Complaint
This bulletin included one of a series of reports introduced as 鈥渓ooking at Britain鈥檚 colonial legacy worldwide鈥 which dealt with the Bengal famine of 1943 in which about 3,000,000 people are believed to have died.聽 A viewer complained that it reflected unfairly on Winston Churchill鈥檚 role in the matter, in three main respects: it personalised an issue about which Churchill could have had little or no knowledge, ignoring key roles played by the Indian Government, local administrators and the relevant Cabinet Committee; it did not take proper account of the fact that Britain was engaged in a world war at the time; and it suggested the absence of effective action to alleviate the famine reflected racism on Churchill鈥檚 part.聽 As these issues concerned a figure in comparatively recent history whose reputation and actions still give rise to controversy in some respects, the ECU considered the complaint in the light of the 麻豆社鈥檚 editorial standards of due impartiality.
Outcome
The ECU did not agree that the report was unduly personalised in relation to Churchill.聽 It did not give the impression that any of the many parties concerned had sole responsibility for the alleviation of the famine, attributing decision-making power to Churchill and his Cabinet, not Churchill alone, and the ECU noted significant documentary evidence that he was aware of the famine and intervened personally on a number of occasions, for example by writing to the Viceroy of India and President Roosevelt.聽 As to the wartime context, the studio introduction to the item referred to decisions made 鈥渋n the turmoil of wartime鈥 and the report itself referred on two occasions to the constraints arising from the war.聽 As the programme appeared to the ECU to have presented a duly balanced picture in both respects, these points of complaint were not upheld.聽
In relation to the third point of complaint, a number of the interviewees in the report, suggested Churchill regarded Indians with a degree of disdain if not outright hostility, and the impression that this explained his behaviour was reinforced by the citation of a contemporary account reporting Churchill as having said Indians 鈥渂reed like rabbits鈥.聽 It is hardly controversial to say Churchill on occasion expressed attitudes which many would now regard as evidence of racism, and the ECU thought it editorially justifiable to refer to the issue of racism in the context of a report focusing on Indian attitudes which run counter to the received view of Churchill.聽 In the ECU鈥檚 judgement, however, more exploration of alternative views of Churchill鈥檚 actions and motives in relation to the Bengal famine was required to meet the standard of impartiality appropriate to a report in a news bulletin of this kind.聽 This aspect of the complaint was upheld.
Partly upheld
Further action
The finding was reported to the Board of 麻豆社 News and discussed with the programme-makers concerned.