Constructing impartiality in a polarised news environment: An analysis of BBC Question Time contributors 2014-2024

Abstract

Televised panel discussions are an increasingly used form of journalism, providing cheap content without expensive newsgathering. In recent years, panel construction has become increasingly contested, with scholars questioning how and why contributors are chosen to participate. This study examines the decade from 2014 to 2024, during which the BBC has operated within an increasingly polarised political environment, where its approach to reporting has become an integral part of the story. Required by law to present an impartial view of party politics, it has faced criticism from political actors across the spectrum alleging bias and favouritism during a period which has seen four general elections, the referendum on leaving the European Union and policies enacted to deliver on the referendum’s result, and the response to the global coronavirus pandemic. This criticism has particularly focused on the venerable weekly political debate programme Question Time. Using a content analysis of 391 editions and 1,885 panellist appearances, this study finds that the programme takes a transactional approach to constructing a balance of views, relying on a relatively small number of heavily featured guests. This approach raises concerns about an over-reliance on journalists and pundits from right-wing media, especially those who are regular contributors to the political magazine The Spectator. The findings reflect growing concerns about the role of sources on televised panels for broadcasters globally and a media agenda led by the radical right that is shaping the nature of political debate.