Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting, Series 1 to 5 (2004-2009, Series 1-3 on BBC Two, Series 4&5 on BBC One) Trash to Cash, Series 1 and 2 (Series 1&2, 2008-2009, BBC One) Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is, Series 2 (Series 2, 2008, BBC One) November 2009 Getting the best out of the BBC for licence fee payers Contents Summary 1 The Editorial Standards Committee Finding in full 4 Report by the BBC Executive, November 2009 10 November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Summary In August work at Reef Television for the BBC was suspended following a newspaper story that a cameraman had posed as a member of the public in the series Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting. In Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting 2 friends or family members are pitted against one another to buy £350 of antiques from a foreign flea market, bring them back to the UK and re-sell them on a stall here. The one who makes the most money wins a small prize (a piece of glass or pottery or similar with a value of a few hundred pounds). This is not a competition for the viewing public. In this case it was alleged the cameraman had bought an item from a stall in the UK and had not been identified as a member of the production team to the viewing public. A BBC investigation began. The Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) of the Trust asked for a report at the start of September. A later story by the Sun revealed that the purchase of an antique had been restaged. The ESC received an oral report on 3 September. On the basis of that report, the ESC asked whether the outcome of the programme had been changed by staff purchases. An interim report to the ESC on 30 September informed the Committee that: • there have been 7 broadcast incidents of staff members purchasing items. In no case did the script make it clear that the purchasers were members of staff. These staff purchase incidents occurred across 5 series of ‘Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting’. In two of these cases the purchase price affected the final outcome of the programme – ie a different contestant won as a result of the purchase. • there have been 2 broadcast incidents of re-staging. In the first another dealer was asked to play the part of the genuine dealer; in the second a researcher stood in for the genuine dealer. Both incidents occurred in series 5. • there were a number of off-camera staff purchases made during Series 6, which has not been transmitted and was in production at the time that work was suspended. Two of these affected the outcome of the challenge. • there were other, more numerous, staff purchases which were not filmed in every series (1-5). There is no record so there is no way of knowing when or if these off-camera purchases affected the outcome of the challenge. Reef Television were fully aware that staff purchases were happening and there was a written company policy which recognised the practice and intended to regulate it. The ESC asked for confirmation that people working on these series had not taken the same practices and used them elsewhere. In November the ESC was informed that a full investigation for Reef Television which had involved contacting senior staff who had worked at Reef in the past had uncovered further matters: • 11 further issues were reported including staff purchases in Series 1 and 2 of Trash to Cash but most of these were judged by BBC management to be minor. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust • 1 incident in Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is, Series 2. In this case a sofa was being sold. Unbeknown to Reef Television management the real buyer did not wish to appear on camera so a friend stood in for him/her. That sale fell through and the dealer then sold the sofa at auction for the same price. Reef Television have confirmed that they never raised or discussed the issue of staff purchases with anyone at the BBC. The BBC investigation spoke to every BBC Executive Producer involved and all said they were unaware of these practices. Management at Reef Television were unaware of the reconstructions and therefore they were not made known to the BBC. BBC management consider that due to the nature of these practices it was not possible, in the edit suite, to recognise that they had occurred, unless the BBC Executive Producer, by chance, recognised a member of the programme team. The ESC was deeply perturbed that once again the trust of the public in the BBC would be undermined by these events. Viewers could not have been aware of staff purchases or of reconstructed events. The public had been misled. The ESC considered both practices (staff purchases and unidentified reconstructions) to be unacceptable. The ESC accepted that it was not probable that these matters could have been detected by the BBC on viewing the programme. The ESC noted however that the chances of a BBC Executive Producer identifying Reef Television staff purchases or unidentified reconstructions in the final programme was reduced because the BBC did not, at that time, view all programmes prior to broadcast. This had been identified by the Trust as a compliance weakness and the Trust had intervened in 2008 to ensure that all programmes were viewed pre-broadcast. This system had not been in place during the delivery of these series to the BBC by Reef Television. The ESC concluded that a fit for purpose compliance system had not been in place at the time of the original broadcast of Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting but that it was probable, even if it had been, that these practices would not have been detected. They sprang from a failure of editorial judgement (staff purchases) and editorial control (reconstructions) at the independent production company, Reef Television. They did not spring from a failure of editorial judgement by the BBC Executive Producers. Notwithstanding, the BBC as broadcaster must take responsibility for the public having been misled. The licence fee payer must be able to trust the BBC in all its programming. This was factual entertainment but even so the public who paid for these programmes through the licence fee did expect to watch real events unfolding even in the context of a format programme. These programmes must not be re-shown on the BBC. The BBC, as a matter of principle, must not tolerate misleading content. It must put steps in place to stop it and, if discovers it, it must be dealt with openly and firmly. The ESC was aware that Reef Television had been suspended for three months without income from the BBC. However the ESC considered the BBC licence fee payer had also suffered financial loss as these programmes could not be shown again on the BBC. The ESC understood that the management of Reef Television were unaware of the reconstructions and had, wrongly, assumed that staff purchases were acceptable. This was not a deliberate breach of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. It was a matter for the Executive as to whether the company was used again in the future. However it was essential that, before work resumes with Reef Television, BBC management must agree November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust with Reef Television the amount and delivery date of financial compensation from Reef Television to the BBC. BBC management must also be satisfied that new compliance measures are in place and are of an appropriate standard. The ESC found that there had been serious and repeated breaches of the editorial guidelines which say: Misleading audiences We should not distort known facts, present invented material as fact, or knowingly do anything to mislead our audiences. Staging and Re-Staging Events …unless clearly signalled to the audience, or using reconstructions, it is normally unacceptable in news and factual programmes to: • Stage or re-stage significant action or events which are significant to the development of the action or narrative, for example, the moment of discovery in a scientific documentary. ….Commentary must never be used to give the audience a misleading impression of events. The ESC concluded that: • the affected programmes must not be rebroadcast; • an apology and reimbursal (which Reef had offered to provide) should be offered to those competitors who should have won but did not do so following staff purchases which were broadcast; • the date of payment and the amount of compensation from Reef Television to the BBC must be agreed by the BBC and Reef Television before Reef Television may resume work for the BBC; • BBC management must also be satisfied that new compliance measures are in place and are of an appropriate standard at Reef Television before Reef Television may resume work for the BBC; • an on air apology should be made at a time and date and on a service to be agreed with the ESC and in wording to be agreed by the ESC; and • The Trust expects the BBC Executive to report on progress made with the actions detailed below in the next bi-annual complaints and compliance report to the Trust in 2010. These are: to contact PACT regarding the lessons learnt from these cases to enable the learnings to be reflected in on-going compliance work; to contact the BBC Academy to provide updates for future training; and to put in place further training for independent production companies and in-house daytime programming suppliers. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust The Editorial Standards Committee Finding in full Background ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ is a long running daytime series. 