir’s urging has said that he did not know how they would be used or that they would show them to anyone. He also said that when he raised his concerns with BBC bosses, work with the corporation petered out and he believed he had been ostracized. By then, of course, the interview had aired and drawn headlines and praise around the world.
The allegations surrounding the documents were revealed in a tabloid newspaper in 1996 and an internal BBC investigation was ordered. The results of that initial investigation suggested that Martin Bashir had been “reckless” about the bank statements, but considered him an honest man.
The BBC also said it possessed a letter from Princess Diana, saying that she had not been forced in any way to conduct the interview.
Martin Bashir left the BBC in the following years, and went on to work in various high-profile positions for other broadcasters. But he returned in 2016 as the BBC’s religion editor.
He is currently on sick leave from the organization, recovering from coronavirus and heart surgery, so he has not been able to provide any context to the current debate.
However, he is likely to be under pressure to answer questions very soon, as the BBC has now started another investigation into the events surrounding the interview, spearheaded by one of the UK’s most prominent judges, Lord Dyson. He has promised that it will be “thorough and fair” and has estimated that it could take up to six months to complete.
The BBC has promised that the report will be published in its entirety. Lord Dyson is now tasked with getting to the bottom of Earl Spencer’s current concerns, who believes he was tricked into persuading his sister to talk to Martin Bashir.
The investigation will also look at whether there was any violation of the BBC editorial code and look at the internal investigation carried out in 1996, essentially looking into the initial investigation.
It’s a complex story dating back 25 years, and some may wonder about the need to dredge it all up again. But there is a growing chorus of voices that want to be fully investigated, the most recent of which is that of Prince William, Diana’s eldest son.
A look at the terms of reference for the new research shows how many questions the BBC believes need to be answered urgently. Many are the questions that go to the heart of your journalism. The investigation will focus on:
1. What steps did the BBC and, in particular, Martin Bashir take to obtain the Panorama interview in 1995? This will include looking at simulated bank statements, alleged payments to members of the royal house, and other issues raised by Earl Spencer.
2. Were those steps appropriate, particularly with regard to the BBC’s editorial standards at the time?
3. To what extent did the actions of the BBC, and in particular Martin Bashir, influence Diana’s decision to grant an interview?
4. What knowledge did the BBC have in 1995 and 1996 of relevant evidence, such as falsified bank statements?
5. How effectively did the BBC investigate the circumstances that led to the interview?
Investigating events like this so many years later can be problematic. People have forgotten details or passed away in the intervening years. In fact, some might argue that the only person who can really say what persuaded Princess Diana to do the interview is the princess herself, and she died in 1997. But the passage of time may also persuade some who did not speak in the past. so many years to discuss what happened, providing potentially valuable new insights.
As Benjamin Disraeli also said: “Truth is more precious than time.”
[ad_2]