Confused Apology

The Guardian reports that the BBC has apologised to viewers offended by a Good Friday episode of EastEnders that featured the attempted murder, by way of live burial, of a central character ('BBC says sorry to EastEnders viewers').

The apology confuses me. It is not an outright apology suggesting the BBC thinks it should not have shown the episode, but a qualified apology to those viewers who did not enjoy it.

The half-way house 'sorry' indicates a lack of courage on the part of the BBC, and deserves criticism. In commissioning the script for the episode and then filming and editing it, the BBC must have been alert to the violent nature of the scenes. Since the episode was a key part of the BBC's Easter output it must have got comfortable with the risk that some viewers would find the episode unpleasant, and decided to proceed with broadcast regardless (indeed, the heavy warnings surrounding the episode indicate that was the case). After Ofcom received 45,000 complaints from members of the public during the 2007 Celebrity Big Brother racism scandal, the BBC must have had in mind the readiness of the public to voice displeasure at close to the bone popular television output.

All of that makes it surprising that the BBC issued an apology about the EastEnders episode so quickly (even accepting that the apology was qualified). A strong public service broadcaster must have the courage of its convictions, and show readiness to stand up for programming it believes in. That is especially the case where the programming pushes boundaries. It must have cogent arguments to back up its decisions, and it must be prepared to stand up to complaints that follow (it received 167). It should not default into apologising whenever viewers complain.

If the BBC genuinely believed that the episode in question was an important piece of quasi-psychological commentary (its response to complaints said: "The burial is in no way glamorised or glorified, rather we see that when pushed to the edge, Tanya's behaviour becomes out of character, and indeed that it's Tanya herself who ultimately suffers because of her actions") it is amazing that it offered so rapidly a mealy-mouthed apology. The reality, more likely, is that the episode was simply about snatching Easter audience-share, and the BBC got caught out by the complaints. That says a lot about the BBC.