The complainant initially wrote to the BBC regarding some of the recipes on the cookery
pages of the BBC website which included the use of foie gras:
( http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/foie_gras). She requested that these recipes be removed
because she believed that their inclusion on the BBC website implied that the BBC
supported animal abuse as “the production of this ‘delicacy’ involves such a high level of
extreme cruelty that its production is banned in the UK and a growing number of other
countries”.

Audience Services replied to the complainant’s concerns, saying that while they
appreciated that the use of foie gras in the UK was a controversial matter, there was
currently no ban on its use and many people enjoyed it. They said that as long as foie
gras remained legal and freely available there was a possibility of it being included in BBC
output, including the website.

Audience Services provided a link to the BBC Trust’s September 2012 Editorial Standards
Findings which included details of the Trust’s decision not to uphold an appeal about the
use of foie gras in The Great British Menu (BBC Two, 7 May 2012):
 http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/appeals/esc_bulletins/2012/19_sep.p
df

The complainant appealed to the BBC Trust.

The complainant considered the BBC should bear in mind the degree of suffering endured
by the birds and provided information to the BBC to illustrate that suffering.

The complainant said that foie gras was only available in the UK due to a loophole in the
law, and this situation was “taken advantage of by greedy people who have no
conscience and take the opportunity to make money by exploiting defenceless creatures”.
The complainant felt that the BBC seemed only to be concerned with the law on this issue
and sought to “escape through the legal loophole”. She felt that the BBC should
reconsider the issue from a more compassionate point of view.

She also stated that the BBC’s audiences were being misled when they saw foie gras
included in recipes as many people did not realise the full extent of the cruelty involved in
its production. That being the case she said it was the BBC’s duty to remove the recipes
from the website and also ensure they did not appear in future cookery programmes.

The Trust Unit’s decision

The Trust’s Senior Editorial Complaints Adviser (“the Adviser”) replied to the complainant
explaining that the relevant correspondence had been reviewed by the Trust Unit and an
independent editorial adviser, and she did not consider that the appeal had a reasonable
prospect of success. She did not propose to proceed in putting the appeal to the Editorial
Standards Committee of the Trust.

The Adviser noted that the complainant had been directed by Audience Services to the
October 2013 issued December 2013 91


Trustees’ finding on the use of foie gras in The Great British Menu in 2012.

Whilst acknowledging the complainant’s concerns in relation to this particular appeal
about recipes containing foie gras which were published on the BBC website, the Adviser
believed the Trustees would be likely to consider that several elements from their
previous finding were relevant to this appeal.

With regard to the Guidelines on Harm and Offence, the Adviser noted that in its
September 2012 finding on the use of foie gras in The Great British Menu, the Editorial
Standards Committee (ESC) had considered the Guidelines on Harm and Offence:

“The Guidelines state that the BBC is required to apply generally accepted
standards so as to provide adequate protection for members of the public from the
inclusion of offensive and harmful material. However, the Committee noted that
the Editorial Guidelines expressly provide that BBC content may include
challenging material that risks offending some of its audience. Also, the Editorial
Guidelines specify that applying generally accepted standards is a matter of
judgement, taking account of the content, the context in which it appears and
editorial justification.”

In reaching its decision, the Committee had recognised the offence complainants had felt
at the inclusion of a foie gras recipe, but had noted that the BBC had a right to produce
challenging content as long as it complied with the Editorial Guidelines. The Adviser noted
that a key factor in the Committee’s decision had been that

“while production of foie gras is illegal in the UK, consumption and preparation of
it is not”.

The Adviser acknowledged that the complainant felt the BBC was using a “legal loophole”
to justify decisions to include recipes for foie gras in its output, but believed that in
considering this appeal, Trustees would be likely to remain consistent with their previous
finding in which they stated:

“The Committee agreed with the Head of Editorial Standards [Trust Unit] that it
was acceptable for the BBC ... to include ingredients that could be legally bought
and consumed in the UK ... despite the fact that there were people and
organisations who objected to foie gras, boycotts urged, stores who banned it and
countries which banned its production.”

The Adviser noted that the complainant considered that the BBC was misleading people
by publishing recipes using foie gras on the website because, unless audiences are fully
informed about the methods of producing foie gras, many people might not realise the
cruelty to animals involved.

The Adviser considered this aspect of the appeal against the Editorial Guidelines on
Accuracy, which state that:

We must not knowingly and materially mislead our audiences with our content.

We may need to clarify the nature of some content by labelling (for example,
verbally, in text, or with visual or audio cues) to avoid being misleading.

The Adviser noted the information about foie gras published on the BBC website
 http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/foie_gras:
October 2013 issued December 2013 92



“Foie gras is a rich pâté made from the liver of ducks and geese that have been
force-fed and fattened until their livers become enlarged. It has a rich flavour and
the texture is silky smooth. The name literally translates from the French as ‘fat
liver’. The south-west of France is the major foie gras producing area - the method
of production is not practised in Britain. After preparation, the livers are soaked
overnight before being marinated in Armagnac, port or Madeira, depending on the
chef’s recipe.”

