Martin Bashir blamed ‘professional jealousy’ for BBC Panorama Diana interview claims
The BBC has released over 3,000 emails related to Martin Bashir's controversial Panorama interview with Princess Diana in 1995
Journalist Martin Bashir suggested allegations he secured an interview with Princess Diana through deceit were due to his background and if a "Dimbleby" had done the piece, they would not have been made.
In new emails released by the BBC, Mr Bashir claimed that him getting the interview as the child of immigrants with “working-class roots” led to “some irritation” among BBC colleagues in a message dated July 20 2020.
The communications were disclosed after the BBC was ordered to hand over around 3,000 files relating to the affair after a freedom of information (FOI) request was made in December.
Mr Bashir told the head of BBC history, Robert Seatter, that forged documents played no role in obtaining the interview.
He wrote: “I am sorry to hear that this so-called ‘forgery’ story has reared its head again.
“It played no part in the interview but did allow professional jealousy, particularly within the corporation, to hang its hat on alleged wrongdoing.
“At the time, it was also apparent that there was some irritation that a second-generation immigrant of non-white, working class roots should have the temerity to enter a Royal Palace and conduct an interview.
“It would have been so much easier if one of the dynastic families (Dimbleby et al) had done it!”
Bashir also told Mr Seatter he had been praised by the then-Prince of Wales’ staff for not giving interviews about the programme.
Journalist Andy Webb had put in a FOI request more than two years ago for the material.
He wrote: “Since returning to the UK in 2015, and re-joining the BBC in 2016, senior staff in the Prince of Wales’ Office (to my surprise) have expressed their gratitude for my declining of all requests to discuss the interview.
Listen to our royal podcast, the Royal Rota:
“As I am sure you will understand, the words of the late princess have been deployed to attack surviving members of the Royal Family, particularly the Prince of Wales, something that I have never wanted to do.
“Some day-who knows when (!)- I will need to look back and reflect upon a career that included but hope was not wholly defined by a single interview.
“For that I’ll need to work hard at recollection – something that I find very difficult.”
Mr Seatter was asking for a statement from Bashir after being asked to “release an archive interview about the event, which mentions a forgery story involving yourself”.
This was ahead of the November 2020 broadcast of an ITV documentary The Diana Interview: Revenge Of A Princess in which graphic designer Matt Wiessler spoke about mocking up the documents for Bashir.
The BBC later apologised and made a financial settlement with Mr Wiessler.
The documents also show Bashir was praised by colleagues at the broadcaster after the interview, with Lord Tony Hall, who was then the corporation’s director of news, saying Bashir “changed the way we report the monarchy”.
He wrote in a note that the journalist should be “very proud of your scoop” which he said was handled with “skill, sensitivity and excellent judgment”.
Members of the corporation’s Television Weekly Programme Review Board also praised Bashir at a meeting two days after the interview aired, with one member saying Bashir had shown “journalistic integrity”.
Bashir, a former religion editor, left the BBC in April 2021 citing health reasons after having Covid-19-related complications.
The next month, a report by Lord Dyson concluded that the BBC covered up “deceitful behaviour” by Bashir to secure the 1995 interview and led to an apology from the corporation and a promise never to show it again.
The report said Bashir was in “serious breach” of the BBC’s producer guidelines when he faked bank statements and showed them to Earl Spencer, Diana’s brother, to gain access to Diana.
Prince William responds to the Dyson report:
A BBC spokesperson said on Tuesday: “There is nothing to support the allegations that the BBC acted in bad faith in 2020 and we maintain this suggestion is simply wrong.
“We have worked to provide relevant material throughout this lengthy process, which has involved extensive archive and record searches spanning nearly 30 years.
“We have also accepted and apologised when errors have been made and taken extensive steps to rectify those errors.
“Further, as has been said many times, far from attempting to conceal or cover up matters, the BBC commissioned Lord Dyson to conduct an independent investigation so that he could gain a full picture of what happened in 1995, including by obtaining any additional materials that people other than the BBC might possess.
“The BBC provided all relevant documentation that was in the BBC’s possession to the Lord Dyson inquiry.
“Other individuals involved in these events also supplied Lord Dyson with written materials, which are detailed in the report.
“This was published in 2021 and the findings accepted in full by the BBC.”
Have you heard our new podcast Talking Politics? Every week Tom, Robert and Anushka dig into the biggest issues dominating the political agenda…