Thought for the Day explicitly excludes non-religious contributors.
The BBC should move away from biased religious programming. That should begin with a rethink of Thought for the Day.
The BBC has a long history of pro-religion bias in its output, which is typified by Thought for the Day.
Thought for the Day is a daily slot on BBC Radio 4's flagship news programme, Today. For nearly three minutes, religious leaders offer "reflections from a faith perspective on issues and people in the news". Nonreligious people and leaders of less popular religions, no matter how well-respected their views, are not allowed to contribute.
Despite being within such a prominent discussion slot, Thought for the Day is outside the programme's editorial control. This means there is no right to reply when the slot is used for political or religious proselytising.
- Fewer than one in five British people think BBC Radio 4's Thought for the Day should exclusively feature religious content.
- Religious radio programmes are the least popular and least well received according to the BBC's own research.
Public apathy towards Thought for the Day is even shared by Today's former presenter, John Humphrys, who described the slot as "inappropriate" and "deeply, deeply boring" in 2017. His colleague Justin Webb has also criticised it.
Reforming Thought for the Day to include speakers of any religion or belief would improve overall quality, make it relevant to Today's audience and remove the unjustifiable discrimination. Contributors should be picked without reference to their religious or non-religious identity.
There is a place for high quality, critical religion and belief programming on the BBC – but not one-sided promotion of religion.
Take action!
1. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
2. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
BBC once more rejects non-religious voices on Thought for the Day
Posted: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 15:52
The BBC has announced today that it will not "revisit" the issue of non-religious voices on Thought for the Day.
The announcement came in an Executive Response to a review conducted by the BBC Trust into the breadth of opinion that is permitted to be heard on the BBC. This included a review of the BBC's religious output.
The National Secular Society was invited to take part in this review and it raised once more the issue of the exclusion of non-religious voices from Thought for the Day."
The independent review was commissioned by the BBC Trust and led by former ITV chief Executive Stuart Prebble. Mr Prebble wrote in the report (pdf):
I asked for Thought for the Day on Radio 4 to be included in the remit for this review because it seemed absurd to examine the provision of range of voice within religion and ethics, without taking into account what must be one of the most listened-to places where religious range of voice is provided.
For my trouble I found myself involved in what has been a lengthy debate between the BBC and the National Secular Society, in which the NSS claims that Thought for the Day should not exist at all, and that if it does, it should include contributions from Humanists and Secularists. This is on the basis that to allocate over three minutes of airtime to a single voice, and to allow it to go unchallenged by interrogation or analysis, gives to religion a status which is not accorded to any other aspect of our lives, and which is unjustified.
However, if this argument fails, and Thought for the Day should continue, then Secularists and Humanists wish to be included among its contributors on the basis that theirs are "beliefs" just as other religions are — an argument which has been given weight by the law of the land.
This matter has been debated at length within the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust which has taken the view that it is a matter for BBC Management to decide whether Thought for the Day should include Humanists or Secular voices among its contributors.
However, it is not simply the BBC which thinks that it has to have belief as part of its output — it is required to do so by the Agreement with the Secretary of State which sets the BBC Trust the requirement to have regard "to the importance of reflecting different religions and other beliefs" as it sets the purpose remits which explain how the BBC should represent the UK, its nations, regions and communities.
Personally I see no difficulty in including a Humanist or Secular contribution within Thought for the Day if justified on editorial grounds. David Elstein agrees, but for slightly different reasons. He told us that: "On religion I am an agnostic and have long thought that BBC's commitment to religion can't be right. It is part of the polity and the BBC thinks it has to have belief as part of the output. I am one of those who think TFTD should have regular atheists in it to achieve a full range."
However, in response, the BBC Executive says that it is undertaking its own research into "the mix and flavour of its Religion and Ethics content", but "We do not propose to revisit the issue of atheists or humanists taking part in Thought for the Day.
Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, commented: "There is no doubt that the changing demographics of the UK — starkly shown in the 2011 Census — mean that the BBC's focus on Christianity is completely out of proportion. Our arguments about Thought for the Day have been frequently rehearsed and have the support even of the presenters of the Today programme, John Humphreys and Evan Davis. We simply cannot understand why the BBC resists this small change that would prove that it is serious about proper representation of all opinions on the airwaves."
Mr Sanderson said he was disappointed with the report which simply seemed to accept that to devote such a large amount of the of the BBC's resources to religious programming was legitimate.
"All the independent research shows that the number of people interested in religion in this country is very small. Why does the BBC put such an enormous focus on it?"
BBC stands by Panorama exposé of Sharia Councils
Posted: Wed, 8 May 2013 12:46
The BBC has rejected a complaint from the Islamic Sharia Council in Leyton East London after it was featured in the Panorama programme about the treatment of women in sharia arbitration bodies. Panorama had accused the Council of ruling on cases that it had no legal authority over – such as child custody.
A member of staff at the Islamic council was secretly filmed telling a woman complaining of domestic violence to only go to the police as a "last resort".
Marriages conducted under Sharia law are not recognised under UK law and are often obtained by couples in addition to civil marriages.
The Panorama investigation featured evidence from a number of women who claimed to have had great difficulty in securing Sharia divorces from their husbands despite being granted civil divorces.
It was alleged that some women who use Sharia councils are unaware that such bodies have no legal rights to impose conditions on custody.
To investigate the claims, the BBC sent an undercover reporter to the council to ask for advice. The reporter claimed that her husband regularly hit her.
She was encouraged to bring her husband to the Sharia Council for a meeting to discuss their marriage and told she should only go to police as a "last resort".
After the programme was broadcast, a spokesman for Leyton Sharia Council said the secret recording was "underhand" and that conversations had been edited out of context.
He added: "It seems that Panorama had a pre-determined agenda and stereotype of how sharia councils operate, and they ensured that a round peg was forced to fit the square hole of this agenda. The council takes a harsh stance on domestic violence. Women who cite domestic abuse in their applications for divorce are advised strongly to report it to the police."
The council said the woman who took part in the secret filming had only come to the site on the pretext of wanting advice and that she told staff she did "not want to get her husband in trouble".
In response to a complaint from the Leyton Sharia Council, the BBC said it stood by the Panorama exposé of Sharia Councils, including the secret filming.
Nazir Afzal, the CPS chief crown prosecutor for the North West, who specialises in such cases, told the programme: "What I have just witnessed is so dangerous. If there is early intervention we know that people's lives can be saved, they can be spared significant harm".
In a statement to the local Guardian newspaper, a BBC spokesperson said: "Panorama fully stands behind its investigation into the workings of some of Britain's Sharia Councils. The programme was raised in a Westminster debate in Parliament the next day in which a government minister referred to the concerns we had raised. Senior British Muslims such as Baroness Warsi also called some of the councils' secretly recorded comments 'disgraceful'.
"As Nazir Afzal, said in the film: 'Most of them are absolutely fine but there are some …who are putting women at risk."
