Sir John Reith has succeeded in explaining the B.B.C.'s faux
pas on New Year's Eve to the satisfaction of the Polish Ambassador. But that should not be the last word on the matter. "The real error," says Lord Sclsdon (who, as Sir William Mitchell-Thomson, was Post- master-General for five years), "is that Mr. X should have been allowed the mask of anonymity." That seems to me to be the real point. By instructing anonymous , persons to speak for it, and not on this occasion alone, the B.B.C. has gone out of its way to create a new sort of monster, a majestic " voice " delivering itself of utterances on behalf of the Corporation with the authority of an oracle. It has no right to do anything of the sort. Lord Selsdon reminds us that the power of moulding opinion " editorially " was expressly forbidden to it at its inception. It has no title to put up an anony-. mous voice—its own voice—to instruct us about public problems. If it does it must fall into one of two errors— express opinions which commit it to a policy, or, utter banalities, and be intolerably dull. Its proper course is to broadcast the words of individuals who speak for them-
Previous page
