hurt the feelings of the Chinese people.
5. The Chinese Government were therefore protesting to the British side and were again asking the British authorities to take measures to prevent the broadcast of this programme. If the British side pressed ahead with this broadcast then they would be responsible for all the consequences. Song asked me to transmit this complaint to the British Government.
6. I replied that, as the Chinese side (including in particular Ambassador Ma Yuzhen) knew very well, the BBC was an independent organisation. I had noted Song's points but he seemed to be mistakenly blurring together the responsibilities of the BBC and of the British Government. In his later remarks he had referred to the "British side". This was as if to say that the British authorities and the BBC were one and the same. The Foreign Office and the British Government did not have a role to play in this matter. The BBC was an independent organisation: it was a strongly held principle that the British Government did not interfere in the content of their broadcasts, irrespective of their own opinions.
7. Song said that he realised that this programme had been produced by the BBC and that the BBC would be held directly responsible. But the BBC had launched personal attacks on the leader of another country. The BBC was a British press organisation. The Chinese side considered that this was not simply a matter for that press organisation and that the British authorities indeed had the power to exercise influence over them.
8.
I stressed that this was simply not the case. The BBC was not the mouthpiece of the British Government. It was an independent
The organisation with the freedom to say whatever it liked. British Government respected that freedom and it was impossible for HMG to interfere in its programmes. I then asked Song to clarify what exactly he had meant by saying that if "the British side" pressed ahead then "the British side" would be responsible for all the consequences.
That seemed to be a threat and I wanted to know
what he had in mind.
9.
Song replied that when a press organisation launched vicious attacks on the leader of another country, citing "the freedom of the press" was no justification. The BBC could not shirk its responsibilities by saying that it enjoyed press freedom. Although the BBC should be held entirely responsible he did not accept that it was impossible for the British Government to intervene. British Government exerted their influence and prevented the broadcast this would be beneficial to both sides. If the BBC insisted on releasing the programme this would bring greater consequences. Already the excerpts released had produced certain consequences (Comment: Song did not elaborate). Song thought that I would "understand" that this matter would bring serious consequences.
10.
I again pressed Song for an explanation of his threat that there would be serious consequences for the British side, by which I assumed he meant the British Government, as retaliation for actions taken by an independent news organisation. Song repeated the arguments in paras 4 and 5 above. The Chinese side believed that the British authorities could exert their influence to prevent the broadcast. If the broadcast went ahead there would be serious
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.