Tim Davie on BAFTA, Mistakes and the BBC’s Future

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Rest Is Entertainment

Episode Title: Tim Davie on BAFTA, Mistakes and the BBC’s Future
Hosts: Richard Osman & Marina Hyde
Guest: Tim Davie, outgoing Director General of the BBC
Date: March 12, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode features an in-depth Q&A with Tim Davie, as he prepares to step down as Director General of the BBC after a turbulent but transformative tenure. Richard Osman and Marina Hyde field listener questions ranging from BBC scandals and the future of public broadcasting to impartiality, board bias, and lessons learned from recent controversies. The conversation gives a candid, informed look at the running of Britain’s most scrutinized media organization and offers rare personal insight from one of its most pivotal recent leaders.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Nature of the Director General Job

• Discussion: Tim Davie reflects on the difficulty, pride, and unique stresses of his role.
• "If everyone pays, everyone's a shareholder and everyone is entitled to a view. That's the joy and the stresses of the job." — Tim Davie [05:24]
• Davie describes the multidimensional demands of the DG – part CEO, editor, and politician, and highlights the operational challenge of serving every household.
• "You've got to get great people working for you in the right place, with the right culture, in a much more competitive world." — Tim Davie [08:19]

2. Surviving BBC Turbulence and Scandal

• Discussion: Marina summarizes crises under Davie – presenter scandals, impartiality rows, and contentious coverage.
• On the "poisoned chalice" nature of the role: "As you get grizzled and old, you realize that some of the best experiences in life are the things that are hardest." — Tim Davie [04:21]
• Davie admits luck, timing, and personal resilience play a role in surviving in public life.

3. The BBC’s Position in the Era of the Streamers

• Discussion: With the rise of Netflix, Disney+, and infinite choice, Davie articulates the BBC's competitive edge.
• The ‘three things’ the BBC does differently:
  1. "Pursue truth with no agenda."
  2. Commitment to UK content and IP, investing outside London.
  3. Bringing people together for shared debates and national moments.
  • "It's not about becoming commercial... it's about becoming distinctive." — Tim Davie [11:45]
• Davie notes the importance of digital innovation and iPlayer’s growth and ambition.
• Despite perceptions: "All the big things that people watch actually are often on broadcast... and the respect for the BBC is serious." — Tim Davie [12:19]

4. Existential Threats and Funding Models

• Discussion: Richard raises the possibility of a BBC-less future, and whether 'market failure' could define public service broadcasters.
• Davie distinguishes between the universal funding model (licence fee) and a residual, charity-style "market failure BBC."
• On the value of universality: "If we can deliver value for every household and really work at that, then everyone contributes fairly. And I think that is a model that's worth fighting for." — Tim Davie [17:41]
• On Netflix and tax: "We underestimate the need to look at those full economics and where the value is. That has been an issue over time." — Tim Davie [16:05]

5. Political Threats, Independence, and the Charter

• Discussion: Addressing threats from political figures and the dangers of the “cliff edge” charter renewal model.
• "The biggest thing that came through [from public feedback] was keep the BBC independent." — Tim Davie [21:34]
• Davie advocates for a model where BBC independence is default, only revoked by active, not passive, parliamentary decision.
  • "I think there should be a standard provision that just goes forever basically until Parliament... decides through recent debate, actively, not passively, to say, okay, we don't want the BBC anymore." — Tim Davie [22:05]
• The conversation addresses the tension between public accountability and political interference.

6. Weaponization of Mistakes & The Bafta/Glastonbury Scandals

• Discussion: The hosts dig into recent controversies, specifically BBC’s handling of offensive language at live events and how mishaps become weapons in the culture war.
• On Bafta: "They just did not hear it." — Tim Davie [33:13]
• Regarding being DG in a polarized age: "Weaponization is selectively taking one fact... but what you're not standing on is any effort to be proportionate." — Tim Davie [29:26]
• Davie describes a need for robust internal process, personal resilience, and refusing to dwell on every social media storm.

7. Impartiality, Bias, and Audience Trust

• Discussion: Listeners ask whether criticism from both sides means the BBC is balanced, how impartiality works in practice, and how political or class bias may play a role.
• "We're still at the races in terms of holding our ground and fighting the fight... We believe in facts. Old fashioned view, but we believe there are facts. So you chase the facts." — Tim Davie [39:27]
• On board bias: "I don't know anyone on the BBC board who hasn't got the BBC's best interest at heart. No one." — Tim Davie [43:10]
• Davie and Marina agree the BBC faces complaints from both left and right and must remain open-minded in investigating all of them.
• Socioeconomic diversity and class perspective are highlighted as deeper, still-insufficiently-addressed challenges:
  • "The biggest thing that we've had trouble shifting is socioeconomic diversity. It's not protected characteristics, it's socioeconomic." — Tim Davie [50:26]

8. The World Service and Soft Power

• Discussion: Listeners question the government’s failure to recognize the soft power value of the World Service.
• "It is shocking what's going on around the world. I mean, part of what I try to do sometimes is lift us out of this UK bubble. I've got, I think now 300 people in the BBC, large in the World Service, who cannot go home to their home country because they'd be arrested..." — Tim Davie [55:19]
• Davie calls government funding essential for the World Service and regrets the shift of its budget burden onto licence fee payers.

9. Personal Motivation, Salary, and Sacrifice

• Discussion: Why stay at the BBC when private sector pay is higher?
• "It's purpose. I care about it... I love this country kind of in a kind of weird, obsessional way. And then the second thing is, if you do something you care about... those memories are... they're priceless. What money are you gonna put on those?" — Tim Davie [58:33, 60:47]
• Davie reflects on the non-financial rewards of public service, referencing his own working-class background and his belief in the BBC’s mission.

10. Leadership, Accountability, and Mistakes

• Final Reflections: Richard and Marina probe Tim on mistakes, accountability, and cultural life.
• "The acid test of a human being is when you give them power, how they behave. And this industry has had a problem where people have had power... I'm really proud. I think that really has been flushed out. It's been tough work... I think it's a kinder, nicer place to work." — Tim Davie [65:40]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "If everyone pays, everyone's a shareholder and everyone is entitled to a view. That's the joy and the stresses of the job." — Tim Davie [05:24]
• "I don't think the BBC has got a right to exist. It has to absolutely deliver value to every household." — Tim Davie [14:28]
• "The BBC is incentivized to bring people together by its model." — Tim Davie [09:46]
• On public/political attacks: "You can simultaneously be continually under siege and getting on with your work." — Tim Davie [19:24]
• Regarding impartiality: "We believe in facts. Old fashioned view, but we believe there are facts." — Tim Davie [39:27]
• "The Director General job is a tightrope going across a very high canyon." — Tim Davie [28:33]
• On BBC board appointments: "Everyone is aligned that the BBC’s reputation needs to be absolutely underpinned by editorial independence." — Tim Davie [45:08]
• "They're good people trying to make the right calls... But you have to get the best people in place and absolutely ensure your processes are robust." — Tim Davie [33:25, 34:19]
• On what's left to change: "Socioeconomic diversity... that's the problem. So you say, what's the bias? Sometimes it's just the way you look at life." — Tim Davie [51:23–51:53]
• "You only have one life, so do something you care about." — Tim Davie [58:33]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Introduction of Guest / Davie's Reflections on Role: [02:21–08:19]
• Streaming, Competition, & iPlayer: [09:28–13:17]
• Existential Threats & Funding: [13:17–19:14]
• Political Interference & Board Independence: [19:14–23:45]
• Weaponization of BBC Mistakes: [31:40–36:42]
• Impartiality & Bias: [39:05–47:51]
• Regional & Class Diversity: [50:26–54:34]
• World Service & Soft Power: [54:34–58:12]
• Personal Motivation & Salary: [58:12–61:00]
• Mistakes, Power, and Leadership: [61:50–65:40]
• Proudest Moments as DG: [64:30–66:19]

---

Overall Tone & Takeaway

This episode features a candid, self-aware, and often philosophical Tim Davie facing tough listener questions about the BBC’s mistakes, pressures, and its purpose in a fragmenting media landscape. Amidst the complexity and continual criticism, Davie radiates a deep pride in the BBC and a belief in public service as a national good, with a clear-eyed view of the existential challenges it faces in the next era.

---

Recommended For

Anyone curious about how Britain’s media ecosystem works, the day-to-day realities of leading a national institution under fire, or the philosophy behind public broadcasting in a digital world. The conversation is accessible, witty, and rich with inside perspective.