In terms of the website foie gras recipes, the Adviser noted that the BBC had given some
introductory information about animals being force-fed in order to produce foie gras and
had stated that foie gras is not produced (as opposed to purchased and consumed) in
Britain. She appreciated that the complainant felt the BBC was not exercising sufficient
compassion about animal cruelty in relation to its published information about the
production of foie gras, or in its responses to her complaints, but she noted that the point
the Trustees had to consider with regard to the appeal was whether the Editorial
Guidelines had been applied correctly in terms of the website content. She noted that in
its September 2012 finding, the Committee had agreed with the Head of Editorial
Standards, Trust Unit, who had noted in her response to The Great British Menu appeal
that, given foie gras may be used legally in cooking in this country, she did not consider
the BBC was under a requirement to tell audiences how foie gras was produced in order
to achieve due accuracy and avoid misleading audiences.

Taking both the current appeal and the ESC’s previous finding about The Great British
Menu into consideration, the Adviser considered that Trustees would be unlikely to
conclude that there had been a breach of Editorial Guidelines in terms of the foie gras
recipes published on the BBC website.

With regard to the complainant’s request in her appeal for the recipes to be removed from
the website, the Adviser noted that the Royal Charter and the accompanying Agreement
between the Secretary of State and the BBC drew a distinction between the role of the
BBC Trust and that of the BBC Executive Board, led by the Director-General. “The
direction of the BBC’s editorial and creative output” was specifically defined in the Charter
(paragraph 38, (1) (b)) as a duty that was the responsibility of the Executive Board, and
one in which the Trust did not get involved unless, for example, it related to a breach of
the BBC’s editorial standards which as previously stated, the Adviser believed the Trustees
would be unlikely to consider was the case. Decisions relating to website content fell
within the “editorial and creative output” of the BBC and were the responsibility of the
BBC Executive. Therefore the Adviser considered it would not be appropriate for Trustees
to consider this aspect of the appeal.

The Adviser appreciated that the complainant felt very strongly about the issues she had
raised but she considered that the appeal did not have a reasonable prospect of success
and should not proceed further.

Request for review by Trustees

The complainant requested that the Trustees review the decision not to proceed with her
appeal. She reiterated her original concern: her belief that the BBC was misleading the
audience by not presenting the full facts concerning the suffering caused to birds such as
that they are confined in tiny cages and force-fed vast amounts of food during the
production of foie gras. The complainant said that she assumed that by acknowledging
the possible inclusion of “challenging material”, the BBC thought that some people might
find certain truths unpalatable; however, the fact was that no mention was made of the
October 2013 issued December 2013 93


true extent of the birds’ suffering, which was not just about force-feeding. This was about
harm to birds not offence to people.

She believed that many people would be misled into believing there was nothing
distasteful about eating foie gras. She considered that when the BBC is seen as
encouraging its use, that would be taken as confirmation that it was acceptable.

She said that it was illegal in other countries besides the UK to produce foie gras because
of the cruelty of production methods but that this had not been acknowledged by the
BBC.

She repeated her request for the recipes to be removed from the website and not
included in future programmes.

The Committee’s decision

The Committee was provided with the complainant’s appeal to the Trust, the response
from the Senior Editorial Complaints Adviser and the complainant’s letter asking the
Committee to review her decision.

The Committee acknowledged the strength of the complainant’s concern about cruelty to
birds during the production of foie gras and her belief that the BBC’s inclusion of foie gras
recipes on its website was offensive, caused harm and was misleading.

However, the Committee agreed that the Editorial Guidelines expressly provide that BBC
content may include challenging material that risks offending some viewers and that the
application of generally accepted standards is a matter of judgement, taking into account
the content, its context and the editorial justification for it.

The Committee noted that it is legal to prepare and consume foie gras in the UK,
notwithstanding that production is illegal and that there are individuals and organisations
who object to its use on the grounds of animal cruelty.

The Committee agreed with the Senior Editorial Complaints Adviser that it was acceptable
for the BBC to include recipes in its output that contained foie gras, given that it could be
legally bought and consumed in the UK; and that the BBC was not under a requirement to
tell audiences how foie gras was produced in order to achieve due accuracy and avoid
misleading audiences, again because the cooking of foie gras is legal in the UK.

As such the Committee did not consider that this aspect of the appeal had any reasonable
prospect of success.

With regard to the complainant’s request for the recipes to be removed from the website
and not include foie gras in future programmes, the Committee agreed with the Adviser
that it was not appropriate for Trustees to consider this aspect of the appeal, as it related
to the direction of the BBC’s editorial and creative output which was the responsibility of
the BBC Executive unless the Committee considered there had been a breach of editorial
standards. Again the Committee concluded that this aspect of the appeal did not have any
reasonable prospect of success.

The Committee therefore decided that this appeal did not qualify to proceed for
consideration.