Dan Walker

[john]

Dan Walker, who I had only ever seen in the role of soccer commentator, is to take over from Bill Turnbull as the permanent main presenter on the BBC Breakfast programme later this month.

According to today's Times newspaper this has caused a bit of a stir at the beeb and elsewhere because Walker is a creationist. He believes the earth to be about 6,000 years old, the bible to be literally true, dinosaurs lived alongside humans, etc. He also refuses to work on Sundays.

"The stir" as reported in The Times worries that the programmes credibility might be compromised when he has to deal with science issues etc.

How to you guys and gals feel his beliefs will affect or not the beeb's image?

[Maeght]

He's a presenter reading an autocue so his personal views shouldn't come into it and shouldn't matter. If he attempts to vocalise them then his employers should point out he is representing the BBC not there to represent his own views and take disciplinary actin if necessary. If they didn't I think it would be this that would effect the BBC's reputation.

[Nearly Sane]

Pretty much what Maeght said. It's irrelevant to the job unless he chooses to make it so.

[L.A.]

I agree, he should be judged by his actions rather than (what we think are) his beliefs, but one could imagine problem scenarios ahead. How would he handle a guest appearance by Richard Dawkins 

[Hope]

I agree, he should be judged by his actions rather than (what we think are) his beliefs, but one could imagine problem scenarios ahead. How would he handle a guest appearance by Richard Dawkins 

How does Bill Turnbull or any of the other presenters handle guest appearances by those they disagree with?

[floo]

Dan Walker, who I had only ever seen in the role of soccer commentator, is to take over from Bill Turnbull as the permanent main presenter on the BBC Breakfast programme later this month.

According to today's Times newspaper this has caused a bit of a stir at the beeb and elsewhere because Walker is a creationist. He believes the earth to be about 6,000 years old, the bible to be literally true, dinosaurs lived alongside humans, etc. He also refuses to work on Sundays.

"The stir" as reported in The Times worries that the programmes credibility might be compromised when he has to deal with science issues etc.

How to you guys and gals feel his beliefs will affect or not the beeb's image?

I have never heard of him, but how very sad, anyone can believe that nonsense to be true!

[Hope]

According to today's Times newspaper this has caused a bit of a stir at the beeb and elsewhere because Walker is a creationist. He believes the earth to be about 6,000 years old, the bible to be literally true, dinosaurs lived alongside humans, etc. He also refuses to work on Sundays.

Unfortunately, I can't open the full Times article as I don't have a subscription to the paper online.  Has this been picked up by any other media, which might be more accessible?  As someone who has been following Walker for some time, I've certainly never heard him espouse creationist ideas, though he has certainly espoused more mainstream Christian ideas in articles and interviews I've read.

[Leonard James]

I have never heard of him, but how very sad, anyone can believe that nonsense to be true!

It takes all sorts to make a world, Roses! 

Fortunately there aren't many who believe 'that nonsense'.

[floo]

It takes all sorts to make a world, Roses! 

Fortunately there aren't many who believe 'that nonsense'.

True!

[john]

Hope

Here you are today's Telegraph says " Dan Walkers creationism is an affront to reason, science and logic.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12152098/Dan-Walkers-creationism-is-an-affront-to-reason-science-and-logic.html

Perhaps they will soon appoint David Icke as science correspondent !

[L.A.]

How does Bill Turnbull or any of the other presenters handle guest appearances by those they disagree with?

We don't necessarily know do we, I'm sure that most presenters have their private strange beliefs. But in this case there would be an obvious 'elephant in the room' if he had to interview Dawkins or make a contribution to that (sadly inevitable) blockbuster: A tribute to the late David Attenborough.

[jeremyp]

I don't watch the BBC Breakfast Programme but, as long as the presenters are professional, what do their personal opinions matter?

[john]

This mornings programme was germane, one of the items being discussed was the latest "Gravitational waves discoveries". A physicist was being interviewed by the presenters Naga Munchetti and John Kay, their role being (I guess) to help us laymen viewers understand the issues by asking pertinent questions. I don't know how someone who believes the world and everything was created in six days between only six and ten thousand years ago could ask pertinent questions on this issue to help public understanding when there is a clear conflict between the science/facts and their own belief.

If you read my earlier link to yesterdays Telegraph article written by someone who declares themselves to be a committed Christion and still finds Dan Walker's "creationism is an affront to reason, science and logic".

For this reason I do not feel he is the right person for the job. Fine sports reporter and personable seeming chap, though he may be.




 

[Gonnagle]

Dear John,

The man is on the Chris Evans show as we speak, he is wondering what all the fuss is about, he asks, is Britain a tolerant society, does it matter what your religious thinking is.

Gonnagle.

[ProfessorDavey]

He's a presenter reading an autocue so his personal views shouldn't come into it and shouldn't matter. If he attempts to vocalise them then his employers should point out he is representing the BBC not there to represent his own views and take disciplinary actin if necessary. If they didn't I think it would be this that would effect the BBC's reputation.

While that is broadly true I think the Breakfast programme is more 'conversational' than, say a standard news bulletin, and therefore has more opportunity for the presenter to stamp their personality on the role, and that might include their own personal views.

The BBC should be careful about ensuring that his creationist views (which are indeed extreme) aren't promulgated on the programme - even is a rather 'soft' way in a manner that would affect impartiality.