Transcript

[Richard Osman]

This episode is brought to you by our friends at Octopus Energy.

[Marina Hyde]

Some people in the entertainment industry are successful, but a much, much smaller number are genuinely admired.

[Richard Osman]

I was trying to think in tv, who everyone likes.

[Marina Hyde]

I mean, Attenborough, in movies, Julia, Meryl, these, you, you will not hear a bad word said about any of those people. There are actually very few that no one is rude about behind their back, but those two are certainly two of them.

[Richard Osman]

Can I tell you about a company that no one is rude about behind their back and that people admire? Would it shock you to learn it is our friends at Octopus Energy? Octopus Energy has ended up being named Britain's Most admired company. 2025.

[Marina Hyde]

That's nice.

[Richard Osman]

That's really nice, isn't it?

[Marina Hyde]

I'm sure companies are like Hollywood, just absolutely vicious behind each other's backs. But to be, to actually be elected, most of my.

[Richard Osman]

All the other companies, like there's, you know, all the other companies just sitting around going, shall I tell you who I met the other day? Octopus Energy. Actually, you know what, Lovely bunch. Really, really lovely bunch. All of them the most admired company in the UK 2025. Which is why we're very, very happy that they are our sponsors.

[Tim Davie]

I'm not an astronaut. I don't need an astronaut.

[Richard Osman]

Audiences have spoken.

[Tim Davie]

Project Hail Mary is an awe inspiring masterpiece. So I met an alien. If you've fallen out of love with

[Richard Osman]

going to the movies, this one will bring you back.

[Tim Davie]

Ryan Gosling, first must see movie of 2026. Project Hail Mary, rated PG13, may be inappropriate for children under 13 only. Theaters March 20th.

[Marina Hyde]

This podcast is brought to you by Carvana. Car shopping shouldn't feel like preparing for a marathon of paperwork. That's why Carvana makes buying and financing your car easy. From start to finish. Search thousands of vehicles with great prices, all online, all on your time. And when you're ready, your new car shows up right at your door. It doesn't get better than that. Buy your car the easy way on delivery fees may apply. Hello and welcome to this episode of the Rest Is Entertainment Questions and answers edition. I'm Marina Hyde.

[Richard Osman]

And I'm Richard Osman. Hello, Marina.

[Marina Hyde]

Hello, Richard.

[Richard Osman]

We're in the grown up studio again.

[Marina Hyde]

We are because we have with us. Thank you so much. A grown up Tim Davy, outgoing Director general of the BBC. Tim, thanks so much for coming on the show.

[Tim Davie]

A real pleasure. It's nice to be in the grown up studio with the grown ups. It's lovely.

[Richard Osman]

And we asked our listeners to send in questions and genuinely we got some Great ones.

[Marina Hyde]

Tim has been in the job at the BBC since 2020, presiding over an almost as usual now turbulent period in the BBC. But there are so many amazing positives. It is the biggest, most recognized and most trusted public service media organization in the world. On the other side there have been the scandals involving senior presenters, Hugh Edwards, Greg Wallace, Gary Lineker with editing and impartiality, Bob Villan at Glastonbury, the Gaza documentary, the Trump documentary edit, and most recently the BAFTAs. And next year the Royal Charter is up for renewal. This is the BBC sort of license to exist and it's in a media market that I think streaming has changed completely, unrecognisably from even a few years ago.

[Richard Osman]

Questions on all of those things from

[Marina Hyde]

our and for full disclosure, I have to say that my husband works at the BBC. They're not on the editorial site.

[Richard Osman]

And for full disclosure, I say I no longer work at the BBC so I can say whatever I want.

[Marina Hyde]

Yes, very good.

[Tim Davie]

That's a regretted loss.

[Richard Osman]

Richard. Just for the record, almost all the questions are about House of Games.

[Tim Davie]

Indeed.

[Marina Hyde]

Just so you know, should we start with Nia Pritchard's question? She says the BBC's former director of Communications, John Shield, called the Director General job a poisoned chalice. Tim, do you agree?

[Tim Davie]

I've said it's not a job for the faint hearted and there are days when you look in the mirror and go, what am I doing? But overall I would recommend it to anyone. I think that if you get one life, do something you care about and I couldn't be prouder of doing the job as Director General Number 17. I think look in life, I think as you get grizzled and old, you realize that some of the best experiences in life are the things that are hardest.

[Marina Hyde]

Yeah.

[Tim Davie]

And this is a hard old gig. But one thing I feel more now than ever I've been at BBC 20 odd years is I care about it more than ever. I think it's more important than ever. And I think that there's something about doing something that you really believe in. And when I look to my future, for instance, I think I just couldn't do something I don't care about. So do I feel incredibly privileged to have done the job? Yes. Do I think it's an impossible job? No. Do I think it's a poison chalice? There are days. But overall I think it's a joy.

[Richard Osman]

When you said there do I think it's an impossible job? You paused before you said no. Almost as if you're about to say, yes, it is definitively a more difficult job than running any other media organization because it's publicly funded and because there are people on all sides who want to take a view on it. So, given that you could run any other big media organization, what is it about the BBC that makes it harder? What are the things that happen in the morning when you wake up that wouldn't happen if you are running, say, the Daily Mail?

[Tim Davie]

Well, it goes to the very roots of the funding and the purpose, which is if everyone pays, everyone's a shareholder and everyone is entitled to a view. That's the joy and the stresses of the job. The very essence of it is when I kind of struggle home on a Friday night, after a full week, I go to the pub in my village and there'll be 15 people who want to talk about the structure of Newsnight or what happened to Richard Osman.

[Marina Hyde]

I love your downtime.

[Tim Davie]

And, you know, it's that passion, it's that care. I mean, I was known in my village as BBC Tim way before Director General. And if you look to the people up my lane, with the greatest respect to them, they are not known as, you know, PwC. John? Yeah, there is something about the BBC, and that's the joy of public media. It is a communal societal choice to do something that brings us together. That's it. And it brings with it quite a lot of stresses and strains, as I said, but some joy. I think I stumbled up. I stumbled over the double negative. Not really in any doubt. I don't think it's an impossible job. I just think it's a very hard one.

[Marina Hyde]

What is. What is the job? It's like a bit politician, it's a bit CEO, it's a bit editor. Do you have any peer?

[Tim Davie]

I rail against people who describe things as unique, but in some ways this is quite different. And I think that it is multidimensional in the way you've talked about it. I think people clearly see the public facing the dealing with the issues. The Director General looking a bit beleaguered at some points, or doing a speech, actually. I think it's underestimated the operational excellence needed. You know, we've got 23,000 people, we've got a 2 billion pound commercial arm. The funding plans and the choices you make in terms of how you deploy your resources are everything. I think what's really different about this, the BBC is, sorry for the pompous language, but multivariable in that if you're running a commercial operation, if something doesn't make money, you close it, or you can't see a way to making money. In science, it's easy. He says there are difficulties, but there's a clarity to that. The difficulty of the Director General's job, and I think it is a kind of wonderful torture, is cross referencing the Gaelic service one day or the orchestral sector against another series of traitors, and actually choosing your resources because you've got to deliver the value to every household, but you've got to deliver on your purposes. So you have this kind of axis where you've got public good and then return on investment for the license fee. And I think that is the essence of the job of Director General. Final thing is you've got to get great people working for you in the right place, with the right culture, in a much more competitive world. So apart from that, there's nothing going on. But that is essentially the essence of the job.

[Marina Hyde]

Is it also slightly, though, that feeling of dead men's shoes you must have when you took over in 2020, is there a bit where you look back at the previous 16 and think, yeah, that won't be me, that won't be me. These things won't go wrong for me. And then life happens.

[Tim Davie]

Well, I think that you don't do these jobs unless you're kind of born with a little bit of optimism, maybe a smidgen of ego in there as well, in terms of just thinking I can do. If you don't think you can do it and you're not up for it, there's no point stepping into these jobs. I mean, I have to say, I think, versus some of the political world where you're saying, I think I'm on my 17th Secretary of State in 21 years. So Director Generals are quite slow moving in that regard. Now, public life is a choice. There are moments where you could just get burnt up in something very quickly or you get the joy of doing something. For a number of years, I've been the BBC, you know, I've been acting director general for six months, dealing with something in 2012. You know, I'm blessed to have done that time. And I think you have to be a bit lucky in these jobs as well. But also you make a bit of your own luck.

