LBC and Global Radio, Currently London’s Biggest Sulk?

LBC and Global Radio showcase presenters who are strong and passionate – they engage with their listeners in a way that is calculated to elicit some strong, passionate responses. Unsurprisingly, there have been some strong and passionate responses to LBC’s choice to make their first approach to Ben Goldacre one of legal chill rather than engagement in a matter of some importance in the area of public health – vaccination uptake in the context of a potential measles epidemic.

A substantial amount of the blogosphere coverage is from people giving thoughtful analysis of the copyright issues v. the need to be able to cite sources and engage with the original, primary source; others have concentrated on rebutting familiar anti-vaccination canards that Jeni Barnett used or allowed her callers to assert as fact, such as the implied toxicity of the level of formaldehyde in vaccination shots.

Doctors who specialise in Infectitious Diseases shared their expertise and concerns. Goldacre chose to highlight post by particular bloggers, such as AP Gaylard of A Canna’ Change the Laws of Physics who contributes an thoughtful discussion of the notion of informed consent. Gaylard provides a fine synopsis of the balance of evidence on vaccine safety, complete with a table and detailed online references from Dr Paul Offit’s book, Autism’s False Prophets.^[a]

One of the most interesting aspects about this slice of social media in action is the wide diversity of people and ages that it reaches. For example, Lizzie C of Musings of The Geeky One is 16 years-old, and she is sufficiently engaged with the issue that she was moved to write a very thoughtful email to LBC. Called to action by the responses to important issues from figures such as Ben Goldacre and Stephen Fry, and seeming to adopt her etiquette from Fry, Lizzie sends an email to LBC:

I’m terribly sorry if this comes across as rude, but I’d like to take issue with some points raised during a recent discussion of the MMR vaccine.

Surely well-mannered posts and emails like Lizzie C’s should be encouraged: there are some people who would be optimistic about what this says about digital citizenship in the future.

Maybe any unpleasantness might have been avoided if LBC appeared to be more receptive of people’s thoughtfully worded complaints rather than seeming to reject them without full consideration. Maybe if LBC and Global Radio had engaged with some commenters and commentators then there might have been some useful exchanges. (See companion post on social media.^[b])

I am truly sorry to learn that Jeni Barnett’s agent is claiming that Jeni has been the recipient of “personal and abusive comments”. Too many bloggers who write about issues such as vaccination have had similar experiences and know how that feels – we are not insouciant about the impact that such reactions can have. However, it is extraordinary that Jeni Barnett’s production team had not taken the precaution of researching the issue in appropriate detail for her programme: had they done so, they would have, perhaps, have had a better sense of the likely depth and breadth of responses.

LBC and Global Radio have given Jeni Barnett a prime spot because they want a certain style of edgy presenter who reliably pulls in an audience. A production team will regularly plan the topics for phone-in discussions and there is usually some guidance on how to cover sensitive issues that may well generate a lot of heat and light. They must be aware of the sensitivities surrounding MMR and the issues of vaccination, particularly in the context of a potential epidemic of measles.

Notably, Goldacre makes a very strong point with his comments about Jeni Barnett’s treatment of Yasmin during the phone call and, subsequently, on her blog. There are probably very few people who would accept Jeni Barnett’s characterisation of Yasmin’s phone call as “vicious”.^[c] Dr Petra Boynton gives an excellent analysis of the phone call that closed the MMR Segment for the 7 Jan 2009 show and holds it up as an example of why health professionals are wary are talking with media people. Nurses have a relationship of trust with their patients so it may be not only personally galling but particularly damaging for a nurse to have her input described as “vicious” by a public figure.

As Goldacre writes:

In this unfortunate episode I am sorry to say that Jeni herself has also been deeply unpleasant to and about individual people with less money and voice than herself, such as the courteous and informative NHS nurse Yasmin who rang into the programme, characterised by Jeni on her website, incomprehensibly, as “vicious”, on no grounds, with access to the relevant clip denied by lawyers, and with the right to reply on Jeni’s site refused and deleted.

Much of this might have been avoided had LBC and Global Radio contacted Dr Ben Goldacre about his understandable concerns and discussed the matter rather than sending a legal chill, placing phone calls in which emotions may have been emphasised over cool judgment and then adding to the silence on substantive issues by deleting comments and posts. Attempting to withhold primary sources (programme segment) or deleting them (blog posts and comments) are unthinkable actions to people who wish to promote discussion about the content of those sources.

LBC and Global Radio should have given Jeni Barnett some better guidance when planning the programme content. Once they realised their error of judgment they might have assigned someone to guide her on an appropriate response rather than the unfortunate decision to resort to deletion and a refusal to engage as appropriate strategies.

Had LBC and Global Radio been up to date with best practice in staff and talent welfare in comparable industries, it is not implausible that they should have had a contingency plan in place for just such an eventuality, one that involved both their HR people and their press office. Most Press Officers of even small to medium enterprises have contingency plans, larger bodies tend to have well-thought out communication responses to mentions in social media: it is difficult to accept that LBC, as part of Global Radio does not.^[b] If you court controversy for ratings, then something like this will happen from time to time. It is unthinkable that they do not have a plan in place for their front line, “own show” personalities.

When the internet was less familiar, it was acceptable for people to think of it in terms of the Wild, Wild West but established media must come to terms with the responses that new technologies enable. Such as distribution mechanisms like Twitter and blogs. But the internet has not been new for some time – some things are becoming predictable. LBC and Global Radio may bear a heavy burden of responsibility for not keeping up to date with this.

We hope that Jeni Barnett and LBC Global Radio recover their equanimity sufficiently to recognise that there is a need for dialogue rather than huff and the silent exchange of hurt feelings/raw emotion. It would be rather a gift to LBC Global Radio’s competitors if London’s Biggest Conversation became London’s Biggest Sulk.

Notes

[a] This is a growing trend: a number of bloggers are providing online references to supplement particularly relevant chapters from books so that other people don’t have to search around for them. See Gaylard, op cit, jdc and Oliolioli provide an index to Bad Science; NellieTAG provides a full list of references to Goldacre’s Placebo chapter. Some people might see that as a little odd, others as the sort what Clay Shirky styles as the collaborative, cognitive heat sink endeavour that the internet and new communication technologies/applications can support so well.
[b] A nice example is provided by this insight into the United States Air Force recently released a blog assessment chart (copied below) to evaluate communication responses to mentions of the organisation in social media. To be clear, none of us has any association or interest with this communications company, it is merely a familiar example. We discuss social media tools elsewhere.
[c] For supportive comments, see, e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

BPSDB