The BBC has come under criticism for alleged bias in its recent Radio 4 documentary series marking a decade since the Brexit referendum. The 10-part series, titled Politically: Ten Years After Brexit, featured interviews with 19 contributors, nearly all of whom focused on the negative consequences of the UK's departure from the European Union. Critics argue this lack of balanced perspectives undermines the BBC’s commitment to impartiality.

The allegations come amid a broader context of scrutiny over the broadcaster’s editorial standards. Last year, the BBC’s director-general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness resigned following revelations that a Panorama episode had edited a Donald Trump speech in a misleading manner. The incident prompted questions about the corporation’s ability to maintain objective reporting, despite assurances of reforms.

Analysis of the Brexit series by the impartiality monitoring group News-Watch concluded that the BBC favored a predominantly pro-EU viewpoint. Of the 20 experts featured, only one—Julian Jessop, an economist at the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA)—was identified as presenting a pro-Brexit argument. The remainder highlighted the costs of Brexit or discussed its consequences without addressing potential benefits.

News-Watch’s 97-page report also noted that several contributors had connections to anti-Brexit organizations, though these affiliations were not disclosed to listeners. For example, Sam Lowe, introduced as a consultant at Flint Global, previously worked at the Centre for European Reform, an anti-Brexit think tank. Similarly, Mujtaba Rahman, listed as part of the Eurasia Group, had formerly been an economist with the European Commission. Another guest, Sarah Main, was identified as a former director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, an organization opposed to the UK leaving the EU’s Horizon research programme.

The report criticised the series for labelling the IEA as a “Right-wing, free-market think tank” while failing to apply comparable descriptions to anti-Brexit groups such as the Social Market Foundation, the Institute for Government, and UK in a Changing Europe. Additionally, positive outcomes linked to Brexit were mentioned only nine times during the series and often were either challenged or left insufficiently explored by the presenter, Alex Forsyth. The documentary notably omitted discussion of sovereignty, a key Leave campaign promise.

David Keighley, managing director of News-Watch and a former BBC journalist, stated that the series reflected a persistent pro-EU bias within the BBC. He criticised the framing of its findings, suggesting the presentation blurred the distinction between contested viewpoints and established fact, thereby contravening impartial broadcasting principles.

In response, a BBC spokesperson defended the series, asserting it adhered to the corporation’s editorial guidelines aimed at maintaining the highest standards of impartiality. The spokesman emphasised that the programme examined various policy areas and public life dimensions shaped by Brexit, incorporating expert analysis of both benefits and drawbacks.

Previously, the BBC had indicated that a broad economic consensus viewed Brexit negatively, though it reiterated that as an institution it holds no official stance on Brexit’s economic impact. The recent controversy over the documentary suggests that debates about media impartiality in the UK’s ongoing Brexit discourse remain unresolved.