6 series have been commissioned since 2004 of which 5 have been shown and one is in production. This means 95 original episodes of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ have transmitted so far, plus 10 cut-downs of the same shows. A further 25 programmes were in production when Reef Television was suspended. It is a ‘challenge’ format. 2 friends or family members are pitted against one another to buy £350 of antiques from a foreign flea market, bring them back to the UK and re-sell them on a stall here. The one who makes the most money wins a small prize (a piece of glass or pottery or similar with a value of a few hundred pounds). This is not a competition for the viewing public. In August the Sun newspaper contacted the BBC having learnt that a cameraman had appeared on screen purchasing an item apparently posing as a member of the public. Reef Television acknowledged this was true. The production of series 6 and all BBC work with Reef Television was suspended on 21 August 2009 and remains suspended. A later story by the Sun revealed that the purchase of an antique had been restaged. An investigation was begun by the Executive which reported to the ESC in September and again in November. Summary of the Executive Investigation re Reef Television The incidents now uncovered occurred between 2004 and 2008 and were spread across all 5 transmitted series of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ made for the BBC by Reef Television. (See below in this document for the final November report by the BBC Executive.) There are 9 breaches in transmitted programmes of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’, with 3 incidents occurring in one show. Therefore 7 of the 95 transmitted original programmes have included footage of production team members buying items or sales restaged with different people. One of the incidents was also included in a 30’ cut-down of the show. Of the 9 breaches in ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ confirmed by Reef Television, 7 are filmed instances of staff members purchasing items. In no case did the script make it clear that the purchasers were members of staff. In two of these cases the purchase price affected the final outcome of the programme – ie a different contestant won as a result of the purchase. However, there were other, and more numerous, staff purchases made across series 1 – 5 which were not filmed. These happened when staff wanted to purchase items which November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust were not to be featured in the show. (In each programme contestants bought more items than could be featured individually although the total value of all sales were added together to decide the winner.) These other staff purchases occurred in every series. According to the Series Producer there were at least 3 or 4 off-camera purchases each series and maybe more. There is no record of who bought what and for how much so there is no way of knowing when or if these off-camera purchases affected the outcome of the challenge. Series 6, in production until Reef Television’s suspension, has not filmed any staff purchases. There were, however, 14 off-camera purchases, made across 8 shows. Two of these affected the outcome of the challenge. In series 1 – 5, Reef Television have been able to confirm 2 cases where the genuine seller of an item was replaced by someone else, in one case by another dealer, in the other by a programme researcher. Reef Television were fully aware that staff purchases were happening and indeed there was a written company policy which recognised the practice and intended to regulate it. Reef Television deny that staff purchases were ever encouraged to make the challenge closer or more exciting. Reef Television have confirmed that they never raised or discussed the issue of staff purchases with anyone at the BBC, not believing there was any issue of trust involved as the purchases were genuine (the production team members bought items for their own use with their own money). Reef Television’s own inquiry looked at all output made for the BBC in the last 2 years. 11 further issues were reported including staff purchases in Series 1 and 2 of Trash to Cash but most of these were judged by BBC management to be minor. In this format members of the public clear out unwanted possessions which they then sell at a ‘table sale’ outside their house. The money raised is then split between the member of the public and their chosen charity. The ‘challenge’ is between two dealers trying to raise the maximum money for the member of the public and the charity and is in no way the driver of the show. Staff purchased items from the ‘table sales’ in both series 1 and series 2. The Executive Producer for ‘Trash to Cash ‘ 2, estimates the value of staff purchases to be approximately £100 across the 30 shows in that series with purchases being for £10 or less. These staff purchases occurred when the sale had concluded ie members of the public had gone. Reef Television also noted some matters in series 2 of Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. Most were deemed of no particular significance by BBC management. One however was reported in detail to the ESC. In this format 2 antique dealers go head to head, buying items with their own money and then competing to see who can make the most profit when they are resold. Any profit goes to charity. In this incident, one of the antique dealers is seen apparently selling a sofa to a buyer. It has come to light as part of the Reef Television staff trawl that, unbeknown to Reef Television management, the real buyer did not wish to appear on camera so a friend stood in for him/her. That sale fell through and the dealer then sold the sofa at auction for the same price Summary of Actions taken by BBC Management November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust As a result of this investigation BBC management decided: • Not to reshow the affected series or accept delivery of series 6 of Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting • That Reef Television must commit to a programme of re-training of its staff and overhaul of compliance processes and that business with Reef Television will not be resumed until these new compliance measures are in place and are of an appropriate standard. • The BBC will accept Reef Television’s proposal to offer compensation, at their own cost, to any contributing member of the public who lost a challenge as a result of staff purchases on ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. • Reef Television remains suspended at the time of the submission of the BBC Executive report and the payment of appropriate compensation to the BBC is a pre-condition for BBC management of resuming business with Reef Television. • After the conclusion of discussions with Reef Television the BBC will, as a matter of urgency, communicate the lessons to be drawn from these events to PACT to assist them in their on-going compliance work and to the BBC Academy to inform future training plans. • The Controller of Daytime has requested an editorial standards training initiative for key daytime TV suppliers. This will be supported by the BBC Training Academy. Finding of the ESC The Practices The ESC was deeply perturbed that once again the trust of the public in the BBC would be undermined by these events. Viewers could not have been aware of staff purchases or of reconstructed events. The ESC noted that they were concentrating on Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting, Trash to Cash and one incident in Dealers Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ but Reef had identified other issues, which BBC management had concluded were not significant, in Reef Television’s ‘Chefs: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’. The ESC accepted that the practice of Reef Television staff purchases in Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting and Trash to Cash grew up in a misconceived belief that the purchases were genuine and so were acceptable. The ESC also noted that the reconstructions had not changed the underlying facts about the sales which had taken place in Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting and in Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. Even so the ESC considered both practices to be unacceptable. The ESC concluded that staff purchases should not have taken place. It had not been made clear in the programme that staff purchases were taking place which meant that the public were completely unaware of an essential fact and were misled. The ESC noted that BBC management had reported that Reef Television said these purchases were genuine initiatives by staff members who individually wanted to buy an item and that these purchases were not undertaken to make the programme more exciting. No evidence suggested otherwise. The ESC was clear however that had the public known about the purchases they might well have felt the programme was being deliberately manipulated. Staff purchases were wrong in principle even had they been explained in commentary. Staff might also have benefited from unfair knowledge in purchasing items which was an abuse of their position. