A complaint concerned a presenter who had drawn the Complainant into a dispute conce
rning dolphins in captivity, without having warned her beforehand that this topic would be discussed. Bayworld, which is managed by the Complainant, had been re-opened, though it no longer included dolphins. The presenter, in a separate broadcast, apologised for so firmly putting her view regarding dolphins in captivity, during the interview.
Having listened to the recordings, the Tribunal was convinced that the presenter’s apology took care of the dispute. In a sense, the presenter went further than was required of her by the Broadcasting Code. She clearly has a strong sense of what is expected of her as a presenter, and rather than attacking the Complainant unfairly, she simply put forward her view. The view she expressed is not a unique view, and relates to a matter where there are frequently differences of opinion. The presenter’s view is therefore one with which the Complainant would certainly be conversant, and to our minds the Complainant dealt with the matter well enough from her perspective.
The Tribunal considered whether an earlier broadcast did not, on its own, amount to a contravention of the Code in that Bayworld was unjustifiably attacked for a matter of which it was totally unaware. Judged on its own this did, in fact, amount to a contravention. However, in the light of the sincere apology by the presenter, it was decided not to pursue this aspect further. The apology put an end to the matter. It was sincere and the matter should be regarded as closed.