Thread by @PandaScottish

[thread]

h/t @gordonrayner @Telegraph

I think the BBC are a fucking disgrace, to the nation, to journalism and their liberal metropolitan elite bias needs to be rooted out.

@POTUS @realDonaldTrump needs to sue them

But @BBCNews should IMO "Fight! Fight! Fight!"

Here's why

Those headlines grouped in 4s

(if the montage is hard to read)

So I am going to back in time to several dates

3rd November 2025

28th October 2024

And of course, how can one omit the beautiful day itself: 6th January 2021

So President Donald J Trump is going to sue the BBC because of this Panorama show

Here's a reminder on one of those headlines

Fascinating how accurate it was

Not just for Donald's historic attacks on the lugenpresse

But also for his future ones since 2021

So here's the Panorama episode in question

Panorama episode link at:

bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00…

Now the Panorama documentary was 57 minutes long

The clip that is the focus of the Telegraph article is 9 seconds long

So let's move to Trump's legal case

Trump wants 3 things:

1. a full and complete retraction of the defamatory statements made by the BBC
2. an apology to Trump for engaging in such intentional and biased reporting
3. a monetary settlement to remedy the financial harm that they caused Trump to suffer

theguardian.com/us-news/2025/n…

Now I am interested in two segments

1) accused the BBC of “defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements”

and

2) has caused Trump “overwhelming financial and reputational harm”

So they are going to have to try and argue

That the BBC broadcast on BBC national TV and available on iplayer to a British audience caused Trump "overwhelming financial harm" and "overwhelming reputational harm"

So first they may have to prove what the viewing figures (either to live broadcast or to the iplayer stream) were

For Panorama this figure varies wildly depending on the topic being covered e.g.

Let's tackle the "overwhelming financial harm" first

So apparently its 13 consecutive years of losses for Trump resorts in Scotland

But - apparently the 2024 calendar year showed a sales increase of £730k to £4.5m

So it doesn't look like "overwhelming financial harm"

pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/lo…

Second let's look at Trump Turnberry

Revenue at Trump Turnberry in Ayrshire rose 15% to £24.2 million

So doesn't look like "overwhelming financial harm"

thenational.scot/news/25546320.…

Then to look at "overwhelming reputational harm"

We can look at UK polling by Yougov on Trump's "Fame" and "popularity"

Full link at:

yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

If you go to 1 year of results you can see clearer

The Panorama episode was aired on 28th October

So there only are 2 data points there for his

Donald's
Fame went UP from 98% to 100%
Popularity went UP from 27% to 34%
Dislikes went UP from 57% to 58%
Neutrals went from 14% to 8%

So to the British audience to whom this Panorama would have been available to watch

His fame and popularity went up

Those with a neutral view of him went down

And those who disliked him had a 1% change

So I look forward to a legal team explaining how

a 9 second clip in a 57 minute documentary

with only UK availability audience

where he had positive reputational change in the period

is somehow "overwhelming damage"

But I want to move back to the BBC headlines I used at the start of my thread

These two are fascinating. I want to know

How did the BBC reach the decision that Trump "egged on his mob" ?

How did the BBC reach the decision that Trump had "handed out matches" ?

But in particular want to focus on this one:

So in the news article that accompanies this one

I will paste my transcript of it verbatim

Just so I can't be accused of clipping it "out of context"

So I want to focus on several (to me) what feel like key phrases

The 3 key ones

1. "a blow to whatever was left of Donald Trump's historical reputation."
2. "crying fraud" and "He has not proven his case. He has not proven that the 2020 election was stolen."
3. "What he has done is radicalise his supporters which is what led to those scenes"

So I look forward to seeing the BBC News team being hauled over the coals in trial to account for those words

After all , we don't want them causing such "overwhelming reputational and financial harm" to Donald

Only one catch though

The headlines that I have shown you

And the transcript I have quoted above

Were not the output of the BBC

They were the output of the Daily Telegraph

The article I quoted from was from Tim Stanley

So I look forward to seeing the BBC have their day in a Florida court room

Where they get to the stand and ask President Trump

Why is he not suing @Telegraph for "intentional and biased reporting" ?

After all surely all "intentional and biased reporting" matters ?

@Telegraph On the Telegraph live blog they even quoted Prime Minister Boris Johnson

Stated clearly and openly that President Donald J Trump having lost a free and fair election then encouraged people to storm the US Capitol

@Telegraph Imagine being so bad

That *even* Boris Johnson condemns you

@Telegraph If you want a larger thread on Partygate

Then I made it into a musical themed one

@Telegraph To make it worse

Even Grant fucking Shapps got in on the action

@Telegraph Yes

Grant Fucking Shapps

@Telegraph Now

The BBC did get it wrong

They did allow a video montage of a speech to be aired that did not make it clear it was splicing together segments

telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/0…

@Telegraph Splicing together clips from a speech is common practice

But you make visible markers so it is clear

e.g. as the Telegraph do here when they "edited" the Jan 6th speech

Here they note how Trump's language changed from "egging on his mob" over 48 hours

@Telegraph So it was a mistake by the BBC

They should have checked the output from the production company and made sure that any speech quotes were either contained in video linearly

Or they had clear visible markers denoting they had been put together in short montage

@Telegraph The full transcript of the speech is of course available in many places

You can look at how often Trump reinforces the theme of "Fight"

edition.cnn.com/2021/02/08/pol…

@Telegraph You can look at the Fact Check of that speech done by Daniel Dale

edition.cnn.com/2021/01/07/pol…

@Telegraph Now you could also look at the change history of that speech and how in the run up to the speech on January 6th before that failed insurrection

How Trump and his cult altered wordings of it to target Vice President Mike Pence

@Telegraph Also is the fascinating line:

"Two Fox News primetime personalities, always so obsequious, begged those around the President to get him to do more. But
President Trump was unmoved."

I often wonder

How did they beg?
For how long did they beg?

@Telegraph Can you imagine the BBC having news staff "begging" a Prime Minister or King?

Oh here's @GBNews

@Telegraph @GBNEWS And here's Margaret Thatcher on the power of propaganda

@Telegraph @GBNEWS Excerpts taken from :

govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GP…

@Telegraph @GBNEWS Now the right in the UK have long attacked the BBC

@Telegraph @GBNEWS Though they never reached calling them lugenpresse

The irony of the Daily Telegraph (of all newspapers) wanting to talk about media bias really is fascinating given their role in ....

@Telegraph @GBNEWS let alone their (and others roles) in brexit

@Telegraph @GBNEWS also:

huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/the-sun-…

@Telegraph @GBNEWS Now I think the 4th estate matters

As Margaret Thatcher put it

@Telegraph @GBNEWS The conduct of the 4th estate matters

In the hyper charged social media world of Elon Musk and his disruptor bullshit and right/far right populist charlatans seeking to profit from it

It is ever more important that journalism stand tall and be better

@Telegraph @GBNEWS @threadreaderapp unroll please