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust The ESC concluded that the public expect to watch real events in these programmes and restaging events should be signalled as reconstructions or avoided. Reimbursement The actions of staff in purchasing items in Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting, even if it had not been done to make the programme more ‘exciting’, had resulted in different outcomes in some cases. The ESC noted that Reef Television has offered to reimburse those competitors who had not won in those programmes where a broadcast sale to a staff member had resulted in a changed outcome. It noted that for many participants it may well have been the mere fact of taking part which counted but concluded that reimbursement and an apology must be the correct action. The ESC noted that the BBC could not be sure that it was aware of all episodes where an off camera purchase or purchases may have changed the final result but concluded that further reimbursement was not possible. The ESC noted in the case of Trash to Cash that it is likely that members of the public in fact received marginally more as a result of staff purchases as did the charities involved. The ESC noted that in these cases (unlike the competition matters which came to light in 2007) the public did not suffer financial detriment. The viewing public did not in any way participate in the competition element of Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting. Additionally the members of the public who were filmed as competitors in Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting and as participants in Trash to Cash were all aware that Reef Television staff members were purchasing items and so were not themselves misled. Future Training The ESC noted that the matters in series 6 of Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting and one other incident post dated the Director-General trawl in July 2007 and that the company did not reveal the 8 previous matters when contacted for the trawl. Reef Television Staff purchases were additionally codified within the company’s own production guidelines for the show. The ESC were concerned that it was apparent that the management of Reef Television and staff working for it on the relevant programmes considered staff purchases acceptable despite the clear message from the BBC in 2007 and 2008 and despite the fact that some had completed the BBC’s safeguarding trust courses. The ESC noted the decision by BBC management to contact PACT (the trade association for independent production companies) regarding the lessons learnt to assist them in their on-going compliance work; contact the BBC Academy to inform future training; and to request training for Daytime independent and in-house suppliers. It concluded these actions were important and that progress should be reported in the bi-annual complaints and compliance report to the Trust in 2010. Compliance, editorial control and editorial judgement Turning to compliance, editorial control and editorial judgement by the BBC, the ESC noted that Reef Television have confirmed that they never raised or discussed the issue of staff purchases with anyone at the BBC. In the case of the reconstructions Reef Television’s own senior chain of management had been unaware of the events on location and therefore they were not made known to the BBC. The ESC also noted that the BBC investigation spoke to every BBC Executive involved and all said they were unaware of these practices. The ESC concluded that there was no evidence that suggested that BBC Executive Producers or any other members of BBC staff were involved. The ESC concluded that there was therefore no failure of editorial judgement within the BBC. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust The ESC noted that, given these practice had not been raised with the BBC the BBC could not have been aware of the two practices unless they had been directly observed on location or a BBC Executive Producer had recognised a member of Reef Television’s staff making a purchase on screen. The ESC noted that although BBC Executive Producers had gone on location (although not in England) they would not have been expected to be at all locations. That was not the role of an Executive Producer. The ESC also noted that the chances of a member of Reef’s staff being recognised in the final programme for broadcast was remote as Executive Producers dealt with senior staff at the independent. The ESC accepted that it was not probable that these matters could have been detected by the BBC on viewing the programme. The ESC noted however that the chances of a BBC Executive Producer identifying Reef Television staff purchases or unidentified reconstructions in the final programme was reduced because the BBC did not, at that time, view all programmes prior to broadcast. This had been identified by the Trust as a compliance weakness and the Trust had intervened in 2008 to ensure that all programmes were viewed pre-broadcast. This system had not been in place during the delivery of these series to the BBC by Reef Television. The ESC accepted BBC management’s assurance that the contracts with Reef Television correctly recorded that compliance with the BBC Editorial Guidelines was essential. It also accepted BBC management’s position that it should not check in-house manuals developed by independent producers as to do so would be to take over the compliance responsibilities of a company in a way which very many independent production companies would find unacceptable and intrusive. The ESC concluded that a fit for purpose compliance system had not been in place at the time of the broadcast of Sun Sea and Bargain Spotting but that it was probable that even if it had been these practices would not have been detected. They sprang from a failure of editorial judgement (staff purchases) and editorial control (reconstructions) at the independent production company, Reef Television. They did not spring from a failure of editorial judgement by the BBC Executive Producers. Notwithstanding, the BBC as broadcaster must take responsibility for the public having been misled. The licence fee payer must be able to trust the BBC in all its programming. This was factual entertainment but even so the public who paid for these programmes through the licence fee did expect to watch real events unfolding even in the context of a format programme. These programmes must not be re-shown on the BBC and there should be an on-air apology to the public. The BBC, as a matter of principle, must not tolerate misleading content. It must put steps in place to stop it and, if discovers it, it must be dealt with openly and firmly. The ESC was aware that Reef Television had been suspended for three months without income from the BBC. However the ESC considered the BBC licence fee payer had also suffered financial loss as these programmes could not be shown again on the BBC. The ESC understood that the management of Reef Television were unaware of the reconstructions and had, wrongly, assumed that staff purchases were acceptable. This was not a deliberate breach of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. It was a matter for the BBC Executive as to whether the company was used again in the future. However it was essential that, before work resumed with Reef Television, BBC management must agree with Reef Television the amount and delivery date of financial compensation from Reef Television to the BBC. BBC management must also be satisfied that new compliance measures are in place and are of an appropriate standard. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust The ESC found that there had been serious and repeated breaches of the editorial guidelines which say: Misleading audiences We should not distort known facts, present invented material as fact, or knowingly do anything to mislead our audiences. Staging and Re-Staging Events …unless clearly signalled to the audience, or using reconstructions, it is normally unacceptable in news and factual programmes to: • Stage or re-stage significant action or events which are significant to the development of the action or narrative, for example, the moment of discovery in a scientific documentary. ….Commentary must never be used to give the audience a misleading impression of events The ESC concluded that: • the affected programmes must not be rebroadcast; • an apology and reimbursal (which Reef had offered to provide) should be offered to those competitors who should have won but did not do so following staff purchases which were broadcast; • the date of payment and the amount of compensation from Reef Television to the BBC must be agreed by the BBC and Reef Television before Reef Television may resume work for the BBC; • BBC management must also be satisfied that new compliance measures are in place and are of an appropriate standard at Reef Television before Reef Television may resume work for the BBC; • an on air apology should be made at a time and date and on a service to be agreed with the ESC and in wording to be agreed by the ESC; and • The Trust expects the BBC Executive to report on progress made with the actions detailed below in the next bi-annual complaints and compliance report to the Trust in 2010. These are: to contact PACT regarding the lessons learnt from these cases to enable the learnings to be reflected in on-going compliance work; to contact the BBC Academy to provide updates for future training; and to put in place further training for independent production companies and in-house daytime programming suppliers. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Report by the BBC Executive, November 2009 BBC VISION EDITORIAL STANDARDS REPORT ON REEF TELEVISION ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ The Series: ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ is a long running daytime series. 6 series have been commissioned since 2004 of which 5 have been shown and one is in production. This means 95 original episodes of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ have transmitted so far, plus 10 cut-downs of the same shows. A further 25 programmes are currently in production. It is a ‘challenge’ format. 