The BBC releases 3,000 emails about Lady Di, Martin Bashir and their controversial interview on 'Panorama'

More than 3,000 emails written between several directors and bosses of the BBC and journalist Martin Bashir, sent during a period of two months in 2020, have just been released by the British network, after journalist Andy Webb , relying on the right to information, obtained a court ruling in its favor last December.

Webb is investigating the controversial interview that Lady Di gave to the television program

Panorama

, presented by Martin Bashir, in 1995. An interview that went around the world and in which the princess spoke openly about her marital problems with the then heir to the throne, she questioned the capabilities of her still husband and left memorable phrases such as “There were three of us in this marriage.

It was a little overcrowded”, admitting the infidelity of Charles of England before more than 23 million viewers.

What was considered “the scoop of the century” was revealed as a model of journalistic

malpractice

in 2020, when a documentary titled

The Diana Interview: Revenge of a Princess,

broadcast by The ITV network discovered the bad tricks with which Lady Di had been managed to get in front of the BBC cameras, uncovering a whole plot of blackmail and lies used to convince the then still wife of the heir to the throne.

Now, Webb aspires to know more details, since he suspects that the company's directors could have had more knowledge than they have admitted, and seeks to know what happened when the scandal was uncovered in which it was discovered that Bashir had obtained the interview through deceptions and false documents until his departure from the BBC, officially, in 2021.

More information

The network of lies in Lady Di's most famous interview causes a scandal at the BBC

Newly released emails show Bashir thought his class and race played a role in the scandal, making him the scapegoat for the entire chain.

In an

email

sent on July 20, 2020, Bashir told BBC head of history Robert Seatter that the falsified documents did not play a role in obtaining the interview and that this would have caused less controversy if the interview had been conducted. a “dynastic” journalist like David Dimbleby (historical political journalist in the United Kingdom, as well as the son and brother of two well-known journalists).

“I'm sorry to hear that this alleged 'counterfeiting' story has resurfaced.

This had nothing to do with getting the interview, but it allowed professional jealousy, particularly within the company, to take the blame for alleged irregularities,” writes Bashir.

“At the time, it was also evident that there was some irritation that a second-generation immigrant, from working-class roots and not white, had the audacity to enter the royal palace and conduct an interview.

“It would have been much easier if one of the dynastic families (Dimbleby, for example) had done it!” he adds.

In those days after it became known that, among other things, Bashir had shown Charles Spencer, Diana's brother, falsified bank statements so that he could convince the Princess of Wales to carry out the interview, numerous emails were sent within the BBC. : “Since I returned to the UK in 2015 and rejoined the BBC in 2016, staff at the Prince of Wales's Office (to my surprise) have expressed gratitude for having refused all requests to discuss the interview,” it stated. Bashir.

Webb v BBC

“You may ask, what more can be said about Bashir's scandalous trap for Diana?” Webb himself wrote in an article published on December 9 in

The Mail On Sunday

.

“We know that the journalist only got his sensational 1995 interview with the princess by selling her a litany of lies and smears.

We also know, thanks to Lord Dyson's report in 2021, that BBC bosses at the time covered up much of what they knew about Bashir's hoax.

But I have been believing, for a long time, that there is a much bigger story here and that the company's attempts to silence this scandal did not end 28 years ago,” the journalist explained about his investigation.

Princess Diana in front of journalist Martin Bashir during the interview at Kensington Palace in 1995. Tim Graham (Corbis via Getty Images)

Now the journalist claims that the documents obtained (which, in total, are 3,288 emails) show that the BBC hid important internal evidence related to the investigations they carried out around the interview in

Panorama

.

In an email dated October 19, 2019, a lawyer writes to a former editor of the television show to explain that “the company is not publishing all documents from the internal investigations at this time.”

Following the release of the emails, Webb said: “The BBC clearly admits that documents were being withheld.

In my opinion, that is a cover-up.

And it is obvious, even at first glance, that this material is very relevant, although the BBC assured the judge that it was completely irrelevant.

The British public broadcaster, for its part, has guaranteed that: “Throughout this process we have taken our responsibility to comply with the Court's instructions very seriously.

“There is nothing to support allegations that the BBC acted in bad faith in 2020 and we maintain that this suggestion is simply incorrect.”

As a sign of this good faith, the BBC has recalled that, on previous occasions, “far from attempting to hide or cover up these matters”, it has taken measures such as, for example, commissioning Lord Dyson to carry out an independent investigation, which would end up being published in 2021. This report concluded that the public broadcaster “failed to meet its high standards of integrity and transparency.”

Webb does not think the same, stating that it “makes no sense” that the network has spent so much time and money trying to prevent these documents from being made public, and believes that they will show sufficient evidence that Bashir is not the only one responsible for the interview. .

Diana's brother, Charles Spencer, is of the same opinion, and has supported the investigation being carried out: "Those responsible for this at the BBC have hidden behind expensive lawyers at a time when the BBC, this great national and international institution, is making cuts.

And I think that's obscene,” he said on BBC Radio 4

's

Broadcasting House

program

last December.