[Richard Osman]

Loads of questions about streaming and, you know, the future of television, where it's going, where the BBC sits in that infrastructure. I think the best way of putting it is Michelle o' Neill who asks this. She says, with global streamers dominating attention, what is the BBC's competitive advantage? Now and do you think they underestimate the BBC?

[Tim Davie]

Firstly, I think it is a very well put question because you can't do everything and you have to decide what your point of difference is. And I think we've decided and we've said there's three things we do and it goes to very essence of our model, our funding, our intent. It has to go to the real core of what we are. And those three things are pursue truth with no agenda. Now we'll talk about, we're not perfect in that, but by goodness we wrestle with it every day. And that is different to running a commercial organization where you're trying to drive subscription. And I'm a lot less grumpy about some of our commercial competitors. I think Netflix and Disney are great companies, they just do something different. The second thing we do is I think we've got a real commitment to UK content and UK IP and that's in the heart of our funding and how we work. So, you know, under my watch I pushed hundreds of millions of pounds outside the M25 so that there's that network effect. And I think that's different. You know, if you were running a commercial organization, you may say we'll just have one center, make it highly commercially efficient. That's not what we do. And the last thing we do that's different. We are here to bring people together. I mean, I really believe in civilized debate or sports events where we come together. You know, one of the great things about the UK is by and large we can have civilized discussion. By and large, we are a community that wants to come together to discuss things in a civilized way. And the BBC is incentivized to do that by its model. So the question is well put. What we're trying to do at the BBC is actually deploy as much as our resources into things that are competitively different. And that's not about becoming commercial to the question, it's about becoming distinctive. Last thing is we need to innovate like crazy in digital. And you've seen me do that. I mean, we now have a world class product development team. You may have seen we've just announced we're merging all of that with our product engineering teams, our technology teams who are second to none and forming a whole new group called MediaTek.

[Marina Hyde]

Yes.

[Tim Davie]

Which I believe will be a national asset.

[Marina Hyde]

I think Michelle's question is also interesting to some extent because there is a perception amongst so many people, particularly younger people whatever, that oh, the streamers dominate everything. It's really interesting. I was Hearing an interview with Ted Sarandos a couple of weeks ago, while they were still. Netflix was still bidding for Warners and he was saying, my God, in the uk, you know, we can't get into the top. We've had one show in the top 50 years, top programs ever, which is adolescents. And it's that sense that actually all the big things that people watch actually are often on broadcast. Yeah, Broadcast.

[Tim Davie]

All the BBC. I mean, I think, you know, we do kind of pessimism for a living in the uk, don't we? And we're not very good at American. Yeehaw. And I kind of like that in a way. But let's have a little, little moment to say, you know, the iPlay is absolutely there as a big platform with the content we've got is strong. The respect for the BBC is serious. Yeah, I mean, I mean, honestly, I think we should be incredibly proud as the uk. This is unique globally. That's the thing I would say is you look around the world, where is a local player fighting it out with the likes of these American behemoths? And they're getting bigger as we speak and they're worried about their own scale with 17 billion of content investment. But here we are in the UK, we've got incredible brand, we're fighting a good fight. And iplayer was in many months over the last couple of years outgrowing all of the competition and is in the game. Not bad.

[Richard Osman]

But there is, you know, there's a flip side to Michelle's question here, which is there is a world in which in 10 years time, the huge amount of money that comes into content through the streamers means the BBC doesn't exist. That's definitively a possibility. And one of your jobs is to be a shepherd to try and make sure it does exist.

[Tim Davie]

Without doubt.

[Richard Osman]

10 years time, what are the biggest challenges you see in the next 10 years with the whole infrastructure of how television is changing, how content is changing?

[Tim Davie]

Your question is absolutely on the money. I think sometimes, you know, the BBC's Thought It's in jeopardy historically, and being contentious about it, you're not really in jeopardy. I mean, the DG may resign or something big might happen, but if you've got two out of four TV channels, you have to be doing a pretty poor job not to get an audience. And I think what I've tried to do in my tenure is say that is a. Let's not worry too much about that, let's really worry about the value. And your point, Richard, which is this is now infinite choice. I mean, I've got probably more computing power in my car than the whole of Croydon had when I was growing up. And some.

[Richard Osman]

Yeah, it's a good analogy.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah. So it's a good benchmark.

[Richard Osman]

I mean, listen, bracket citation needed.

[Tim Davie]

But so I think in that environment, you then say, it goes through the heart of the question again, what are you doing differently now? To your point, it is existential. I don't think the BBC has got a right to exist in that way. It has to absolutely deliver value to every household. The exam question for me is not whether the BBC exists actually in the next phase. It is whether it is a market failure. Forgive the jargon, but a market failure BBC, almost a charity project on the side, funded by, you know, general taxation or whatever it is, where people don't feel participative as opposed to a funding model. And currently 94% of Brits are British using this every month. 83%, I think the week I saw last. That's pretty incredible. And what it allows you to do is make the case for a universal funding mechanic where everyone feels connected and looking for value. That's different to a market failure model. I rail against those people who say it can be just news. That's not what we're trying to build here.

[Marina Hyde]

Because all of what you're talking about, all these successes actually do get put back into Britain. And I find it quite interesting, for instance, that Netflix, I don't know, I think they paid something like 0.7 of 1% tax in the UK last year because they booked the profits elsewhere. And it all were a sort of extraction colony for them, no offense. They make lots of great things, but they use lots of our talent and they. And then the profits go back to the motherland. Is that something that you find quite frozen? I find that you don't hear politicians talking about that at all when they constantly big up Netflix.

[Tim Davie]

I'd say a couple of things. One is, I'm going to say I think it's rather pompously an and not an awe. So I absolutely think it's great that Netflix is coming. The productions are here, the storytelling is here. But the thing I would agree with you on is I think the uk, we need to really spend time looking at what I call the whole economics more. How much IP do we own? There's a radical difference. For someone like Strictly, which is owned by the British public, we've generated a business that can make lots of profit, but that profit is not lying in my pocket being recycled into it's not to bonuses or an investment company or a US entity. It is literally being used to fund the news. All the things we do as the BBC. I think sometimes I would say we underestimate the need to look at those full economics and where the value is. And that has been an issue over time. So sometimes you're celebrating things which are radically different, just to echo what you're saying in terms of how much money they're bringing back to UK plc. The good news, by the way, is the creative industry. 2 million people plus employed, good. Generally better salaries than average. Very good for people with different skills, where they've got creative skill, all those things. There's plenty of growth to be had. We just need to make sure we capture going forward the right share of the economics and the BBC is part of that.

[Richard Osman]

Okay, talking of the economics, here's a question from Berol Su Onair, who says if the BBC were being founded today in a world dominated by Netflix, YouTube and TikTok, do you think the license fee model would still be the best way to fund it or would you design something fundamentally different?

[Tim Davie]

I think I've never felt more the need for the BBC. I really, really feel we've got a choice around what kind of society we build. My thought is that we are facing a crisis in terms of what I call a participative society. It just feels, you know, you have to travel far, far from, you know, the centre of London, which is a little different and it feels a long way from some of the institutions and we see it. So we do need to decide. I don't want to be of a generation where I'm looking back going, well, the best days are behind us. I want to intervene. So I think the BBC is an enlightened intervention for the future, not for the past. I think being trapped by the past is a problem. So the first thing is, I'll say, I think absolutely, the BBC has got a role to play as a universal provider. And that's the second part, which is we said, look, the specific mechanic and this is what the charter will get into. And I don't think we should jump the gun on this. We're at consultation phase, but we have set out a very clear preference which is, and I would do this to the point about restarting where we're at. I think there is a model which says, look, if we can deliver value for every household and really work at that, then everyone contributes fairly. And I think that is a model that's worth fighting for. I Don't see it as something potentially trapped in the past. I actually think it could be something exciting for the future, quite enlightened. You don't have to go exactly where the market is going currently, you have to make markets. And I think we can do that.

[Marina Hyde]

Because you said earlier that you didn't feel that the BBC, that it's a kind of slight fallacy to imagine that the BBC is always under siege, although explicitly some political parties.

[Tim Davie]

Did I say that? I can't remember saying that. I think you can simultaneously be continually under siege and getting on with your work. That's the point.

[Marina Hyde]

Perhaps the most explicit threats to the future of the BBC have been made to pluck an example by someone like Nigel Farage and reform. How do you sort of protect the BBC from government control or even malice and. And still have it accountable to the public?

