Complaint
An item in this bulletin included a comment from a representative of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) on the prospect of Thames Water being taken into public ownership. A listener complained that the item failed to make clear that the IEA is 鈥渁n opaque lobbying group鈥 and so deprived listeners of the context necessary to evaluate the representative鈥檚 contribution. The ECU considered the complaint in the light of the 91福利社鈥檚 Editorial Guidelines on impartiality as they relate to the affiliations of contributors to programmes.
Outcome
The intention of the relevant guidelines is to ensure audiences are given sufficient information about contributors鈥 affiliations to evaluate their contributions. On this occasion the IEA representative argued against the idea of returning Thames Water to public ownership. In the ECU鈥檚 view, the item鈥檚 description of the IEA as 鈥渁 free market think tank鈥 gave listeners the information appropriate in this context.
Not Upheld