In a bombshell revelation that has ignited transatlantic fury, a leaked internal whistleblower memo has exposed the BBC’s deliberate manipulation of footage from Donald Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech at the Ellipse in Washington, D.C. Aired in a Panorama documentary just one week before the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the edited clip falsely portrayed Trump as inciting violence against the Capitol, splicing together disparate remarks to create a seamless, damning soundbite.The doctored segment merged Trump’s early rally words—”We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and I’ll be with you”—with a later, unrelated exhortation to “fight like hell,” omitting his explicit calls for “peaceful and patriotic” protest. This 54-minute gap was erased, making it appear Trump issued a direct “call to arms.”
A whistleblower memo by former BBC standards adviser Michael Prescott alleges that the October 2024 Panorama special “Trump: A Second Chance?” doctored Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech to suggest he incited violence.
— TabZ (@TabZLIVE) November 3, 2025
The program spliced clips to make Trump appear to say “we fight… pic.twitter.com/vEVlWNXqr4
Compounding the deceit, the BBC overlaid the clip with footage of Proud Boys marching on the Capitol—shot before Trump’s address—implying immediate causation and mob frenzy. As whistleblower Michael Prescott, former external advisor to the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee, warned in his 19-page dossier, this “made Trump ‘say’ things he never actually said,” setting a “very, very dangerous precedent” for journalistic integrity.
🚨 EXCLUSIVE: The BBC edited a Donald Trump speech by making him appear to encourage the Capitol Hill riot, according to an internal whistleblowing memo seen by The Telegraph
— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) November 3, 2025
Watch the two versions and read the full story ⤵️https://t.co/NUVYDQkjJH pic.twitter.com/A8lljPqrJl
Prescott’s report, obtained by The Telegraph, accuses BBC executives, including chairman Samir Shah, of dismissing repeated complaints from the corporation’s own standards watchdog. This isn’t isolated bias; it echoes prior scandals like “Crowngate,” where the BBC faked Queen Elizabeth II’s demeanor. Critics, including ex-BBC presenter Andrew Neil, decry it as “propaganda,” with GB News labeling it a “slick and deliberate” attempt to sway voters against Trump amid his legal battles over the riot.
The fallout is seismic. The White House, under Trump’s second term, is probing the broadcaster for potential election interference, while U.S. conservatives demand accountability from the “world’s most trusted” outlet—now facing eroded global faith.
In an era of deepfakes and polarized media, this unmasking underscores a harsh truth: even venerable institutions can forge narratives to fit agendas, risking democracy’s fragile trust. As Prescott queried, “Why should anybody trust the BBC?” The answer may redefine public broadcasting’s role forever.
It’s not much better over here
CBS’s 60 Minutes aired a heavily edited 28-minute version of President Trump’s 90-minute interview with Norah O’Donnell, conducted at Mar-a-Lago on October 31, 2025—exactly one year after Trump sued the network over its alleged deceptive editing of Kamala Harris’s 2024 pre-election sit-down. That suit settled for $16 million, which Trump crowed about in unaired clips, claiming it proved “fake news” and boasting, “60 Minutes paid me a lotta money.”
The broadcast sparked backlash: critics accused CBS of sanitizing Trump’s “unhinged” rants, including false boasts about $17 trillion in U.S. investments and election interference. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer quipped on X about filing an FCC complaint against the White House for “editing” the interview, flipping Trump’s own 2024 grievance.
A 73-minute extended cut was released online, but even it omitted Trump’s fiery crypto corruption tantrum over a pardoned billionaire’s $2 billion family deal. Trump, aware of edits, teased, “You don’t have to put this on.”
Fact-checkers debunked 18+ claims, from tariffs to impeachments, fueling cries of media bias under new editor Bari Weiss.