Racism: should news reporters be able to condemn it? – Immie Pearson

Racism: should news reporters be able to condemn it? – Immie Pearson

Recently Naga Munchetty, a prominent BBC news reporter found herself in trouble with her employers and under fire for supposedly breaching their impartiality guidelines, during a discussion with fellow co-host Dan Walker about the attitude of trump towards congresswomen of colour and their backgrounds. Walker had asked her how she felt about these comments Trump had made and she repsonded; ‘“Furious. Absolutely furious and I can imagine lots of people in this country will be feeling absolutely furious a man in that position thinks it’s OK to skirt the lines by using language like that. Anyway, I’m not here to give my opinion”. Munchetty’s comment, according to one viewer who wrote in to complain said, “went beyond what the guidelines allow”. 

Trump has never had a good track record for respecting people from any background different from his own, but that aside he still he isn’t exactly known for his tactful and deferential dialogue. Trump tweeted in July that congresswomen Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley, who are all US citizens, should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came”. The ignorance within this statement is glaringly obvious and infuriating.

While no actual disciplinary action has been taken, these guidelines present the BBC as rather out of touch. Yes, it is definitely important for news reporters to be able to maintain neutrality and impartiality where appropriate, but the fact that this has been enforced surrounding such an issue makes it appear as though racism is a matter that requires impartiality. Surely out of many topics discussed on the news, racism is one that needs to be openly condemned, to expect news reporters, especially those as Munchetty, who have a personal experience with this problem to present robotic neutrality, is unreasonable and negligent. 

Munchetty expressed on the red sofa; “Every time I have been told, as a woman of colour, to go back to where I came from, that was embedded in racism,”. To suggest that Munchetty should not have expressed this view, is reflective of the very point she is making. It appears so embedded in the collective conscience of society that politicians make these comments, so much so that they have become something seen as off limits to openly criticise, as if it were a controversial and divided topic such as abortion or euthanasia. Racism is not such a topic where it may be understandable for reporters to remain more neutral, it is deplorable and inexcusable, so should not be treated as a matter of personal opinion, for someone to decide wether they find it acceptable or not.

There was an outpouring of support for Munchetty, including from Nish Kumar, a comedian who hosts ‘The Mash Report’ on BBC 2, he said of the issue; “We all work within the BBC, we respect the guidelines, we respect the notion that the corporation… needs to remain impartial. However, I can’t see why we have to treat racism as though it’s a legitimate opinion…For me, racism is an issue on which there is a right and wrong side,” he added. “Racism to me is like gravity; you know, there is a position that is correct and there is a position which is incorrect. It’s a subject along which people have laid down their lives in defence of the idea that racism is unacceptable… So the idea that we would still treat it as a talking point is absolutely bizarre.” Kumar, here perfectly articulates the point I was previously trying to make, racism is not an opinion it’s a flawed and disgusting prejudice, not a personal view worthy of protection. 

While the BBC has been criticised for its handling of the situation, the decision that Munchetty had breached BBC guidelines, was withdrawn by the BBC’s director Lord Hall after he reviewed the issue; he made clear in an email to his staff; “Racism is not an opinion and it is not a matter for debate. Racism is racism and the BBC is not impartial on the topic.”

 While it is a relief to hear that Naga Munchetty is not being condemned by her employers, this does not take away from the fact that she came under fire in the first place. It is reflective of a worrying trend that in my opinion has increased within politics and the media during Trump’s presidency. What I mean by that is the notion that opinions can be stated with confidence and become infallible, is one that Trump strongly holds, he is never wrong his eyes and therefore never apologetic. 

Trump, I’m sure, would defend his comment not by saying it was an opinion, but by pointing out irrelevant facts to support the comment he made about the four congresswomen’s ‘country’s’. And this to me is extremely concerning. While being self assured and refusing l to back down are mostly seen as praise worthy attributes, Trump has taken these so far as to simply be an arrogant, egotistical tyrant, who resorts straight to racist, misogynistic, infantile insults in lieu of any intelligent contributions, which with Trump, is most of the time.

To conclude, it is a shock to me that the comments Munchetty made could’ve been seen by anyone as crossing a line, when she was expressing a sincere reaction to comments made by Trump, that most people upon hearing them will have shared. Trump’s comment not only crossed the line of decorum that should be required of the President of the United States, but went in my opinion, beyond the realm of human decency. 

Trump is now dealing with the threat of impeachment proceedings, In light of this, I strongly suggest looking into the work of the very congresswomen he criticised, all doing productive and admirable things in their work. I particularly admire Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and keep up with most of what she does, I find her intelligent, an eloquent speaker and full of passion and kindness. She said of Trump’s comments, particularly poignant considering his current predicament; “You are angry because you can’t conceive of an America that includes us. You rely on a frightened America for your plunder.” 

I would say, anyone who has experienced Trump in any way, whether that be personally or simply by watching through a tv screen, would not have a hard time empathising with Munchetty when she said he made her ‘furious’, when he can definitely be accused of much worse. As the commencing impeachment inquiry clearly demonstrates, there is much to be angry with Donald Trump about.