2 friends or family members are pitted against one another to buy £350 of antiques from a foreign flea market, bring them back to the UK and re-sell them on a stall here. The one who makes the most money wins a small prize (piece of glass or pottery or similar with a value of a few hundred pounds). Although these shows use the language of ‘competition’ they are not competitions according to Editorial Policy’s definition of a competition. The entertainment comes from the locations, the information and the personalities. Who ‘wins’ or ‘loses’ is not a key driver. It is a contest between friends. During the time this series has been on the BBC, there have been 6 different controllers of BBC Daytime: Alison Sharman; Jay Hunt; Alison Kirkham (acting - maternity cover); Carla-Maria Lawson (acting); Emma Swain (acting); Liam Keelan. There have also been 5 different executive producers for the BBC looking after this series: Jay Hunt; Lindsay Bradbury; Maxine Watson (maternity cover); Jacqueline Hewer; Tracy Forsyth (maternity cover). For Reef Television, the same Series Producer made series 1 – 5 (job title changed to Series Editor from series 4). Richard Farmbrough, also MD of Reef Television, was Executive Producer for series 1 - 5, although for series 5 he took a back seat as exec, handing compliance responsibility to the Series Editor. Earlier this year, a new Executive Producer and a new Series Producer were appointed by Reef Television to make series 6, the production of which is now halted. What happened: November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Thursday 20th August – the Daytime team received a call from someone purporting to be a media student asking whether a cameraman had posed as a member of the public in the Reef Television series ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. Later the same day, a reporter from The Sun newspaper telephoned asking for comment on the story. When the question was followed up with Reef Television, they admitted it was true. There has been no separate complaint received from a member of the public directly to the BBC. Friday 21st August - a decision was taken, which the BBC believes was agreed with Reef Television, to suspend all business with them to allow an investigation to take place. (Reef Television now dispute whether they agreed to this suspension). Press statements were issued by the BBC and Reef Television (both via the BBC press office). Reef Television took full responsibility, stating “The Company recognises it is a serious breach of editorial standards of which the BBC was not made aware.” Both the BBC and Reef Television launched immediate investigations into the issue. Reef Television have co-operated fully with this investigation and have responded swiftly to all requests for information. At this point Reef Television provided information on 4 incidents, in 3 separate shows, where production team members had bought items, on camera, in effect appearing to be members of the public. These shows were spread over 3 separate series and were filmed between 2005 and 2008. At this stage it appeared that none of these purchases had affected the final outcome of the challenge. Also on 21st August the BBC wrote to Reef Television to record the suspension and to confirm that all the BBC’s legal rights were reserved in relation to what were apparent breaches of a number of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ contracts. Interviews began immediately during the week starting 24th August. Thursday 27th August – During an initial meeting with Reef Television, their MD said they had completed their review of programmes and had uncovered 3 more incidents, bringing the total to 7 incidents over 6 programmes – now spread over all 5 transmitted series of the programme. In two of these new incidents the purchase of an item by a member of the production team did affect the outcome of the challenge causing a different contestant to win. Reef Television were asked to provide written assurances to the BBC that there are no further editorial standards breaches in current or back catalogue series made for the BBC. Tuesday 1st September – the BBC press office received another telephone call from The Sun, this time asking for comment on a story that Reef Television had re-staged the purchase of an antique in a foreign market with a staff member instead of the original dealer who had sold the item and been filmed doing so. This incident had taken place in a programme filmed in Fiesole, outside Florence, in September 2008. (All previously reported incidents had happened at the UK end of the challenge ie the ‘table sale’ when items bought abroad are sold in the UK.) Reef Television were immediately contacted and initially denied that this was the case. Both EP and SP reviewed the tape and confirmed there were no staff members posing as dealers. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Later that day, after further investigation, they discovered that a sequence with a dealer had been re-shot with another dealer playing their part (not a member of staff as per The Sun’s story). Thursday 3rd September - Reef Television informed the BBC that another incident in which someone appeared on camera posing as a dealer - in this case a staff member accepting money for a sale - had also come to light. As a result of the further breaches, Reef Television began their own, more comprehensive trawl of staff, contacting individually all senior production staff who had worked on their series. The incidents now uncovered occurred between 2004 and 2008 and were spread across all 5 transmitted series of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ made for the BBC by Reef Television. There are 9 breaches in transmitted programmes of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’, with 3 incidents occurring in one show. Therefore 7 of the 95 transmitted original programmes have included footage of production team members buying items or sales restaged with different people. One of the incidents was also included in a 30’ cut-down of the show. Wednesday 14th October -The BBC served a notice of breach of contract and claim for damages in relation to ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ series 1 – 5 and a notice terminating the ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ series 6 contract, rejecting the balance of the series and seeking damages. Friday 16th October - Reef Television responded via their lawyers. In summary, Reef Television’s position is that it is not in breach of contract in relation to the ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ contracts and, in particular, that the BBC has no right to terminate the ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ series 6 contract. In short, Reef Television dispute that the matters we refer to below amount to contractual breaches on its part of the BBC guidelines and, even if there were any such breaches, they are remediable by re-shooting, captioning etc. Reef Television also now advance a case that the August 21st suspension was in fact not agreed by Reef Television. Reef Television allege this is a breach of contract by the BBC of its ongoing production agreements and has caused it damage. Timeline Notes In Summer 2007 Reef Television was contacted by the then Daytime executive producer as part of the editorial standards trawl and did not report any incidents at that point. E- mails of this exchange exist. All contracts for series 1 - 5 of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ were signed before the introduction of the new Editorial Specification for independent productions (with formal compliance conversation included) and before the compulsory Safeguarding Trust training for staff at independents making programmes for the BBC was brought in on May 1st 2008. Summary of Specific Incidents: November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Of the 9 breaches in ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ series 1-5 confirmed by Reef Television, 7 are filmed instances of staff members purchasing items. In no case did the script make it clear that the purchasers were members of staff. In two of these cases the purchase price affected the final outcome of the programme – ie a different contestant won as a result of the purchase. The value of on-screen staff purchases varied between £5 and £150, with most being at the lower end. However, there were other, and more numerous, staff purchases made across series 1 – 5 which were not filmed. These happened when staff wanted to purchase items which were not to be featured in the show. (In each programme contestants bought more items than could be featured individually although the total value of all sales were added together to decide the winner.) These other staff purchases occurred in every series. According to the Series Producer there were at least 3 or 4 off-camera purchases each series and maybe more. There is no record of who bought what and for how much so there is no way of knowing when or if these off-camera purchases affected the outcome of the challenge. Series 6, still in production, has not filmed any staff purchases. There were, however, 14 off-camera purchases, made across 8 shows. Two of these affected the outcome of the challenge. In series 1 – 5, Reef Television have confirmed 2 cases where the genuine seller of an item was replaced by someone else, in one case by another dealer, in the other by a programme researcher. The Issues Raised by these incidents: Staff purchases: 1. Misleading the audience. The audience would have believed that the buyers were genuine members of the public. Although the contributors and experts on location all knew they were staff members, the programme scripts did not make that fact clear to the audience. 