[Tim Davie]

I think there's two. Let's just unpick that a bit because there's big things in there. The first is, I think in terms of some people's vision of the BBC, as I said earlier, I. I believe that you've got a choice. It's not about killing the BBC. There's not many people who don't want the World Service or, for all their angst, would keep the news room going. The question is, do you have a intervention of scale that does entertainment, all the other things? And I believe that scale is really effective venture capital, both economically and socially for the UK and as it is today, we can make that fight. And I absolutely think that's right for a mainstream intervention, because I don't see it as restricting commercial markets, I see it as stimulating. Look at what we've done, the independent production sector, I think that doesn't work for me. So when we talk about people's view of the BBC, I think often we fight the wrong battles. We finger point and say, don't, you know, we do good work? Yes, that's not the exam question. The exam question is what kind of scale and what kind of operation, how you fund it. When it comes to political interference, I'm pretty straightforward. I think we absolutely need accountability of the public. There are mechanics to do that, I think. You know, I can't remember how many select committees I've done, but I may not miss them. But, you know, I think public accountability is essential and through Parliament and through politicians, that's appropriate when it comes to editorial interference or anything like that. And I think, you know, we need to look at and review how board members are appointed, all of that. Look, when I emailed, he says 40 million people and we got nearly 900,000 people coming back to us with the gift of feedback. And I thank everyone for that. The biggest thing that came through was keep the BBC independent. I mean there's a clear message and

[Marina Hyde]

look, we want is the idea of being renewed every, you know, and having to argue for your existence every however many years. When the bank of England has been given a form of independence. Is there a way of being the BBC, being given that independence but still being able to be accountable?

[Tim Davie]

Well, we've made it very clear in our green paper response that we think this idea of a cliff edge charter is wrong. Which is this idea where it's a little bit random, isn't it?

[Richard Osman]

Where and a cliff edge charter would be every 10 years you've got to go back and renew.

[Tim Davie]

Well, the point is not whether the BBC exists or not, it's how that happens. And the idea, a passive action to not renew just allows it to just drift off to me just doesn't make sense. So this often gets read, I think is the BBC not wanting accountability. Nothing could be further than the truth. We need accountability. But I do think the idea of a basic level of charter, I don't know, there might be an example out there, but of a royal charter that has a time length like this. I think there should be a standard provision that just goes forever basically until Parliament or whatever the mechanic is decides through recent debate, actively, actively, not passively to say, okay, we don't want the BBC anymore, but the idea can just roll off and it's just happens to be the government du jour. To me, I don't think it's right.

[Richard Osman]

I genuinely agree with your economic case for the BBC and I'm speaking to someone who doesn't work there anymore, but who ran a very, very big independent production company for a long time. And I see that the ecosystem in Britain, because we sold to pretty much every country in the world, is probably the best ecosystem there is. And I think that's because of the BBC. And so I think it raises all ships. So I think the economic argument is an easy one to make and most people would agree with it. However, there is an ideological argument which is harder to make and there are ideological opponents who are harder to sate. And that feels like anyone who wants to follow the economic path, I think would accept there is an argument for funding a BBC. However, I think that the ideological argument is going to be the one that's

[Tim Davie]

arguing with because the word ideological in that could mean A couple of things, Richie. So give me a bit more.

[Richard Osman]

Okay, you're saying enlightened intervention into our, into a market. It. Okay, we've got two words, intervention, which some people are against in and of itself, and enlightened, which of course is a value judgment. And other people have completely different politics. And there are definitely people out there. You must know every morning when you wake up the people who in 10 years time don't want the BBC to exist, they're out there and hard to make that economic argument to them.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah. But I do think it rests on your view of do you want an economy? I mean I'm a. This is not a speech against markets. But I do think the idea of enlightened intervention is proven actually to stimulate markets. And I think there are without doubts if we're at the economic end of this question which says there are people that just say, look, there's perfectly good functioning markets around the world without public service intervention. For what it's worth, we see public service broadcasters around the world under. And if I'm beleaguered of a morning, have a look around the world. I mean, honestly, it's really worrying. They're being stripped. Yeah. And they are market failure operations. Some of them, Many of them are very good, very good people, but they are trapped within their brief. Now to your point, I think that debate is really the essence of what you want from a public service broadcaster. Do you want a market failure? I've said this a little bit. Do you want to fail or do you want the market making? Now to your point, Richard, I think that still when you really get people to the facts of economic growth, it looks like now you don't have to be a huge. I mean I don't think this is cartoon left and right. I think there's no one in the world that doesn't think a participative economy doesn't have intervention. It has intervention on tax policy, it has intervention of healthcare. There's no one way model where you just let it go to the market or you state control everything. But enlightened intervention is to me something that is accretive to the economy and to your point, helps grow a bigger commercial side to our business. It is a UK national asset and it's not a coincidence that we've had this hybrid system. It's not a coincidence. Now I think to your point, there are some, there are some who look at other markets and just feel uncomfortable about any kind of government intervention in this way or public intervention. They also may have Their own politics to add to that.

[Richard Osman]

But that's what I'm really getting at, Tim, as you know.

[Tim Davie]

Well, I thought you might be.

[Richard Osman]

I was trying to say it in the politest way I possibly could.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah, I tend to pull them apart a little bit and I think it really is. If you really talk to people about the economics of it and what the BBC delivers, it becomes a more recent debate. I think some of the.

[Marina Hyde]

Also if you talk about the least polarized news market and you look at America, which is just as an example, which is often held up as like, why can't we move more like that. They have a hyper polarized news market where really no one trusts anyone much more than about 20% wherever you are, whether you're on the left, the right and you've got your chosen sources, whereas we have something much bigger in the middle purely because of the BBC.

[Tim Davie]

We do. But also, look, I don't rail against some of the other services that want to, you know, have a, a particular view on life or a lens. We should let you know within, within our codes and all that we do in our little standards and we all of that needs management. But let the competition roar. The questions I got earlier on the money, which is what's different about the BBC? The BBC is trying to be all of your media consumption, maybe with 30%, but that 30% is curiously valuable. You know, if you're a young parent and you want to put your precious child in front of some good content, CBeebies is there for you. If you want to watch decent drama UK based, there's some other people who do some good stuff. There's a few titles I would have liked myself over the last, you know, 24 months. But the BBC is doing it at its heart and that's just different. I think it is not a zero sum game. And to a point it's always been like that. You know, people have always read a paper with an opinion and then gone and watched the BBC. They may watch the news here then I think there are some worrying societal trends we need to be a bit paranoid about, which is people trusting more people of their own view. So I think there's work to be done to say, okay, that's one way of doing it. But this is. And we need to be more transparent as the BBC in terms of showing on air, how we even develop our editorial.

[Richard Osman]

But it sounds like there's a tightrope to walk you. I would say this is just my opinion have walked it very, very successfully. But your successor is going to have to walk that same tightrope and for quite some time.

[Tim Davie]

Without doubt, when you sign up for the job, the image of a tightrope going across a very high canyon is reasonably appropriate. Richard. Yeah, yeah. I mean, there's some jo to be had. But look, we're in an age where weaponization is rife. And when I say weaponization, someone said to me, well, it's not weaponization, it's simply pointing out the fact that you didn't get that right or you pulled that documentary. And that is true, we made mistakes, sometimes serious mistakes, which we regret. But weaponization is selectively taking one fact. It may be a fact, so you're standing on a fact, but what you're not standing on on is any effort to be proportionate. You're not saying, look, a thousand stories run, were running and one didn't get it right. Or overall, this is where there's no balance date. It's literally just selecting a fact to make a case.

[Richard Osman]

Well, I tell you what that is. Right, we've got a question about that very specifically, which we will do after some adverts. I know you're not used to adverts, Tim, but listen, they are absolute lifeblood.

[Tim Davie]

So after the adverts, go and get this thing paid for.

[Richard Osman]

Yeah, exactly right, we will talk about that very weaponization. This episode is brought to you by Monzo. Marina, what's your attitude to things like stocks, shares, investing, all of that?

[Marina Hyde]

I think most people feel daunted and like it's not for them.

[Richard Osman]

I agree. It always feels slightly terrifying, like something that other people do, people with their kind of pinstripe suits and braces.

[Marina Hyde]

Well, that's where Monzo comes in. Monzo offers two types of isa, which is simply tax efficient accounts. A Cash ISA is for saving where money earns interest, and a stocks and Shares ISA is for investing with the aim of long term growth.

