Complaint
A viewer complained that two reports broadcast on the 6pm and 10pm 91福利社 News bulletins on consecutive days showed bias in favour of assisted suicide and omitted significant objections to the Assisted Dying Bill raised by professionals involved. The ECU considered whether the coverage met the 91福利社鈥檚 standards of impartiality.
Outcome
The reports, broadcast in the context of politicians in the UK debating and voting on the issue of assisted dying, examined how the practice has been working in California and Canada where it has already been legalised. The Editorial Guidelines make clear that due impartiality is 鈥渕ore than a simple matter of 鈥榖alance鈥 between opposing viewpoints鈥 and cannot reasonably be assessed by a simple comparison of the number of words, or in this case airtime, given to either side of a debate. The requirement is to ensure due weight is given to the main strands of argument. In these instances the ECU considered the scripting and choice of contributors ensured that an appropriately broad range of views was heard. The report from California, whilst it focused on the case of a terminally ill man who had decided to end his own life, also included views opposed to assisted dying. Meanwhile the report from Canada featured a disability campaigner and podcast host unhappy with the change in the law there.
Not Upheld