BBC Balance - Again

Yesterday I made a post on Betfred, having read a BBC article on it; however, on reflection, it wasn’t Fred Done who deserved the spotlight – it was the BBC’s journalism. Or rather, the lack of it.

The piece was a masterclass in what the Corporation now seems to think “balance” means: repeat the words of a billionaire unchallenged, then toss in a few opposing quotes near the end for seasoning. Job done, impartiality achieved, time for coffee. The problem is, that’s not balance – it’s stenography with punctuation.

Fred Done, a billionaire bookmaker with operations stretching from Manchester to Gibraltar, tells the BBC that a modest tax rise could spell “the end of the industry”, costing 7,500 jobs. No one asks why a firm that rakes in a billion pounds in revenue and owns premises across several tax-light jurisdictions makes only half a million in operating profit. No one asks how much profit is quietly parked offshore. No one challenges his claim that a 35 per cent duty would finish him off. It’s all dutifully reported as if gospel.

This is what happens when “he said, she said” reporting replaces investigation. The journalists treat Done’s threats of shop closures as fact, yet offer no counter-data. The piece even repeats his claim that higher taxes would drive punters to offshore betting sites – without mentioning that the industry already shifted online years ago. Half the story, half the truth.

And then, right on cue, comes the ritual paragraph from the other side: a think tank quote, a charity soundbite, and an obligatory “critics say” to preserve the illusion of fairness. What’s missing is analysis. No exploration of whether Betfred’s model is even viable. No comparison of effective tax rates. No attempt to quantify the real social cost of gambling – estimated at up to £1.7 billion a year – against his alleged £20 million rise in company costs.

The BBC used to pride itself on calling power to account. Now it seems content to quote it. “Balance” has become a shield for timidity – the kind that leaves readers more misled than informed.

If Rachel Reeves does raise gambling taxes, it won’t be because the BBC held the industry to scrutiny. It’ll be despite their reluctance to do so. Because when journalism trades courage for caution, billionaires get to write the script – and the public gets the advert.