[Richard Osman]

And Monzo Stocks and Shares ISA is designed to feel simple with expert managed funds and no unnecessary jargon. You can start with a small amount and build it up gradually with a monthly deposit, roundups from your daily spending or even investing interest you've earned.

[Marina Hyde]

It means investing isn't just for the select few.

[Richard Osman]

Absolutely not. Search Monzo Online. Monzo Current account required. You could get back less than you invest. Tax depends on your circumstances and could change in the future. UK residents 18 plus T's and C's apply

[Tim Davie]

Monster Energy. Everybody knows White Monster Zero Ultra. That's the OG. It kicked off this whole zero sugar energy drink thing. But Ultra is a whole lineup now. You've got Strawberry Dreams, Blue Hawaiian Sunrise and Vice Guava. And they all bring the monster energy punch.

[Richard Osman]

So if you've been living in the

[Tim Davie]

white can branch out. Ultra's got a flavor for every vibe and every single one is zero Sugar Tap the banner to learn more.

[Marina Hyde]

Spring is here and there's a whole new way to chai at Starbucks that's

[Richard Osman]

made perfect for you.

[Marina Hyde]

Choose your sweetness, dial it up or keep things light. Add a touch of pistachio, a hint

[Tim Davie]

of strawberry or vanilla, or make it

[Marina Hyde]

a spring classic with lavender.

[Tim Davie]

Because this season there's endless ways to chai at Starbucks.

[Richard Osman]

Welcome back, everyone. We are joined by Tim Davy. The outgoing Director General of the BBC is answering all of your questions. We've speaking just before the adverts about when BBC gets things wrong and the weaponization of that. And we have a question on exactly that. Marina.

[Marina Hyde]

Well, let's get into it. Chris says, why do you think the BBC failed to learn any lessons from Glastonbury when broadcasting the baftas?

[Richard Osman]

He's gone. Done two in one there.

[Marina Hyde]

He's done, yeah,

[Tim Davie]

they're different situations. They're obviously live events, but they're different situations. So I think in Glastonbury it was clear the team made a bad mistake not to pull the broadcast rather than doing the warning. And there are learnings around that in terms of making sure with high risk live music acts. I say with some heavy heart, actually, because I think we're in a point where you've just got to be safe. But that was completely unacceptable and I found it really, really quite upsetting. I think a lot of the BBC staff are very upset by it because, you know, it didn't stand for what we stand for and I think it, you know, it was a bad error. Now, when it comes to bafta, scroll forward. We're still in the midst of doing a little bit more work in terms of talking to people and making sure we're across every single detail. But it is very clear they didn't hear that instance and they heard another instance of the same word and they took it straight out. So it wasn't unlike Glastonbury where there was an interpretive question. And as always, these things are the devil is in the detail. They just did not hear it.

[Richard Osman]

Well, I mean, listen, just from a production point of view, I'll say two things. It boggles the mind. The communication was so bad that it wasn't heard. But equally, that doesn't feel like a job for the Director General.

[Tim Davie]

Well, I think there's two points you're making there. One is we deeply regret it was aired. I mean, honestly, the hurt it's caused people personally, I mean, this is not, not what we stand for. And when I, when I see something, you know, this is the BBC's intent or the. I mean, honestly, people are very upset that it got aired. And they, these are good people who are trying to make. I'm not, I'm not excusing them, by the way, in that way, but they're good people trying to make the right calls. They removed the word, then it came, you know, and, and they didn't hear it. Now, to your point, Richard, I think there's some things to be learned there and the impact is profound on individuals. And I absolutely think that no one across the BBC feels anything but. Reg, is there a part of you,

[Marina Hyde]

Tim, that thinks, I've got a few weeks left if I have to edit every single program myself until I can get out and have a leaving do, I'm going to get down there and do it?

[Tim Davie]

Yeah. I think that the point, and this is Richard's second point, which is the Director General is sitting across so much editorial simply as I sit here today. We've got numerous radio stations across the world, so you just have to get the best people in place and absolutely ensure your, your processes are robust. Sometimes in the last few years, we've had moments where that hasn't worked and we've had to have learnings, we've moved people, we've done things. But what I would say is I'm very sensitive to it because I think we are deeply sorry when that happens. But I also would look across the sweep of the BBC in a highly weaponized world where proportion is something very high. I'm not excusing this, but proportionality is sometimes a little hard to find, that we calmly reflect on that and look at the entirety of the BBC output as a simultaneous fact, not one that negates the error. But I think that is reasonable. The Director General's job is a couple of things, I think in this, aside from just picking up the phone and going, what happened? What on earth happened? That's polite language. I think there's two. One is, have you got the right people in every place in the organization, in the group grip? And that is a real challenge. The second is you are often, and I'm not looking for sympathy, but the Director General job is, okay, we have an issue with this documentary. Do we pull it or not? Yeah, it's a absolutely raw editorial choice one way or the other. And I think what you need is someone in the role who can make those choices. Often you're doing that once you're in a situation you wouldn't want to be in and you are cleaning up in the way that is appropriate. You're also trying to be proportionate. I mean, many people think the BBC Director General job is literally just sitting in an office managing crisis. That's not how it is at all. No, honestly, people think, you know, you're kind of sitting with a towel over your head for days on end. It's actually just getting the right people. It can actually be quite time efficient. What you've got to decide is not your comms line or what you're going to say in that regard, it's what is the right thing to do. That's what I've tried to do. And what do you think? And try and act clearly and appropriately and that's all you can do. And that's what I'd say to my successor. Just act, you know, act sensibly in that.

[Richard Osman]

In a world. And we touched on it just before the adverts came, where, as you say, there is a weaponization of dissent against the BBC must make those decisions, which as you say, are often very binary, almost impossible.

[Tim Davie]

It makes it much harder. It makes them much harder in a world that's so polarized that everyone is, you know, talking about. About their truth or their. It does make it harder and it dials it up. The whole thing gets quite lively and. And you have to. In my job, I think you have to actually look after yourself a bit. I'm not. I mean, in terms of just not reading everything or. I mean, I don't spend my time on social media. I think I'd collapse.

[Richard Osman]

Yeah. I think it's probably for the best.

[Tim Davie]

Thank you for that. Yeah, but. But you can't do that. I think we can do the survival technique is to a couple of things. One, don't be too defensive. If you've done something wrong, just. I'd go for human. We deeply regret it. We made a mistake. I think we've tried to do that more and just be honest about these things.

[Marina Hyde]

The BBC is too apologetic and that they're in this permanent crouch maybe because of the funding model and the sort of sense that they're always saying sorry and a lot of people think that again, you can't win.

[Tim Davie]

The truth is, as ever, a little bit, yes and no. I mean, I think we're pretty robust On a lot of what we do. Most of our coverage, by the way, is loosely positive. It's about what's coming up on Traitors. Yeah, it is. The latest dramas we're deploying. I mean, honestly, when I look at what's going around the world, I mean, part of keeping my sanity is just to sit on the train in the morning and listen to what people are talking about. Yeah. And they might be talking about, oh, did you see Waiting for the Out. Nice little drama, by the way.

[Marina Hyde]

Very good.

[Tim Davie]

Thank you. So that is important to keep perspective while dealing with these things. Seriously. I think the truth of it is, and I see I have some sympathy for politicians of all flavor here because this is not a news cycle that's like a day long.

[Richard Osman]

It's not fun.

[Tim Davie]

It's half an hour. Yeah. I mean, through that churn, how on earth do you plan long term to do things that really make a difference? And again, I think people are pretty surprised when they come to BBC. We're not running around, but headless chickens at all. We've moved on a little bit since W1A in terms of the way we operate.

[Marina Hyde]

Fantastic BBC show. Show.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah. In the great show. But we've moved on. We. We're pretty. Well. I think it's a pretty good team.

[Marina Hyde]

Can I talk to you a bit about impartiality? Because we had a lot of people talk about impartiality and obviously point out that the BBC gets criticized from both sides. Does that mean that it's getting it right? How would you personally define impartiality? And, you know, have. Has it changed a lot during your tenure as Director General?

[Tim Davie]

I think it's been the big challenge. Challenge.

[Marina Hyde]

Yeah.