2. Purchases affecting the outcome. In two cases these on-screen staff purchases affected the outcome of the challenge, causing a different contributor to win. There were also many more staff purchases which were not filmed and Reef Television can give no assurance that these other purchases did not affect the outcome for series 1 – 5. 3. Unfair advantage. Staff members were often purchasing items at below cost price and therefore had an advantage over genuine customers who did not know whether their purchase was good value or not. 4. Editorial control and oversight. The effectiveness of editorial control at Reef Television is called into question by the way staff purchases were made. Re-staging deals with stand-ins: November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust 1. Misleading the audience. The audience was misled into believing these were all genuine encounters, with real dealers. 2. Editorial control and oversight. The effectiveness of editorial control at Reef Television is called into question by the failure of the P/D to refer the re-staging incidents to the SP. Staff purchases – what happened and why: Company Policy: Reef Television were fully aware that staff purchases were happening and indeed there was a written company policy which recognised the practice and intended to regulate it. Staff were openly allowed to purchase items if they wished to and rules about how this should be done were written down and enshrined in the production bibles for the series. The relevant Reef Television Production Guidelines for ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ on staff purchases say: ‘Contributors, experts, production team and crew are not allowed to buy anything from the stands until one hour before the close of sales. After this time, they can buy items at cost price. Purchases by contributors or experts will not be added to the final scores.’ This rule was devised and written after series 1 by the Series Producer, after discussion with the Executive Producer and MD of Reef Television. Staff purchases had occurred during the first series (including one high value filmed purchase which affected the outcome). Before series 2 went into production the Series Producer had told the Executive Producer they would feel happier if there were clear rules. With his agreement the SP then drafted the ‘Rules of the Game’ which have remained unchanged for all ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ series to date. Although some additional points about editorial compliance were added to the Production Bible after the 2007 crisis of trust in television, these rules about staff purchases remained unchanged. Reef Television deny that staff purchases were ever encouraged to make the challenge closer or more exciting. Any such effect, say both Reef Television’s EP and SP, was purely coincidental as all purchases were instigated by the staff member themselves. No team member had any vested interest in who won or lost and there was no pressure in the format to sell everything, according to the SP. Misleading the Audience: Neither Reef Television’s EP/MD nor the Series Producer felt they were misleading the audience with this practice. Their view at the time was that these were genuine sales. The staff members wanted the items for themselves and paid for them with their own money. The fact that these purchases were made by members of staff was not reflected in the programme script in November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust any way. Because the sales were ‘genuine’, it was felt, there was no need to put the fact they were staff members in the script - that was not important information which the audience needed to know. With hindsight both the EP and SP agree this practice did mislead the audience. The contributors and experts were all aware of the policy of allowing staff to buy items so no contributor was misled. Purchases Affecting the outcome of the Challenge: Two of the on-screen purchases did affect the outcome of the challenge, causing a different contributor to win. In addition there were many more staff purchases off camera – at least 3 or 4 per series, perhaps more, according to the Series Producer. These staff purchases were not recorded so the exact number or the amount of money involved cannot be discovered. Although it is likely that these off camera purchases were for small amounts (the bigger ticket items were usually featured in the show) Reef Television are unable to say with certainty that they didn’t affect the outcome of the challenge. Indeed there were two off- camera purchases made during series 6 – this series is not transmitted yet – which did affect the outcome of the challenge. Unfair Advantage: The rule that staff could only buy at ‘cost price’ was an important one for the Series Producer who felt this made the purchases ‘neutral’ in the game. This seemed to be a rule which was not always followed however as none of the filmed purchases were at cost price – two were for more than the cost price and five were for less. This potentially gave members of Reef Television staff a financial advantage over genuine customers who would have had no idea what had been paid for the item in the foreign flea market. Even had the purchases all been at ‘cost price’ they would not have been ‘neutral’ as they clearly affected the final totals and could therefore have affected the outcome. At best the cost price rule would have prevented staff members being able to use their ‘insider knowledge’ to secure good deals. Editorial Control and Oversight: With one hour to go of the sales period, any member of the production team was free to buy items from the table sale. It was described by one staff member as a “free-for-all”. These purchases did not have to be referred to the SP/SE as they fell within the programme guidelines set out by the company. (NB at the beginning of series 4, the Series Producer’s title changed to Series Editor.) One of the filmed purchases, however, was made at the beginning of the sale when in Series 4 a water pump was bought by a staff member at the UK market for £80. Reef Television’s explanation for this being allowed is that the staff member was on a day off, and not involved in making this specific programme, so they were considered to be a genuine member of the public. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust The SP/SE said that he/she would expect to have the purchase of high value items referred to him/her and, agreed that he/she would have signed off the purchase of the water pump in series 4 although he/she has no specific memory of doing so. He/she said he/she would also have expected to have purchases that would affect the outcome referred to him/her. Although both the Reef Television EP (and MD) and the SP/SE said that they thought it had been made clear in the rules that no staff purchase should be allowed to affect the outcome, that is not written down anywhere in the ‘bible’ nor was there any mechanism to spot any such distortion, or evidence that that happened. The BBC Executive Producer’s Role: Reef Television have confirmed that they never raised or discussed the issue of staff purchases with anyone at the BBC, not believing there was any issue of trust involved as the purchases were genuine (the production team members bought items for their own use with their own money). None of the EPs who looked after this series for the BBC knew about the practice or the policy. No EP for the BBC knew about the production bibles issued to staff working on ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ where the staff purchase policy was outlined. The current BBC EP for this series said ‘I was unaware they had any production bibles other than the BBC Editorial Guidelines’. Reef Television say that no BBC EP asked to see the production guides or asked what their procedures were. None of the BBC EPs made a location visit to a UK market, which is where these staff purchases were made, so had no opportunity to see them happening first hand. All say the relationship with Reef Television was good and they visited their offices often to attended cutting rooms but did not know the wider production team members by sight so had no way of spotting staff on screen at those viewings. All describe Reef Television as a very open and communicative company, responsive to their concerns or any requests for changes. Both BBC EPs and the EP for Reef Television said that ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ was an established series which was working well and therefore ‘low risk’. Compliance was not considered to be a big issue for this series. Re-staging deals with stand-ins – what happened and why: There have been two cases of this happening reported by Reef Television. Case 1. (Fiesole) A lamp was bought from a dealer in a market in Florence. The dealer had been filmed making the sale and had signed a release form. The same deal was subsequently re-shot with a different dealer re-enacting the haggle and purchase of the same item. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust When asked by Reef Television, the P/D said he/she had re-shot the sequence because the expert had found additional information about the item which they wanted to include. The original dealer was no longer available so he/she asked another dealer to pretend to sell the item. The decision to re-stage was not referred to the Series Editor either on location or subsequently in the cutting room. Neither the SE nor the EP for Reef were aware that this substitution had occurred until the BBC was asked for a comment on the incident by The Sun. At that point an examination of the paperwork and the rushes revealed the original (un-used) sequence shot with the genuine dealer. The P/D who re-staged the dealer sale then went on to feature as a buyer at the UK table sale in the same programme (buying the same item). Case 2 (Mons) In this incident, the P/D asked a researcher to take the role of the dealer, accepting payment for an item. According to a statement made to Reef Television by the P/D the stall holder who had sold the item refused to take part in the filming so the researcher was asked to step in. Although the Series Editor was on location on that day the matter was not referred to him/her at that point by the P/D. The SE did subsequently spot the researcher in the edit but took the view that it was OK because the researcher had agreed to appear and the financial side of the deal was accurately reflected. The SE did not refer the issue to the EP for Reef Television. The P/D for this incident was the same as the P/D for the previous (Fiesole) incident. The P/D was a freelance employee, not a member of Reef Television staff. In both cases of re-staging, the price paid for the item was the same as in the genuine sale. Misleading the Audience: These incidents clearly misled the audience who would have believed they were watching genuine deals. They did not alter or affect the outcome of the challenge as the financial details were correct. Editorial Control and Oversight: In neither of these cases was the re-staging referred to the Series Editor by the P/D. In the second, although spotted in the cutting room by the SE, it was not referred to the EP. As this was the series when the EP ‘took a back seat’ and the SE had compliance responsibility there is a question over both the SE’s editorial judgement and also whether he/she had the time to exercise proper editorial oversight given his/her many responsibilities on location. It also suggests that there was no clear understanding among the team members about when issues needed to be referred. The BBC’s Executive Producer’s Role: No BBC Executive Producer was aware that any sequences had been re-staged. As with staff purchases, there is no way of knowing these were not genuine dealers from what is on screen. Although two of the BBC EPs made trips to foreign markets neither saw anything to cause them any concern and both described the operation as ‘slick’ and ‘very impressive’. (No BBC Executive Producer was present in Fiesole or Mons where the re-staging incidents occurred). November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Editorial Policy Guidelines to Consider: Misleading Audiences We should not distort known facts, present invented material as fact, or knowingly do anything to mislead our audiences. We may need to label material to avoid doing so. Staging and Re-Staging Events …unless clearly signalled to the audience, or using reconstructions, it is normally unacceptable in news and factual programmes to: • Stage or re-stage significant action or events which are significant to the development of the action or narrative, for example, the moment of discovery in a scientific documentary. ….Commentary must never be used to give the audience a misleading impression of events. Other series made for the BBC by Reef Television considered by this inquiry At the outset of the inquiry into the editorial breaches which occurred in ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’, Reef Television were asked to investigate all their other current and back catalogue series for the BBC and provide assurances that they were free from trust issues. Other series considered are: • ‘Buy it, Sell it, Bank it’ 2008 (included in Reef Television investigation) • ‘Trash to Cash’ series 1 2007/8 ( included in Reef Television investigation ) • ‘Trash to Cash’ series 2 2008 (included in Reef Television investigation) • ‘Trash to Cash’ series 3 2009 suspended (has only filmed two days so far) • Dealers: ‘Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 1 2007 (not included in Reef Television investigation) • Dealers: ‘Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 2 2008 (included in Reef Television investigation) • Dealers: ‘Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 3 2009 suspended ( still in edit) • Chefs: ‘Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 1 2009 (included in Reef Television investigation) Summary of results of Reef Television’s investigation of other series Reef Television’s own inquiry looked at all output made for the BBC in the last 2 years, in addition to all series of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Their investigation comprised the visual checking of all programmes for staff members purchasing items, (when this sort of public sale is part of the format) or appearing on screen in any other capacity, and also a formal, written trawl of all senior production personnel asking them to declare any possible breaches they were aware of. Reef Television took the view that they could not rely on the memory of production team members about series made longer ago than two years and any assurances they could give the BBC on such old shows as a result of their trawl would have ‘limited value’. Therefore series 1 of ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ was not part of their trawl of production staff. [REDACTED – FOI Act Section 41. Information supplied in confidence] The main points to come out of Reef Television’s wider investigation are as follows: • Reef Television received responses from all 38 people they wrote to. • They have provided the BBC with the detailed results of that trawl. 11 issues were reported, of which 2 are more fully detailed below. • Reef Television have made it clear that they, as a company, ‘are reliant upon the willingness of former production team members to tell us honestly whether there are any further instances where editorial standards have been breached.’ • ‘Buy it, Sell it, Bank it’ series 1 2008: Reef Television report no editorial standards breaches or issues of concern raised either from Reef’s own review or from their staff trawl. • ‘Trash to Cash’ series 1 2007/8: off camera staff purchases made (detail below). • ‘Trash to Cash’ series 2 2008: off camera staff purchases made (detail below); researchers helped experts set up sales. • ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 2 2008: production team helped experts set up deals on occasion; suspected incidents of presenter giving a shop owner money to buy items (no proof this did happen therefore not considered ); confusion between ‘Expert HQ’ and ‘home’; P/D bought an umbrella as a gift for an expert after shooting ended; P/D re-bought item already sold to someone else; expert’s adult son bought an item at auction; sofa sale not genuine (detail below) • ‘Chefs: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ Series 1 2009: some members of the production team purchased food from chef/challenge contestants’ stalls (partially breached a rule about blind tasting agreed with the BBC but not significant enough to include in more detail here). Reef Television have been very open in making a full disclosure of even very minor issues. Some of the incidents they report did break their own rules, such as researchers occasionally helping experts make phone calls, and will lead to them tightening up their own controls, but are not significant breaches of trust which should be considered here. There are two issues raised in Reef Television’s staff trawl which should be considered in more detail as part of this report. Staff purchases on ‘Trash to Cash’ series 1 and 2. In this format members of the public clear out unwanted possessions which they then sell at a ‘table sale’ outside their house. The money raised is then split between the member of the public and their chosen charity. The ‘challenge’ is between two dealers trying to raise the maximum money for the member of the public and the charity and is in no way the driver of the show. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Staff purchased items from the ‘table sales’ in both series 1 and series 2. (Series 3 has so far only shot for two days, and at no public sales, and this is therefore not an issue). According to Reef Television these purchases were for very small amounts. The Executive Producer for ‘Trash to Cash ‘ 2, estimates the value of staff purchases to be approximately £100 across the 30 shows in that series with purchases being for £10 or less. These staff purchases occurred only when the sale had concluded ie members of the public had gone. It is highly probable that any money from staff purchases was added to the final totals raised, although this cannot be proved or disproved. There is nothing in the production bible for ‘Trash to Cash’ which covers the issue of staff purchases. Reef Television say that due to the small number of staff purchases and their low value it was not an issue which required a written policy. The Executive Producer was unaware that this had been happening until they reviewed the series for this investigation. Sofa sale in ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 2. In this format 2 antique dealers go head to head, buying items with their own money and then competing to see who can make the most profit when they are resold. Any profit goes to charity. In this incident, one of the antique dealers is seen apparently selling a sofa to a buyer. It has come to light as part of the Reef Television staff trawl that the real buyer did not wish to appear on camera so a friend stood in for him/her. This was known by the AP who shot the sequence but not referred up to the P/D despite it being a substantial sequence. When this story was checked further by Reef Television as part of their investigation, the expert told them she/he had subsequently decided to sell the sofa at auction (for the same price) and had not informed anyone on the production team of this change of plan. The sale which appeared in the programme was therefore not genuine on two counts, although this was unknown to any senior programme maker at Reef Television. Issues raised by these incidents: 1. Culture The fact that staff purchases occurred on ‘Trash to Cash’ 1 and 2, despite there being no written company endorsement of the practice on this series suggests a company culture where staff believed this practice was acceptable on any show. 2. Referral and editorial oversight Although team members have now told Reef about these incidents they did not consider them important enough to refer to their line-manager at the time, either on location or in the edit. This raises questions about editorial oversight as well as how effectively the referral system at Reef Television operates. 