Storm over Fiona Bruce comments about Stanley Johnson shows why education is key
This week, Question Time presenter, Fiona Bruce stepped down as an ambassador for domestic violence charity Refuge after a contentious clip taken from a discussion on the show went viral and caused upset.
In the video, panellist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown spoke about Boris Johnson and his father, Stanley, who she labelled a wife-beater.
Fiona Bruce gave context to Alibhai-Brown’s claims, which originated in a biography of his son, the former prime minister.
However, the way in which she did it caused understandable upset to viewers, particularly those who are victims and survivors of domestic violence themselves, leading to her decision to step back from her role at Refuge.
It was a shame – not only because Bruce has been a fantastic advocate for women over the years – but mainly because the upset, trauma and distress caused by her comment could have been avoided if the general public were better informed about the way in which media legal systems work.
Bruce said she did not dispute what Yasmine was saying, then added ‘Just so everyone knows what this is referring to, Stanley Johnson’s wife spoke to a journalist Tom Bower and she said that Stanley Johnson had broken her nose and she ended up in hospital as a result. Stanley Johnson has not commented publicly on that. Friends of his have said “it did happen, it was a one-off”.’
It was the ‘one-off’ comment that became a particular point of contention.
As many people pointed out, domestic violence is never a one-off. It is a pattern of physical, emotional or psychological abuse that leaves victims vulnerable and traumatised.
While a specific assault might have happened on one occasion, it is often accompanied by other forms of violence or abuse used to intimidate or coerce victims.
I don’t doubt Fiona Bruce knows this. She has worked with a women’s refuge charity for 25 years, which is why people were outraged to hear her seemingly defending Stanley Johnson’s alleged actions.
But as a live television broadcaster myself, when I watched the clip, I could see straight away that Bruce was not in fact sticking up for Johnson, she was simply doing her job as a presenter.
The phrase ‘one-off’ was not Bruce’s own opinion, but the words spoken by friends of Stanley Johnson who were asked about the alleged assault at the time
Presenting on current affairs is a high-pressure job that requires legal checks and balances in order to avoid the programme being sued.
Unless someone has been convicted of a crime within the legal system, talking about specific cases of alleged domestic violence in the media is a legal minefield – as is the case with most criminal accusations.
As an advocate for domestic violence survivors, it was something that took me a while to get my head around when I began working in live broadcast and even while writing these weekly opinion pieces.
Which is why I think it’s vital that the general public have a better understanding of how legal language and right of replies work in news and current affairs – both in print and on TV.
When I was sexually assaulted years ago, reports in the media referred to me as an ‘alleged victim’ who had ‘accused’ a man of assault.
With my limited understanding of media law at the time, it felt as if the journalist writing about it didn’t believe me. In my eyes I wasn’t an ‘alleged’ victim – I was a victim – to me it wasn’t just an ‘accusation’ – it was a fact.
It felt as if what had happened to me had been trivialised, diminished, reduced to my accusatory words instead of his very real actions.
But when it was explained to me that media outlets have to use words like alleged and accusation for legal reasons unless a conviction has actually been secured, I understood that these reports were not doubting what had happened to me, they just had a requirement to maintain a neutral stance.
In the eyes of the law, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty – even though in my eyes I knew the truth.
The man who assaulted me pled guilty, was convicted and soon the reports on the matter labelled me simply as victim. They were no longer required to remain neutral.
When anyone experiences domestic or sexual assault, there are huge emotional barriers that may prevent a person from coming forward – especially when it’s your word against theirs.
You worry about what people will think, whether you will be believed or whether coming forward might cause further trauma.
If victims don’t understand how media reporting frameworks work, then it’s understandable that they might – as I did – feel as though they are not being taken seriously.
How many times have we heard news presenters say, ‘Prince Andrew has denied ever meeting Virginia Guiffre’ (the woman who has accused him of sexual assault) while on the screen there is a photograph showing him with his arm around her waist.
It can often feel like gaslighting.
Which is why it’s important to point out that Fiona Bruce, in her role as presenter of Question Time and therefore the only person who can mediate the discussion, gave context to Alibhai-Brown’s accusation (that word again) that Stanley Johnson was a ‘wife-beater’.
Whether there were voices from the gallery in her earpiece telling her to do so, or whether – as a seasoned broadcaster – she already knew what she would have to say, we can only speculate.
The phrase ‘one-off’ was not Bruce’s own opinion, but the words spoken by friends of Stanley Johnson who were asked about the alleged assault at the time.
It was undoubtedly clumsy and I completely understand why many viewers thought she was trivialising a serious assault accusation.
The way in which she said it could be interpreted as flippant, but as a broadcaster, my interpretation was that she was simply reeling off the disclaimer so they could focus on the debate. It’s important that people understand that it wasn’t a defence of Johnson, but an explanation of the circumstances surrounding the specific ‘wife-beating’ accusations.
As she stepped down from her role as ambassador for Refuge, Bruce acknowledged she had ‘faced a social media storm, much of which mischaracterised what I said and took the form of personal abuse directed at me’
Bruce accepted the fact that what she was required to say on air had caused distress, and that ‘the only people who matter in all this are the survivors, they are my priority’.
If only people had a better understanding of why she was required to say it, then perhaps the outrage would be more targeted at the man in question, rather than the woman presenting Question Time.
It’s sad that Bruce felt the need to step back from her role, despite the fact that Refuge stuck by her. Refuge has lost a powerful and prominent female advocate, even though I have no doubt she will continue to support their work from the sidelines.
With Stanley Johnson recently reported to have been nominated in the honours list by his own son, it would appear that Fiona Bruce has faced more social consequences as a result doing her job as a responsible broadcaster, than Johnson has for the accusations made against him.
Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk.
Share your views in the comments below.
MORE : Piers Morgan defends Fiona Bruce after she quits as Refuge ambassador over Stanley Johnson comments
MORE : Susanna Reid calls pile-on against Fiona Bruce over domestic abuse Question Time remark ‘outrageous’
MORE : Was Fiona Bruce right to quit domestic violence charity after Question Time comment?