[Tim Davie]

I think negotiating a world in which people often see this. I mean, particularly Gaza, you see people. People see the same piece of content and absolutely believe. And I don't say it was angst, by the way, or anger. I might have some angst, but not anger. I kind of. I say it, you know, with some understanding. But people see the same piece of footage and will absolutely be convinced that. That it indicates. Because they're looking for cues there. Meanwhile, add in the fact that we make mistakes now and again, so that can be okay. That's pure evidence. What. What I would say is, overall, we. I'm very proud, actually, that we're still at the races in terms of holding our ground and fighting the fight. If you. Yeah, I honestly, I mean, people don't believe me internationally when I say I've got no idea how Chris Mason votes I've got no idea. Henry Zephyrman. Yeah, These people are seriously good and you can see their intent. They're exploring on our behalf. They're inquisitive. And you ask me what impartiality needs to be. It is that it's a fair assessment of where the situation lies, both in terms of facts. So we believe in facts. Old fashioned view, but we believe there are facts. So you chase the facts. You're also very transparent about where the facts are. Facts are not, are not available. And we also believe in sensible and proportionate interpretation. That is due impartiality. It's not say, one person here, one person there. We've got the balance. I think that's cheap. Okay. Or lazy to a point.

[Richard Osman]

I think, although that's often been the case in the BBC in current affairs

[Tim Davie]

and things like that, it's also been the facts in UK politics. I mean, you're covering a vast swathes of population 10 years ago by doing the two main parties. We're now in a completely different landscape. That actually puts some pressures on you if you look at the elections coming up and add the nations in there as well, or you've got complexities around, less people locked into a political party, more issues based, you know, all this final point, just to pick up on your question about number of complaints, a relevant factor, but certainly I would not allow a BBC executive off the hook by going, We've got 5,000 here, we got 5,000 there. Oh, cliche. But it's the nature of the complaint, it's the depth of the complaint is, has it got merit? I think what can happen is these situations can, because they're so intense, can provoke unnecessary defensiveness and I've really tried on my watch to be, you know, provoke open mindedness. Well, maybe they've got a point. So instead of kind of, this is clearly coming from that point of view. Just keep an open mind and do your best. And that's all human beings can do. I think we're doing okay, but it's been really tough and we've made a few mistakes that have allowed the whole thing to be often, you know, really, really difficult over periods.

[Marina Hyde]

But I should say one thing we're not. Okay, we're not able to talk about today is the ongoing case with Trump.

[Tim Davie]

Indeed.

[Marina Hyde]

Right.

[Richard Osman]

He's great. We don't have to talk about it.

[Marina Hyde]

I know he's available on demand in so many other formats. If you want your Trump fixed.

[Tim Davie]

Well, we're fighting the case, we're defending it aggressively and that's about as much as I can say.

[Richard Osman]

But talking about politics and talking about elephants in rooms, David Benedict asked a question which we had in so many different forms. And you're the person best placed to answer this. I think. When you announced you were leaving the BBC, Lisa Nandi highlighted she was concerned about political appointments to the board of the BBC. Do you think that those on the BBC board have the BBC's best interests at heart? And you know what the question is there, which is, is there a right wing bias on the BBC board?

[Tim Davie]

I don't know anyone on the BBC board who hasn't got the BBC's best interest at heart. No one. I think if you go down, by the way, to the newsroom floor, you would be reassured. Weirdly, despite all the noise, if you meet John Neal, Eddie's rule of the 6 and the 10 and watch that meeting, they are not being. I mean, honestly, the level of interference. I mean, honestly, if you. Is not something I worry about.

[Richard Osman]

You understand why the question is asked, though, because there is a narrative that gained so much traction, which is Robbie Gibb is on the board. The BBC is skewing. Right. There's a right wing plot to oust you and Deborah Turnis. I ask that question only because you're aware of that narrative and you're the best person to ask.

[Tim Davie]

I'm very aware of it. What I'm saying is that decision I made was largely, again, there's no cryptic stuff here. I wrote, wrote. When I left, there were three things and they were the facts. One is I, you know, after five and, five and a half years, I thought that's, that's about the right tenure for me. The second was I actually thought there was a, there was a gap to Charter and it's worked. I say it's worked, let's see what happens. But, you know, we've responded to the Green Paper. I think it's quite, it works to have someone new come in and then take into. And I think we're in a good state as the BBC. And lastly, the Trump situation was difficult put that together. That's why I decided to move. I'll say going forward, I do think for all public institutions and we've made this clear in our Charter Green Paper submission that I've always been a fan of. The system we've had in the UK has been one where we've chosen people of high competence. We've not necessarily made ideology overriding. And I think that's great. That's what we should do. We've been very clear on the appointments going forward. That's all I'll say on the, but

[Richard Osman]

in, in your response to the Green Paper, you do talk about perhaps making the BBC board non political appointees and is there, was there anyone on the BBC board who disagreed with that?

[Tim Davie]

Well, it will not surprise you that I don't deconstruct board debates within the podcast studio. But I think everyone's aligned on, everyone is aligned that the, the BBC's reputation needs to be absolutely underpinned by editorial independence. That is sacrosanct and I think it's really important that the charter enshrines that.

[Richard Osman]

Well anyway, but thank you for letting everyone ask that question because it is, it's, it's a question that has gone sort of unanswered and it's interesting to hear that your day to day experience of the BBC and your day to day experience of the newsroom would not back up the suggestion that there is some sort of institutional bias on that board.

[Tim Davie]

I don't think there's institutional bias in the BBC and, and the, the board is there to support the BBC. I think the, the editorial power of the Director General is, sorry I sound like some kind of maniac here but, but it is, is significant and essentially they're in con, you know, we're in control as the executive. I mean personally I, you know, one minute I'm a kind of right wing implant with Tory roots, the next moment I'm Britain's chief left wing warrior.

[Marina Hyde]

You've got to just throw the ring back into Mount Doom, Tim. That's what you're doing. Basically. It's too much power.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah, well, I, I, I, I think, I think actually it's highly distributive. So if you look at it and you know this, it's like I'm currently, as I sit, my life could be changed quite dramatically by the wrong decision of probably 100 editors as we speak. You just have to get the right people.

[Marina Hyde]

Is it tiring all sorts of other people's faults always being your fault?

[Tim Davie]

Yeah, I don't see it like that because I kind of take it personally. But not to a point where I'm collapsing. I think you are. You can't be accountable for everybody or responsible for every single broadcast. But you know, these public jobs have a, I do believe in accountability. I do believe, you know, you stand up accounted on your record and that's just, I'm very lucky to be in this job. It's, you know, there are some tough bits. There's some lovely. I've had some amazing moments in this job. There's some wonders here. You're very lucky to do it. So you've also got responsibilities. I mean there's no free lunch here. This is a tough old job. But the great things in life tend to be tough.

[Richard Osman]

Can I just as a follow up to my first elephant because we've talked about this idea that there's keep the herd coming, some right wing bias on the board. There's also a very, very strong strain of thought in the absolute other direction which is the BBC has a strong left wing bias. So you've spoken to ideas of right wing bias. You say it doesn't affect you in your day to day job and you don't see it. What about the suggestions of a left wing bias in the BBC particularly in BBC newsrooms?

[Tim Davie]

Again, I don't see. So much of the world seems to be straining under this left right construct, doesn't it? It's like look at our politics, it's breaking down the whole thing. Okay. And what I see, and I've been very. I said it from day one, I still see it as a challenge for institutions because again I really, really feel very deeply. There's two reallys there. That's how deeply I feel that institutions are there to serve and we have a crisis, we should call it as a full on crisis that people do not trust too many of our institutions and in the UK we're well ahead of the rest of the world. We hate to even be happy about things but it is a wonder that we have these institutions and they're there to serve. But trust is built and I'm semi obsessed by this so prepare yourself is trust is built by people absolutely believing that someone is acting their interest and they listen to them. Yeah. And if you think about an old school broadcaster, it broadcast.

[Richard Osman]

Yeah.

[Tim Davie]

I think we're of an age where the BBC Central Challenge and you might think where the hell's going? Because of the bias question. But I think it relates to it which is if someone is not seen to listen and act in someone's interest then you've got a problem. So it may not even be an active bias, it might just be you just don't get it. And I think there has been too many instances where institutions and the BBC is definitely not exempt from this. Where call it what you will, Metropolitan, a certain lens on life. I happen to think it's not that helped by left and right. It's just a view on life, a metropolitan view. You and I could walk out of here, go to a few restaurants and go, what's wrong with the world? You know, it is a fatal place for institutions to be. That's why I push so much out. I mean, one of the things I'm proudest about is the number of apprentices in the beginning who come from, you know, different background. We had 46,000 applications, I believe, to 288 places. Which puts it in perspective in terms of our diversity as an organization. The biggest thing that we've had trouble shifting is socioeconomic diversity. It's not protected characteristics, it's socioeconomic. Because you and I know, and I know you're passionate on this. This industry is not an easy one to get into. There's potentially more transient working, freelancing. I think there's a risk in that. And then if the local media, all the local newspapers are under their economics, are under real pressure. Have you got that feeding kind of pipeline of talent coming through the organization? And by talent, I don't mean presenters, I mean all talent coming through.

