§ BARONESSS EMMET OF AMBERLEYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper. With your Lordships' permission, I would like to alter the word "does" to "did not".
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the continual interviewing of demonstrators against the Test Match tour by the B.B.C. does not constitute a direct incitement to violence.]
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, as noble Lords will know, programme content is the responsibility of the broadcasting authorities alone and the Government do not intervene. The B.B.C.'s duty is to report the news fairly and to treat controversial subjects with due impartiality. The B.B.C. 1170 have told my right honourable friend, the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, that they took care to maintain a fair balance between those who were in favour of the cricket tour taking place and those who were not.
§ BARONESSS EMMET OF AMBERLEYMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Would she not agree that mass media communication is a most dangerous instrument which can stir up emotions and hysteria much in the same way as Hitler did in Germany, and that the B.B.C. should take great care, as she said they have? I would ask her to consider whether both the producers and the announcers should not keep a fair balance and above all be careful not to betray their own preferences, as they do at present, by inclination or by accident.
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, of course the mass media are dangerous, but they are also extremely educative. I am sure the noble Baroness would be the last to ask for any form of censorship over what goes out over television. I do not think that all of the last part of her supplementary arises. It is quite clear that it is a controversial subject which must be handled very carefully, but I have every confidence in the way the B.B.C. and Independent Television deal with these questions.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness—or perhaps the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack would be the better to answer my Question, which is very erudite and precious. The Question is whether the Statement of the Prime Minister on this subject, which was reported fully verbatim by the B.B.C, might not have amounted to the felony of seditious libel—a felony which I think only the Lord Chancellor would understand—and whether the Attorney General and the Law Officers had considered this matter.
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, I think that that question ought to be treated with reserve; and I do not mean contempt.
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that many of us consider that the B.B.C. have been fair in putting both sides of the question? And is she further aware that there was 1171 quietude on the Opposition Benches when South Africa stopped d'Oliveira and nobody is making this a political gimmick because the Election is coming about.
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, nobody can improve on what my noble friend says.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness why she said that the noble Baroness, Lady Emmet of Amberley, was not asking for censorship of the B.B.C.? I thought that that was exactly what she was asking for.
§ BARONESSS EMMET OF AMBERLEYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister to realise that I was not asking for censorship; I was asking for a fair deal for both sides. Now she has given me that assurance I hope we shall see it carried out.
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, I think that on the whole I was putting more politely what the noble Baroness was saying, but I am delighted that she is satisfied with my reply
VISCOUNT GAGEMy Lords, I know that this is a different question, but does the reply given by the noble Baroness apply to the dramatic exploitation of crashes, fires and other disasters, and is the way that this is done in the national interest?
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, that is another question, and perhaps the noble Viscount would care to put it down.
§ THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEMy Lords, will the noble Baroness say, further to her point that the duty of the B.B.C. is to report news faithfully, whether she is aware and whether the B.B.C. are aware and will admit to a current report that freelance producers make themselves available to the B.B.C. to produce a telegenic happening at a point in time and space convenient to television cameras; and does not this constitute a distortion of news?
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, I have heard of that, but of course I am quite unable to answer at this sort of notice.
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, does my noble friend think it appropriate that people who have not demonstrated but have merely expressed their opinions should be referred to as "demonstrators"?
§ LORD HANKEYMy Lords, would the noble Baroness agree that in this Election period it is very important that the B.B.C. commentators and questioners, who like asking very steeply slanted questions, should be careful to preserve a neutral balance?
§ BARONESSS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEYes, indeed, my Lords.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, is the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor not going to try to help us?
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, can my noble friend also say whether there is any way of requiring the national and local Press to observe a similar neutral balance?