Broadcasting awards organiser refuses to examine TV plagiarism complaint

In June 2021, the UK’s Channel 4 Television screened “The Anti-Vax Conspiracy” — produced by Dinah Lord of Caravan Media and Eamonn Matthews of Quicksilver Media — lifting my reporting without acknowledgment, then entering it for an award

Dear Mr Deer

Thank you for your email regarding The Anti-Vax Conspiracy.

The programme was entered into our 2021 awards by Channel 4 Television along with a range of other commissioned programmes from its Dispatches and its other strands. The Anti-Vax Conspiracy was submitted “as broadcast” and it went through the shortlisting process and then onto our panel of judges across the world. It was this international jury that assessed this together with the other half dozen programmes that had been shortlisted in the investigative documentary category. This panel of experts decided that the programme was the best of the selection. The jury looks at each programme in isolation, just as a viewer or listener would.

We have dealt with Channel 4 and its senior executives for many years – the AIBs have been in existence for 18 years and this Association for almost 30. The AIB is satisfied that Channel 4 and its executives act in the interests of the network’s audiences and that the broadcaster operates appropriate pre- and post-transmission systems to ensure that programmes which the network commissions and broadcasts meet all their editorial requirements and standards.

Should you decide to pursue the matter through the courts, and judgement is made in your favour, this Association will review the award that was made to The Anti-Vax Conspiracy. Similarly, should the UK media regulator receive a complaint from you and decide that it is within its remit to investigate [I believe Spanswick already knew that it didn’t], and should such an investigation rule in your favour, then we will review the award.

In the meantime, perhaps I might ask that you refrain from writing comments about your allegations on the AIB’s social media accounts. As I have noted above, the Association will review this, and any other award, should any allegations be tested and proven.

Regards

Simon Spanswick
Chief Executive
AIB | Association for International Broadcasting
PO Box 141 | Cranbrook | TN17 9AJ | United Kingdom

Put another way, Simon Spanswick, on behalf of the Association for International Broadcasting, makes clear that it has no interest in a credible complaint that an award was obtained from the association by deception. Although any such deception would, in this case, not only harm me but also TV producers who entered the association’s awards competitition, he says he will take no action.

Spanswick makes clear that unless I give up journalism to embark on — and then win — immensely costly High Court litigation that would take years to resolve, he doesn’t believe the so-called AIB awards judges need be bothered.

I can’t think of any other entity purporting to offer awards for journalism which would be likely to respond with such indifference.

No wonder I’d never heard of the Association for International Broadcasting. And if it doesn’t take seriously the integrity of its awards, I can’t see why anyone should regard them as credible.

Brian Deer

>>> Win an Association for International Broadcasting Award (AIB) >>>