[Marina Hyde]

You don't say talent anymore, I believe. Is that right?

[Tim Davie]

I do say talent, but I refer to everyone. Okay. As opposed to a certain subset of our community which are presenters. Okay, but. So to your point, Regina, I think there's more work to be done in terms of really understanding people from different backgrounds, people from different life experiences. That is a problem for the media industry. The overall media industry is about 15% from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. I think the population is about mid-30s. That's the problem. So you say, what's the bias? Sometimes it's just the way you look at life. It's the way you look at you come into an issue. It's what interests you. It's your curiosity is stimulated in a certain direction, your topic choice. It's much deeper than just a kind of pantomime left, right. It's an institutional flavor. And I've really tried to work on that. We are better than we've been, but I think that is a lot of work to do.

[Richard Osman]

I've always taken it to be a class bias. And if I can just speak from experience, this idea that BBC sending things out to the nations and regions. And what it means in a very real sense is I go up to Glasgow and Manchester and I work in an environment there where there are people who do not have to leave their hometown anymore. And they would have had to 15, 20 years ago. There are huge creative sectors which have been created because the BBC and ITV and Channel 4 have put money into those areas.

[Tim Davie]

One of the things I'm most proud of is all those partnerships with the regions. If you go to Digburgh, Salford, you work the centre of Cardiff in Central Square. The issue is now into us another level of debate which is, is Cardiff is not Wales breaking news. Yeah, says man from Oxfordshire. It's also what's happening Aberystwyth in Bangor. What's the situation there? And I could go around Wales and say, okay, how are we building the talent to come through the organization? There's an interesting tension actually because you can be too distributed in terms of your actual resources, so you have to move around. Whereas what I'm really proud of on my watch is, is you can go to Cardiff and be a network editor in news. Yeah. Not in the Welsh newsroom. You are, you know, and that is a massive change. There's network programs coming out of there. Great drama that's no longer kind of consigned. It used to exhaust me like, oh, we, you know, it's like a trust in terms of we don't want to put network out there. That's largely disappeared. The BBC superpower. And it relates to some of the conversation we had earlier, which is because I don't have to make a P and L work every quarter and turn up to a stock exchange and tell them how we're doing or not. I can actually make slightly longer term decisions which may not be, if you like, the most economically tight in the short term, but make total sense longer term. And actually what I've tried to do in the BBC is let's imagine a Venn diagram. You didn't think I was going there,

[Richard Osman]

but yeah, I'm surprised you haven't mentioned Venn diagrams up to now.

[Tim Davie]

But what you're trying to do is, is say what's in the public interest for public policy. It's useful having working with the regional mayor, Richard Parker in the West Midlands, going okay, in Digberth, we can be an anchor tenant there. Bring up Silent Witness, bring up Marshall and do a partnership where we're both investing more money. Now what you've got is that is absolutely driving our public purposes. What I've tried to do is migrate as much money though into a Venn diagram where the other side, side. The other side is actually really valued by audiences in every part of the UK to actually, you know, we've announced that Casualty will be not only staying in Rock outside Cardiff, but we're actually based in Wales. So it'll be rooted in Wales clearly of its place. Just like Silent Witnesses now in Birmingham. A Birmingham show. You know, it's Birmingham that just builds the power of the show. Yeah, it's not a creative weakening. I'm not compromising. I don't see it as doing anyone a favor. I think this whole thing do us a favor and move some money there. That's not what we're doing. We're trying to migrate as much of our money into that is not only good on our public purposes, but really smart use of money to drive audience. So that's what I've tried to do on the BBC.

[Marina Hyde]

What about the wider world? Because obviously it is a huge job. A lot of people ask us about the World Service.

[Tim Davie]

Indeed.

[Marina Hyde]

Here's one from Stephen Kerr who says, do the changes made to the BBC World Service look, with hindsight insight to have been mistaken, especially given the importance of soft power in today's global political maelstrom.

[Tim Davie]

Thank you, Stephen. The answer is yes. I've spoken a lot about this. It is shocking what's going on around the world. I mean, part of what I try to do sometimes is lift us out of this UK bubble. I've got, I think now 300 people in the BBC, large in the World Service, who cannot go home to their home country because they'd be arrested or face trouble because they're doing just their job.

[Marina Hyde]

Why do you think so many successive governments have sort of failed to understand the importance of an organization that does that?

[Tim Davie]

I think everyone supports the. I've met anyone where I go, you do understand China is spending billions. You do understand that there's been interesting analysis of what might be called cognitive warfare, which is how people think, oh, you're all as bad as each other. And I think that's a long, long term game being played by certain regimes to undermine democracy.

[Richard Osman]

And we famously. Russia, I mean Russia, absolutely.

[Tim Davie]

But there's others who are active in. I mean, the flood of, you know, frankly, dangerous. I mean there's AI slop and there's just dangerous propaganda. It's hundreds of millions of pounds. And it's absolutely about conditioning how we think, I'm not sure, being provocative of people nodding along. I don't think there's anyone that. I can't think of it. I mean, there's probably someone you can find, but there's not many people I look at and go, do you realize that not only should we be protecting the World Service in the short term, I think the government get that. But longer term, actually I think we should be doubling the funding and Absolutely. It's a UK national asset but it's important in our national defense, our national strategic. Strategic. Okay. The problem is just to your point about why don't, why don't we is I just think people, you know, if you look at the current funding and there's always a problem. You know the FCDO are really committed to the World Service.

[Marina Hyde]

The Foreign Office.

[Tim Davie]

The Foreign Office, they've increased funding but in terms of a transformational budget increase they're currently facing cuts in the FCD go in. So it just as with life it just gets hit with the current situation and financial constraints and yet it's really quite expensive. My view is someone, someone just needs to go look enough. We're going to make a big call here and support this thing properly. I honestly think it's so short sighted.

[Richard Osman]

But is that government, is that taxpayer or is that private sector or could it be.

[Tim Davie]

I think it's government. I think. Look, you can cost. Cost, terrible words but you can cost recover through a bit of appropriate advertising on the news channel in the right market. But honestly if you're going to be out there in Afghanistan, if you're going to have the Persian service, this is not with the best. I mean I'm all for. We built a 2 billion pound commercial arm, we're making money wherever we can appropriately. But there's not money in the news business in this way. And if you want to make money in the news business, you, you might just get out alive and make some by having a subscription business in the US which we're trying. But you're not going to do. You're not going to do the World Service without government funding. And do I think it was a mistake to put it on the BBC license fee payer? Absolutely it was.

[Richard Osman]

Can I ask you this question from Chloe Taylor? Because I do think it's interesting. I think it speaks to a lot of what is coming through behind all the things you're saying. She says, what's kept you at the BBC, your comparative job at ITV, Channel 4 or any other international broadcaster have paid millions. Is it dedication to public service?

[Tim Davie]

God, that makes you sound extremely worthy. It's certainly purpose. It's purpose. I care about it. I mean I do. I mean everyone knows me. I really care about it. I think I also am philosophically one of those people who says cliches are available. I sound like some kind of US self help tape. But the. You only have one life, so do. I mean I am extremely lucky. I get a good salary. We all know that actually happiness is often at the point where you're not going into the supermarket and worrying about how you make it work. I happen to come from a background where that was a bit. Not hugely disadvantaged, but where household budget was a real challenge every month. That is the reality for most households. If you got over that. And also it goes to science, happiness does not massively increase once you're over that point. Okay. The data is overwhelming. So bluntly, a bit of me is the rational brain and the emotional brain going, yes, you could get more money, but one thing I know is I care every day I get up. There are some days where you probably question your choice, but you get up and you're fired up. And also the variety. The other thing about life is as I look to the future, it's really interesting. I was talking to someone who did a high profile job and they said, everyone just wants to hire you to get kind of what you were. Whereas I want to learn. Now, the great thing about, you know, I was marketing fizzy pop, and I could have been in Connecticut in a nice house with a white picket fence with the hoop and the drive, and with lots of money, but without being funny about it, I. One is, I love this country kind of in a kind of weird, obsessional way. And then the second thing is, is if you do something you care about, I have. You know, when I took audio music, I didn't know a lot about classical music. I listened to a bit, but this job allowed me to sit in the proms, watch Bitchkov conduct a Marla symphony with myself and three people watching. And you can just. Those memories are. They're priceless. What money are you gonna put on those? Yeah, I mean, I've met people you wouldn't dream of in terms of. From world leaders. That is not what you get. If you're running a widget company, itv, you might get a bit of it, but you get the idea.