3. Experts’ influence In one of these cases it seems that an expert acted in a way which affected whether what was seen on screen was genuine. Reef Television’s ‘Presenter Rules’ which were printed in the series production bible for this series are clear and explicit. In this case the issue seems to be not whether Reef Television had laid down rules, but whether they were properly communicated to the expert and, if so, whether he/she took them seriously. Although the practice of staff purchases and the sofa incident did in some ways mislead the audience, the following points are worth bearing in mind. • In ‘Trash to Cash’ the staff purchases did not result in any on-screen deception, that is, no member of staff was portrayed to the audience as a member of the public. The final totals raised would have been affected by the staff purchases but November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust no unfairness to a contributor resulted from them. More money was raised for the member of the public and the charity, albeit probably a very small amount. • In the ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ sofa incident, Reef Television appear to have behaved in good faith and do not appear to have knowingly misled the audience. The Executive Producer is very clear that he would not have allowed the sequence to be used had he been made aware, at the time, of the substitution of the ‘friend’ for the genuine buyer. There is also evidence that, after May 2008, they made considerable efforts to tighten up their rules for presenters and these were in the production bible for this series. While they might need to reinforce those rules with their experts, they are not wholly responsible for how the expert acted in that isolated case. Reef Television’s Compliance Procedures: Reef Television is a small company, and was smaller still in 2004 when this series was first commissioned. All referral lines for compliance issues were and remain to the company MD, who was also the only staff executive producer until the appointment of an additional EP this year. In the MD’s absence, on holiday for example, serious compliance issues would be referred to the Head of Production. In other instances they would be referred up the editorial chain via series producers and, now, to the other staff EP. The company has no in-house compliance officer or lawyer and buys the services of a media law firm as required. Until May 2008 when the BBC’s Editorial Specification changed, the Head of Production, was the main point of contact with the BBC on compliance matters. After that date it became series producers/series editors and EPs. There are no formal, regular compliance meetings within the company, either for specific series or to review company wide issues. Nor is there any internal process for compliance sign off within the company over and above filling out and submitting the BBC’s compliance form. Everyone sits in close proximity, however, as this is still a small company based in one location only and communication is easy and frequent. The MD operates an ‘open door’ policy for issues to be brought to him as required. Compliance Processes on ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ The MD of Reef Television was also the Executive Producer of the first 5 series of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ although he took a ‘back seat’ for series 5 and handed compliance responsibility over to the Series Editor. Each production has a ‘bible’ for incoming staff, and after 2007 the bible for ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ contained some Editorial/Ethical guidelines which state: ‘EDITORIAL / ETHICAL GUIDELINES November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Everyone involved in the production must work to ensure that the programme is a true and faithful representation of events that take place within the constraints of the programme format. Obviously the nature of television means that we often recreate scenes to represent the truth of events; however if you feel at any times that action is being manipulated beyond the boundaries of truth, you should mention this to the P/D on location and the series editor. Specific situations to be aware of: • Any time money is being talked about or featured onscreen – this must be an honest representation • When members of the public are filmed buying items from our stall, they must not be substituted with other people • Reference to locations must be filmed in the said location • References to time must be accurate to the reality of the shoot day • If contributors are asked to voice an opinion, it must be their true opinion.’ By the time ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ series 6 was commissioned, the BBC had introduced new Editorial Specifications which required that a formal compliance conversation take place. There is a record of that compliance conversation in the Editorial Specification for series 6. Reef Television have stressed that there was also a requirement (which they say was not followed) that there be separate minutes of the compliance conversation for this series. Reef Television do not deny that the conversation took place. The contract envisages that there will be fuller separate notes of editorial compliance considerations that might arise which will be kept by both Reef Television and the BBC. While no separate record of the compliance conversation has been found so far (the EP in question is currently on maternity leave) the Editorial Specification compliance section includes good notes on the key mitigations required to ensure adherence to the BBC’s Editorial Policy Guidelines. The first entry in this section reads, ‘Production staff to ensure all purchasing and sales transactions are genuine.’ Compliance Processes on other Reef Television series commissioned 2008/9 After the Trust crisis, Reef Television did introduce some clear and sound rules for some of their programmes, including ‘Trash to Cash’ and ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’. For example, the contracts for expert contributors on ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is‘ series 3 explicitly state: ‘Presenters must inform the production team of all purchases made on the buying day and must not attempt to purchase any items ‘secretly.’’ ‘Throughout the selling process, each presenter is asked to be 100% honest, open and transparent with the ‘Put Your Money’ production team.” These same rules had also been included in the production bible for ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 2. Similarly for the production teams, the production bibles do contain some clear messages signalling Reef Television’s stance on compliance and honesty. This is a selection of statements from production bibles for series 3 of ‘Trash to Cash’ and series 3 of ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ commissioned in 2008 and 2009: November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust ‘Just be aware at all times that we must have honesty, integrity and fairness in how we make the show – the BBC is very hot on this…’ ‘In a nutshell: Don’t bend the truth in any way – it just won’t be worth it and it will backfire …’ ‘We must have a totally accurate record of how the competition is progressing so that we are above question at all times’. ‘Everyone must do the BBC Safeguarding Trust course – it only takes 45 minutes and is easy – but it is an essential reminder of how careful and honest we must be in putting this series together.’ Reef Television always agreed the choice of charities with the BBC Executive producer and sought formal receipts from charities for money donated by experts or by programmes. All Editorial Specifications for Reef Television commissions signed after May 2008 contain a written record of the formal compliance conversation as specified. These sometimes took place face to face, sometimes via e-mail exchanges and telephone calls. Reef Television confirm that a representative from Reef and the BBC did discuss compliance on all series after May 2008 but say that the level of detail covered in those conversations varied. Following the suspension, Reef Television have engaged a specialist lawyer with experience in media and compliance issues to help with their internal investigation, to review their compliance procedures and to help devise training for the future. Training at Reef Television: Reef Television appear to have taken the requirement for staff to do the Safeguarding Trust modules seriously. Senior staff members had completed 2 modules (Trust Issues in TV and Factual TV) before the modules were made compulsory for independents working for the BBC. From the review of those productions which have delivered copies of training e-mails, the training is being done although on occasion Reef Television admit that some editors may have slipped through the net. New joiners are instructed that they must complete the training and the confirmatory e- mails are held centrally – the system is managed by the Head of Production and the Unit Manager, who works directly for him/her. All e-mails are held by the Unit Manager in hard copy against alphabetical staff lists. It was not compulsory for Reef Television staff working on series 5 of ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ to complete the training as the contract was signed before May 1st 2008. A number of them did, however, including the EP and SE for the series. The P/D responsible for the two re-staging incidents in September 2008 had also completed Safeguarding Trust modules in July 2008. Reef Television’s MD and the Series Editor for ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ both said that they would expect senior staff members to be aware of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. The SE said he/she would not expect more junior staff to have read them. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust Until recently new joiners received a paper pack of information about Reef Television. After May 2008, this also included an instruction to do the 2 specified Safeguarding Trust modules. Recently, in June 2009, Reef Television set up an internal website containing information for new joiners. This includes links to the Safeguarding Trust Modules, to the Ofcom Code and to the Producers’ Handbook (C4/C5). It did not include a link to the Editorial Policy Guidelines, but that has now been added. All Editorial Specifications for series commissioned from Reef Television after May 2008 have included the requirement for production team members to complete 2 Safeguarding Trust Modules (Trust Dilemmas in TV (i), and Factual TV (vii)). Although not applicable to series commissioned before May 2008, EPs for the BBC interviewed all said that they do discuss Safeguarding Trust training at point of commission and specify modules (confirmed on the Editorial Specification). They do not themselves follow up and check whether the training has been done. A brief ‘sense check’ is made by the business teams at Progress Report stage and then at final delivery. The BBC’s Key Findings: 1. The staff purchase issue ( both on and off camera ) which resulted in the misleading of the audience was caused by a poor judgement, resulting in a failure to follow the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines, taken by the Series Producer at Reef Television and signed off by the Executive Producer and MD at Reef Television. Once this was enshrined in company policy it is not surprising that production team members did not believe they were doing anything wrong. This failure or ‘blindspot’ (as the MD described it) should have been identified when the Production Bible for ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ was revised in 2007 in the light of the widespread TV trust crisis. Thought had been given to what was ‘genuine’ on location but not to whether the audience was being misled. The scripting of the shows clearly implies that staff members were genuine customers and compounds the view that misleading the audience in this way was not considered to be an issue. 2. The two incidents in ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ of re-staging sequences with people other than the genuine dealers are clear breaches of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. As the same P/D was responsible for both there is no evidence to consider this practice as endemic in this series, and the real question raised is whether editorial oversight and control was good enough. 3. It is clear that some things were not being referred to the Series Producer/Series Editor and were therefore not reaching the Executive Producer either. This meant that the editorial control of the series was at best patchy – dependent on whether the series producer happened to be in the right place at the right time. Even Reef Television’s own poorly judged policy was not properly implemented by the teams (although Reef Television’s view is that it is more fairly described as ‘not always implemented’). For example, below cost price sales were routine, without referral to the SP/SE. The re-staging of a sequence was not referred to the SP/SE either when it was shot or later at the editing stage. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust 4. It appears that the SP/SE was under some pressure. He/she was, on occasion, operating as a P/D as well as Series Producer and from series 5 onwards was also responsible for compliance. Two or three shows were being shot simultaneously which could mean up to 80 sales being made in a UK market day. It seems highly probable that the time pressure on the SP did make it hard for him/her to exert sufficient editorial control. 5. Reef Television’s investigation into their other series, ‘Trash to Cash’, ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’; ‘Chefs: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ and ‘Buy it, Sell it, Bank it’, has not turned up breaches on a par with those on ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. The breaches that were found, while not as significant in themselves, do underline the poor judgement used on ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’ about staff purchases and indicate a culture which seemed to have a ‘blindspot’ about how this might result in the audience being misled. They also underline the question of how effective editorial oversight was. 6. The BBC, of necessity, has to rely on Reef Television’s assurances that all incidents have been uncovered. Reef Television have provided the BBC with a letter confirming the outcome of their own investigations and the limitations of the warranty they are able to give the BBC about archive series. Reef Television are unable to give any information or warranty about ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’ series 1 as it fell beyond the time limit of their investigation. 7. Reef Television have set out a proposed plan for changes to their compliance and training procedures. This covers areas such as: • improved communication of compliance issues on each series; • the introduction of a new internal referral process; • new regular management meetings to include compliance/editorial standards as an agenda item;. • new Reef Television written rules banning staff appearances and purchases; • increased editorial support to be provided for the Series Editor • new compliance training for all staff. Management Actions in Relation to Reef Television As result of this investigation the BBC has made a number of practical decisions relating to Reef Television output. 1. Series 1 – 5 ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. The BBC will not re-show these series. 2. Series 6 ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. The BBC will not accept delivery of series 6. 3. Series 1 and 2 ‘Trash to Cash’. The BBC will not re-show these series. 4. Series 1 ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is’. The BBC will not re-show this series as Reef Television are unable to warrant that it is compliant. 5. Series 2 ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where Your Mouth is’. The BBC will not re-show episode 16 and seeks a clear warranty from Reef Television that the rest of the series is compliant and also contains no other incidents of dealer behaviour leading to a breach of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. November 2009 Finding of the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust 6. Series 3 ‘Trash to Cash’ and Series 3 ‘Dealers: Put Your Money Where your Mouth Is’. Both series undelivered and production currently suspended pending BBC approval of Reef’s improved compliance processes. 7. Compliance processes and training. Reef Television must commit to a programme of re-training of its staff and overhaul of compliance processes in the company and to outline to the BBC how this process will happen and how it will be maintained in the future. Business with Reef Television will not be resumed until these new compliance measures are in place. The final delivery of the outstanding series will only be accepted when Reef Television has satisfied the BBC that compliance procedures and training in the company are of an appropriate standard. 8. Compensation to Contributors. The BBC will accept Reef Television’s proposal to offer compensation, at their own cost, to any contributing member of the public who lost a challenge as a result of staff purchases on ‘Sun, Sea and Bargain Spotting’. 9. Compensation to the BBC. Reef Television remain suspended at the time of the submission of this report and the payment of appropriate compensation to the BBC is a pre-condition for BBC management of resuming business with Reef Television. Further Action • After the conclusion of discussions with Reef Television the BBC will, as a matter of urgency, communicate the lessons to be drawn from these events to PACT to assist them in their on-going compliance work and to the BBC Academy to inform future training plans. • It is noted that the Controller of Daytime has requested an editorial standards training initiative for key daytime TV suppliers. This will be supported by the BBC Training Academy. . November 2009