Trump said on Friday he was likely to sue the British broadcaster this week for up to $5 billion after it spliced together separate excerpts of a speech on January 6, 2021, when his supporters stormed the Capitol. The edit created the impression he had called for violence.
BBC chair Samir Shah sent a letter to Trump to apologise for the edit, the BBC said on Thursday, but it said it strongly disagreed there was a basis for a defamation claim.SHAH SAYS BBC POSITION HAS NOT CHANGED
Trump told reporters on Friday he would sue for anywhere between $1 billion and $5 billion.
Shah told BBC staff in an email on Monday there was speculation about the possibility of legal action, including potential costs or settlements.”In all this we are, of course, acutely aware of the privilege of our funding and the need to protect our licence fee payers, the British public,” Shah wrote.”I want to be very clear with you – our position has not changed. There is no basis for a defamation case and we are determined to fight this.”
The documentary, made by a third party, aired in Britain before the November 2024 U.S. election. It showed Trump telling supporters “we’re going to walk down to the Capitol” and we “fight like hell”, a comment he made in a different part of his speech. Trump had in fact said supporters would “cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women”.
The edit was made public after the Daily Telegraph published a leaked internal BBC report.
The report, written by an independent adviser, contained wider criticism of the BBC’s news output, including assertions of anti-Israel bias at BBC Arabic and a lack of balance in stories about trans issues, and led to the resignation of the director-general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness.
NO US BROADCAST
Trump’s lawyers said the edit caused the president “overwhelming reputational and financial harm”, according to a letter seen by Reuters.
They said they would sue in Florida, rather than in Britain, where the one-year limit to file a defamation case has expired.
Trump will face a tougher legal standard in the United States given the protection of freedom of speech in the constitution, lawyers have said.
The BBC is likely to argue that the programme was not broadcast and was not available on its streaming service in the U.S., so voters in Florida could not have seen it.
The BBC, which is funded by a mandatory levy on TV-watching households, is also widely expected to challenge the reputational harm claim on grounds that Trump went on to win the election, and say the edit was not done in malice.
