Trust in media—once considered a bedrock of modern democracies—has been slipping away, and recent events at the BBC have thrown this issue into sharp relief. On November 14, 2025, UK Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy publicly voiced her “real concern” about political appointments to the BBC board, saying such moves risk eroding public confidence in the broadcaster’s impartiality. Her remarks come at a time when trust in journalism is already at historic lows, not just in Britain but across much of the world, as detailed by researchers at the Glasgow University Media Group in their decade-spanning studies.
According to BBC reporting, Nandy’s concerns were prompted by a series of controversies, most notably the resignation of BBC Director General Tim Davie on November 10, 2025. Davie stepped down following a leaked internal memo that raised serious questions about editorial decisions, including the way the flagship program Panorama edited a speech by former US President Donald Trump. The memo’s publication in the Daily Telegraph triggered a week of damaging headlines, intensified scrutiny of the BBC board’s composition, and renewed debate about the broadcaster’s independence from political influence.
Nandy, speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today program, acknowledged the growing perception that political appointees—like Sir Robbie Gibb, a former communications director under Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May—could undermine the BBC’s neutrality. “There is a real concern, which I share, that political appointments to the board of the BBC damaged confidence and trust in the BBC’s impartiality,” she said. Nandy promised that the issue would be a key focus in the upcoming charter review, which sets the BBC’s funding and regulatory framework in negotiation with the government. She added, “That is something we will be looking at as part of the charter review.”
Calls for the removal of Sir Robbie have grown louder, with the creative industries union Bectu demanding his ouster in a letter to Nandy and BBC chair Samir Shah. The union argued, “We simply do not see how staff can have faith in the BBC’s leadership while a crucial position on the board is filled by someone perceived by many staff and external commentators as sympathetic to, or actively part of, a campaign to undermine the BBC and influence its political impartiality.” Yet, as the BBC and other outlets have pointed out, the corporation has also appointed Labour-affiliated figures in the past—such as James Purnell and Gavyn Davies—without the same level of public outcry, highlighting the complex and often partisan nature of debates over media governance.
The latest storm was triggered by the Panorama episode that aired in 2024, which spliced together parts of Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech. The edit, the BBC later admitted, gave “the mistaken impression that Trump had made a direct call for violent action.” The broadcaster apologized to Trump on November 14, 2025, but rejected his demands for compensation and a retraction. Trump’s lawyers have threatened to sue for $1 billion unless the BBC complies. The legal wrangling continues, as Nandy noted: “The BBC is independent of government, and so they are having those direct discussions with the US administration and with their own lawyers. But they have been speaking daily to the director, the chair of the board, the director general, and other senior leadership within the BBC. And I am confident that they’re gripping this with the seriousness that it demands.”
Davie’s resignation wasn’t the only fallout. Deborah Turness, CEO of BBC News, also stepped down. The departures followed a string of scandals involving other BBC programs, from Strictly Come Dancing to Gaza documentaries and MasterChef presenter Gregg Wallace, as well as a controversial performance at Glastonbury by Bob Vylan. These incidents have all contributed to a sense that the BBC’s editorial standards are under strain. Nandy, while careful to stress that she wouldn’t dictate the choice of the next Director General, emphasized, “The editorial standards and guidelines that the BBC has are in some cases not robust enough and in other cases not consistently applied which leaves individual journalists, presenters and editors in quite a difficult position on a number of occasions. I think that does demand that there are people at a very senior level with a journalistic background who are able to uphold those standards.”
The BBC’s current charter makes it difficult to remove board members except in cases where they are “unwilling, unfit or unable to discharge their duties,” meaning Sir Robbie Gibb will remain in post until 2028 unless circumstances change. Nandy explained, “In these particular issues instances I’m unable to act.” The charter review, set to begin soon, will likely confront these governance questions head-on.
This crisis of trust at the BBC is not an isolated phenomenon. Researchers at the Glasgow University Media Group have been tracking public attitudes toward media from 2011 to 2024, summarizing their findings in the book The Construction of Public Opinion in a Digital Age. Their studies reveal a widening gap between what journalists report and what audiences believe, especially during events like the cost of living crisis. While mainstream media, often echoing politicians and economic experts, portrayed the crisis as a temporary disruption, focus group participants described it as a long-term decline in their communities and living standards. This disconnect, the research shows, is fueling skepticism and encouraging people to seek out alternative sources of information.
The Glasgow researchers identified three main patterns in how people now engage with news. Older and highly educated individuals tend to stick with mainstream outlets, trusting official sources and expert voices. Lower-income groups, meanwhile, gravitate toward non-mainstream sources—partisan podcasters, independent outlets, and bloggers—who share their skepticism of established institutions. Younger people are more likely to use a mix of sources, relying on aggregation apps, friend endorsements, and social media influencers who seem more relatable and representative of their interests. Importantly, these are general trends, not hard-and-fast rules; people’s news habits are increasingly fluid and context-dependent.
One figure stands out in this fragmented landscape: Martin Lewis, founder of MoneySavingExpert. According to the Glasgow team, Lewis and his website enjoy a rare level of trust across demographic groups, especially during the cost of living crisis. As a financial journalist turned consumer advocate, Lewis is seen as “on the side of the public,” unafraid to make emotional appeals for politicians to “help people” on national television. His unique model of trust—rooted in expertise and relatability—offers a potential blueprint for journalists seeking to reconnect with disaffected audiences.
As the BBC and other legacy media organizations grapple with scandals, legal threats, and questions about their independence, the broader challenge remains: how to rebuild trust in an era of endless choice and deepening skepticism. For now, the answers may lie as much in the lessons of figures like Martin Lewis as in the outcomes of charter reviews and boardroom reshuffles.
