On November 18, 2025, a media firestorm erupted on both sides of the globe, placing two of the world’s most influential public broadcasters—the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)—squarely in the spotlight. The controversy centers on the editing of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s speech from January 6, 2021, the day of the Capitol riot, and the profound implications for journalistic integrity, public trust, and the future of public service media.
The immediate spark came from Sky News host Chris Kenny, who publicly demanded an apology from the ABC after its managing director, Hugh Marks, dismissed Kenny’s report as “opportunistic and false.” According to Sky News, Kenny had revealed that the ABC’s flagship investigative program, Four Corners, selectively edited Trump’s speech in its 2021 episode “Downfall: The Last Days of President Trump.” The edit, Kenny argued, spliced together two separate sections of Trump’s remarks, omitting a crucial passage where Trump stated his intention for supporters to “cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.” Instead, the version aired by the ABC presented Trump as urging his followers to show strength, which, according to Kenny, made it seem as if he was inciting aggression.
Kenny didn’t mince words on his show. “The ABC managing director said my attack was false. That’s a big claim,” he said. “Marks just says my report is false. What is false? What fact is wrong? He should detail precisely what I said or wrote that was wrong or false, otherwise he should apologise.” He further insisted that his critique was not rooted in support for Trump, stating, “I’m no Trump barracker. I think he was reckless and irresponsible in the way he refused to accept the election result, and it created such resentment over that. But I didn’t pretend that he deliberately urged people to be violent because that’s not true.”
The ABC, for its part, stood by its reporting. An ABC spokesperson told Kenny that Four Corners “examined the events of 6 January 2021 in detail, including the role of President Trump. The quote in question from President Trump was used accurately by the ABC, did not change the meaning of that section of the speech and it did not mislead the audience. The program was consistent with the ABC’s high standards of factual, accurate and impartial story telling. The ABC stands by Sarah Ferguson’s outstanding journalism.”
But the controversy didn’t stop at the Australian border. As reported in an opinion piece by Gavin Esler for The Independent, the BBC is also facing a crisis over similar editorial decisions. The BBC’s Panorama program likewise stitched together unrelated segments of Trump’s speech, creating the impression that he called for violent action. The fallout was immediate and severe: Tim Davie, the BBC’s director general, resigned, joining a long list of predecessors who have left the role under pressure since 2000.
“Trump is right to be angry and the rest of us are right to be disappointed at the editing together by the BBC Panorama programme of two broadly unrelated bits of his speech in the lead up to the 2021 Capitol Hill riot,” Esler wrote. The BBC’s error, he argued, was “difficult to understand and, frankly, inexcusable.” He noted that apologies had been offered to Trump, but the damage to trust and reputation was already done.
The legal ramifications are also making headlines. Trump is suing the BBC for over a billion dollars, a move that Esler described as “embarrassing, although a familiar part of his political armoury.” Legal experts, however, are skeptical about the lawsuit’s prospects. As Esler explained, “Mr Trump cannot sue in Britain because the allegations are more than a year old. He can sue in Florida, but there are questions over whether the film was available to US viewers. Moreover, Florida courts can dismiss lawsuits that limit freedom of speech concerning prominent public figures.”
While the BBC has already seen top executives step down, the ABC faces mounting calls for accountability. Senior Liberal Senator Sarah Henderson has gone so far as to demand changes to Australian law, arguing for new mechanisms to hold the ABC to account after what she called a series of “egregious” editorial failures.
For both broadcasters, the stakes go far beyond a single episode or editorial decision. The BBC, in particular, faces an existential reckoning. Its Royal Charter, which underpins its independence and public service mission, is up for renewal in December 2027. As Esler noted, the BBC must soon “justify its continuing existence by explaining to the British public and politicians why in an age of almost infinite choice of media access it should continue to exist, why it should be funded by the licence fee and why it remains important as a key part of Britain’s ‘soft power.’”
This moment of crisis is unfolding against a backdrop of intense political scrutiny. The BBC has faced sustained criticism from figures like Nigel Farage and Elon Musk, as well as from the right and far-right in the U.S. and Britain. The ABC, meanwhile, finds itself in a similar position, with politicians and commentators across the spectrum weighing in on its editorial standards and accountability.
Yet, as Esler observed, the BBC remains “Britain’s most trusted news source” and a pillar of the country’s cultural influence around the world. Reports from the British Council and others regularly cite the BBC as a vital component of UK soft power. “If the BBC were to be neutered or destroyed by politically motivated enemies, it would be sorely missed—and not just in Britain,” he wrote. The ABC, too, occupies a unique place in Australia’s media landscape, serving as a public touchstone in times of crisis and controversy alike.
The current debate also touches on questions of diversity and leadership. With Tim Davie’s resignation, some are calling for the BBC to break with a century of tradition and appoint a woman as its next director general. Esler wryly noted, “For a hundred years, the BBC has been led by a series of men and its coverage of gender issues has also been hugely problematic.”
As the dust settles, both the ABC and BBC are under pressure to restore public trust and demonstrate their commitment to accuracy, impartiality, and transparency. The controversy over Trump’s speech is, in many ways, a symptom of deeper challenges facing public broadcasters everywhere: how to navigate polarized political environments, adapt to new media consumption habits, and maintain credibility in an era of instant outrage and viral misinformation.
For now, the world watches as two of its most storied broadcasters confront their critics, reckon with their mistakes, and chart a path forward in the unforgiving glare of public scrutiny.