This isn't the only headache the BBC has over impartiality - there is currently a debate waging over the team of senior political correspondents and presenters, who seem to be disproportionately right wing and often from exactly the same elite group who currently run the country. Concerns have been raised over Nick Robinson getting the role on the Today programme.

Also the rather odious chummy, chummy interview of David Cameron (in his kitchen) before the general election by the BBC Deputy Political Editor James Landale which came across as if they were old school chums ... until you realised that they were old school chums.

The BBC needs to take care.

[john]

Dear John,

The man is on the Chris Evans show as we speak, he is wondering what all the fuss is about, he asks, is Britain a tolerant society, does it matter what your religious thinking is.

Gonnagle.

Gonners

Sounds to me like the beeb are responding to criticism and are attempting a damage limitation exercise!

"does it matter what your religious thinking is" ?

Er, yes .......think Jihadi John, schools that ban teaching about science, sex, etc.

[Rhiannon]

News presentation is different to sports or the arts when you consider the nature of the interviews that form a big part of the content. I've read some of his views (particularly about unbelievers going to hell) and I just don't think he's right for the job - he will have some very sensitive interviews to conduct and IME a belief in damnation for those not in God's club and sensitivity don't go hand in hand.

[Shaker]

Somewhat torn on this one.

On the one hand, his private beliefs in principle ought not to matter (leaving aside the fact that since we're discussing him they're anything but private). His job is to scrub up well in front of a camera and read what somebody else puts on an autocue.

On the other hand, his beliefs are inescapably weird fringe beliefs; and as john has pointed out in #12, with something like the discovery of gravitational waves, the fact that we know what his beliefs are entails that were he to conduct an interview with a willing scientist trying to explain what it's all about to people at home still drinking their coffee, we're going to be aware that he's discussing a matter that he considers to be a rank fiction.

A bit of a cock up all round, really.

ETA: Funniest comment on the Scaly Mail website was from someone who wrote: "He keeps the Sabbath but what if one of his kids gets sick on a Sunday? Who's he gonna call - Ghostbusters?"

[ProfessorDavey]

News presentation is different to sports or the arts when you consider the nature of the interviews that form a big part of the content. I've read some of his views (particularly about unbelievers going to hell) and I just don't think he's right for the job - he will have some very sensitive interviews to conduct and IME a belief in damnation for those not in God's club and sensitivity don't go hand in hand.

The problem is always when the reporter becomes the story, as seems to be the case here.

There is also the issue about the fact that his pretty extreme views are public knowledge and this perhaps undermines his ability to do the job. Reminds me of the late, great Brian Redhead - a continual thorn in the side of politicians of all persuasions through the 1980s as presenter on the Today programme. Famously on one occasion he was accused of political bias by Nigel Lawson who suggested he was a Labour voter. Redhead quipped back:

'Do you think we should have a one-minute silence now in this interview, one for you to apologise for daring to suggest that you know how I vote ...'

The point being that Redhead kept his actual private political views just that, private, so he couldn't easily be accused of bias in the manner that Nick Robinson (ex young conservative) or Justin Webb can (however well they do their jobs), and indeed the same problem now applies to this guy, albeit not in terms of party political, but religious bias.

[BeRational]

It also puts me in mind of Glen Hoddle and his wacky views.

It did not help him while he was England manager.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rhiannon and John,

Yes it does seem a strange choice, trying to get my head around the question, should it really matter, but the man will be the face of breakfast telly, what if he has to interview someone like Stephen Fry, a man not backwards at coming forward in religious matters, it will make interesting telly.

I don't agree with his YEC nonsense but does that matter, he did state on the Chris Evans show that he wants to live in a society where a young Muslim girl could grow up to be a great journalist.

Yes a very strange choice by the BBC, one to watch, hell maybe that is their masterplan

Gonnagle.

[Shaker]

I don't agree with his YEC nonsense but does that matter, he did state on the Chris Evans show that he wants to live in a society where a young Muslim girl could grow up to be a great journalist.

Very few people don't want that; but it's a deflection from the issue of whether his views are going to stand in the way of impartiality.

[john]

Gonners  reports;

he did state on the Chris Evans show that he wants to live in a society where a young Muslim girl could grow up to be a great journalist.

What a disgraceful and disingenuous statement that is. To my knowledge there are already lots of such people working as journalists both male and femail  (see Al Jazeera for starters) or as media presenters. And rightly so. Take Professor Jim Al Khalil for instance physicist and documentary presenter, what an interesting chat the two could have about "creation". Pity though that the nice prof would still be condemned to burn in hell for eternity for not accepting Jesus as his personal savoir.   

[Rhiannon]

My big concern is his views on hell and salvation, mostly because I've met a few with similar views and seem the damage they can do. He thinks it is a good thing that he was scared into these beliefs when only twelve by a Baptist preacher. If he believes he is directed' to try to save the souls of those he meets in the course of his work - some of whom may be quite vulnerable - then his perceived duty to god will inevitably outweigh any agreement with his employers about religion in the workplace .

[Shaker]

My big concern is his views on hell and salvation, mostly because I've met a few with similar views and seem the damage they can do. He thinks it is a good thing that he was scared into these beliefs when only twelve by a Baptist preacher.

... and doesn't appear to have revisited or re-evaluated them at any point since.