Republic has said that its participation in two BBC News programmes on the Windsor birth were “vetoed” yesterday. It said that this was a part of the marginalisation or suppression of republican opinion.
Another example of this marginalisation came in the form of a statement by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg that the birth had brought a smile to the faces of everyone in the UK.
To be fair to the BBC it must be conceded that it faces particular dilemmas.
It wants desperately to succeed at tabloid television. If it admits that monarchy is a serious political issue it will fail to do so.
More importantly monarchy is the “third rail” of British politics. Those who touch it, those who criticise the Windsor clan and question their feudal privileges, risk political electrocution. The establishment left, right and centre will rush to declare their loyalty and push beyond the pale the disloyal. And the BBC is, after all, founded on a “royal charter”.
But if the BBC does find itself obliged to take sides by effectively denying that there is another side, it must forfeit any claim it might like to make that it is politically impartial or truly serious in its journalism. It’s impartial except when it might pay a high price for impartiality. It is serious except when being serious might threaten it ratings.
There were exceptions to the fawning over the Windsor clan that the BBC excelled at. One of the most interesting was the American US News & World Report. It reminded us of how far the British establishment will go to suppress republican sentiment, even to the extent of denying citizens basic civil liberties. It recalled the Windsor wedding in 2011 “where police rounded up citizens in London who went off-script and planned to protest, rather than celebrate, the events”.