[Marina Hyde]

Can I ask you a little bit about. I'm reading a really good book at the moment by a guy called Michael Linton, who you probably know he was there.

[Tim Davie]

I know Michael.

[Marina Hyde]

Yeah. But his book is about mistakes. I don't know if you've read it. It's really good. So he was the chief executive of Sony.

[Tim Davie]

I could write a long one on that.

[Marina Hyde]

Well, I was gonna ask you. Okay. He was the chief executive of Sony Pictures at the time of the North Korean hack, and he greenlit the interview, the Seth Rogen comedy about North Korean, which precipitated the attack.

[Tim Davie]

Indeed.

[Marina Hyde]

And this is a book about mistakes. Not Failure, which I think is something different, and how that kind of explosive scandal impacted his home, his family, his whole industry. And for years, he literally couldn't bear to analyze what happened and would always kind of laugh it off when people bought it anyway. He eventually did, and he now knows that the reason he did that and what the mistake was was that he basically greenlit that movie because he just got sick of being the guy who said no. And he wanted actors to like. He wanted to be cool, and he wanted to belong. I think it's kind of interesting because I think the Seth Rogen character in the studio has sort of imbibed quite a lot of that. And I just.

[Tim Davie]

Great series, by the way. Yeah.

[Marina Hyde]

Yeah, it's brilliant.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah. Love it.

[Marina Hyde]

You may not have had time yet, but I wondered on your BBC mistakes if you thought that any of those derive from bits of your personality, like all of us do, and if you've had a chance to look back and think.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah, it's a really good question. Personally, I more reflected on did we have the right people and the right. And the right process? There's a very dry answer. But I. I think it's not because I've been kind of yeehaw and blinded by stardom or like Seth in the studio. I think that's right. But. But. Here's the but is sometimes you need a little time. I mean, you know, give me a break. I'm still on the job. Yeah. So I'm still in the midst of it. I'm still on the tightrope. I can just. I can just see the cliff on the other side. Address, you know, but it's. It's. It's so. So you. I will process those things and have a think.

[Marina Hyde]

But have you had time to have a cultural life? You talked about the problems you have. You had time to have.

[Tim Davie]

Yeah, I. Well, yes and no. I. It's surprising. I mean, I'm pretty ferocious about the weekend.

[Marina Hyde]

Yeah.

[Tim Davie]

Okay. And my view is if you call me at the weekend.

[Richard Osman]

I thought you meant the band.

[Tim Davie]

No, not the weekend.

[Richard Osman]

I was like. That surprised me.

[Tim Davie]

No. Anyway, moving on. So that's one of my kids ones. But the. But the. I. I think you do need your time. That's. That's quiet. And I'm not a big fan of Flap. Yeah. People that also, you know, people come and say, oh, we got this one. Well, hold on. I'm the one that's gonna have to deal with it. I'm the one that's gonna do the interview, not you. Yeah. And you're conducting a lot of energy. So I think people do need quiet time. I mean, honestly, often the best time in a week is just quietly wandering down to the calf, sitting there for half an hour with a notebook and working out what you want to do. And I still do that, by the way. I still spend a lot. I do have quiet time now. To your point about culture, I'm a reader, so I, I love. That's my background and I've never lost it since I studied. So if, if, you know, you're not. If I'm not reading a novel or, you know, a book, a book that I care about, that is a problem for me. So I escape that way and I'm a runner. These things were really important, by the way. I mean, I won't give the full resilience a speech, but I think you need that stability if you're going to cope at all with these things because they are quite significant at times. I absolutely think you need to consciously manage that. Not in a kind of over organised way, but just say, I will need time to think, quietly reflect. If you can't get that calm, I don't think you're going to last very long. Just, you know, I just don't think that works.

[Richard Osman]

Can I ask you one final question from Anthony Jackson? And he says, what are your proudest moments from your time as dj?

[Tim Davie]

Probably three quick things. One is the people I bought into the BBC. At the end of the day, that is huge for me. The second thing is I think the BBC for audiences, you'll all have your views, listening, you'll always clapping steamed up. But the BBC is still fiercely relevant and precious and it's that digital innovation we've done, pushing it out of London. Really, really important, important. And the last thing I'm really proud of is we haven't talked enough about culture in this session because we've been through the highlights and the low lights. But there's also been quite a lot to deal with in terms of how the acid test of a human being is when you give them power, how they behave. And this industry has had a problem where people have had power. It's a weird old thing. You've got senior executives, presenters with power. I'm really proud. I think that really has been flushed out. It's been tough work and it's never ever done so you constantly watch it. But I really think we've got an environment in the industry where behaving in the wrong way. I nearly said something a bit more fruity. In my language, but behaving like that, difficult men.

[Marina Hyde]

Shall we put it that way?

[Tim Davie]

But you know what? It's mainly been men. But I wouldn't go there. No. But I just think it's people who have abused power and that is not acceptable. And I'm really, really proud that we've called a lot of it out. It's been difficult dealing with it, but I genuinely believe you can't behave in that way. I'm fiercely proud of that. Cause I think it's a kinder, nicer place to work. So, yeah, there's a lot of things I'm proud of. And then I could list a lot of programs that at the end of the day, it's the work as well. So, you know, if you can't list

[Richard Osman]

programs because everyone who makes every other program will be listening, going, that's quite

[Tim Davie]

a lot of people to offend. I know. So I'll quit while I'm.

[Richard Osman]

We know his eyes are saying House of games. I see that. Tim, thank you so much. That was. That was a pleasure. And best of luck in what you do next as well. I'm sure whatever it is, it will be very interesting. And thank you so much, listeners, for those amazing questions. And super balanced as well and interesting. And I thought, I thought there were

[Marina Hyde]

so many we could have got to.

[Richard Osman]

That is absolutely proud there, don't you think?

[Marina Hyde]

Yeah, absolutely. Thank you very much, Tim.

[Tim Davie]

Thank you very much.

[Richard Osman]

Thank you, Tim.

[Marina Hyde]

Spring just slid into your DMs. Grab that boho look for that rooftop

[Tim Davie]

dinner, those sandals that can keep up with you.

[Marina Hyde]

And hang some string lights to give your patio a glow up springs coffee. Ross, work your magic.

[Tim Davie]

Every act of change begins with a neighbor. With someone saying, we take care of each other here. In food banks and food pantries, neighbors pack fresh food and dignity into every box, moving food from farms to families through Feeding America's nationwide network. So when that box reaches a home, it carries more than food. It carries a promise that together we can end hunger. Feeding America, led by neighbors. Give now to [e-mail] to some, he

[Marina Hyde]

is the revolutionary hero who restored China to its rightful place on the global stage.

[Tim Davie]

To others, he's a brutal despot accused of presiding over more civilian deaths than either Stalin or Hitler.

[Marina Hyde]

Mao Zedong has one of the most recognizable faces in the world. Yet he started life in a muddy provincial village.

[Tim Davie]

A rebel son who hated his father

[Richard Osman]

survived a 6,000mile walk across China and

[Tim Davie]

rose to become a figure of titanic

[Marina Hyde]

proportions from empire the Goal Hanger World History Show. I'm Anita Anand.

[Tim Davie]

And I'm William Durample.

[Marina Hyde]

In this six part series, we're joined by world renowned expert Rana Mitta to explore the life of the father, of course, Communist China, Mao Zedong.

[Richard Osman]

We'll track his rise from a bookstore

[Tim Davie]

owner to a guerrilla commander. And we'll witness his ruthless elimination to secure total power. And we'll descend into the dark experiment of the Cultural Revolution, a time when

[Richard Osman]

ancient temples were burnt, children denounced their

[Tim Davie]

parents, and a nation worshipped a mango as a sacred relic.

[Marina Hyde]

Subscribe to Empire wherever you get your podcasts to listen now.