Why is Donald Trump threatening to sue the BBC?

The BBC is in the midst of a crisis after its director general and head of news resigned, and US President Donald Trump threatened it with a $1bn (£760m) lawsuit.

It has been under fire after criticism that an episode of the Panorama documentary TV series misled viewers when it edited a speech by Trump, making it look like he was explicitly urging people to attack the US Capitol on 6 January 2021.

Trump has demanded a retraction, an apology and compensation. The BBC has apologised to Trump, but rejected his demands for compensation.

Concerns over the Trump documentary emerged when a leaked internal memo was published by the Telegraph newspaper. Among other things, the document also criticised the BBC's reporting of trans issues, and BBC Arabic's coverage of the Israel-Gaza war.

What was in the Trump documentary?

The Panorama documentary in question, called Trump: A Second Chance?, was broadcast on 28 October 2024, just days before the US presidential election.

In November 2025, the Telegraph newspaper published a report, saying it had seen a leaked BBC memo written by Michael Prescott, a former independent external adviser to the corporation's editorial standards committee.

The memo suggested that the one-hour documentary had edited parts of Trump's speech together, so he appeared to explicitly encourage the Capitol Hill riot of January 2021.

In his speech in Washington DC on 6 January 2021, Trump said: "We're going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women."

However, in the Panorama edit he was shown saying: "We're going to walk down to the Capitol... and I'll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell."

The two sections of the speech that were edited together were more than 50 minutes apart.

The "fight like hell" comment was taken from a section where Trump discussed how "corrupt" US elections were. In total, he used the words "fight" or "fighting" 20 times.

Mr Prescott's memo said Panorama's "distortion of the day's events" would leave viewers asking: "Why should the BBC be trusted, and where will this all end?"

When the issue was raised with managers, the memo continued, they "refused to accept there had been a breach of standards".

What has Trump said and how has the BBC responded?

After BBC director general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness resigned, the US president said top people in the BBC were quitting or being fired "because they were caught 'doctoring' my very good (PERFECT!) speech of January 6th".

Trump's lawyers sent a letter to the BBC, demanding that it immediately retract the documentary, issue an apology, and compensate him.

The BBC was given a deadline to respond of Friday, 14 November, at 22:00 GMT. The letter added that if the BBC did not comply, the president might file legal action "for no less than $1bn in damages".

The night before the deadline, the BBC apologised and said it would not show the programme again.

It said: "We accept that our edit unintentionally created the impression that we were showing a single continuous section of the speech, rather than excerpts from different points in the speech, and that this gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action."

A spokesperson said BBC chair Samir Shah had separately sent a personal letter to the White House making clear to Trump that he and the corporation are sorry for the edit of the president's speech.

However, the corporation rejected his demands for compensation and set out five main arguments for why it does not think it has a case to answer.

First of all, it says the BBC did not have the rights to, and did not, distribute the Panorama episode on its US channels.

When the documentary was available on BBC iPlayer, it was geographically restricted to viewers in the UK.

Secondly, it says the documentary did not cause Trump harm as he was re-elected.

Thirdly, it says the clip was not designed to mislead, but just to shorten a long speech, and that the edit was not done with malice.

Fourthly, it says the clip was never meant to be considered in isolation. Rather, it was 12 seconds within an hour-long programme, which also contained lots of Trump supporters.

Finally, an opinion on a matter of public concern and political speech is heavily protected under defamation laws in the US.

A BBC insider said that internally, there is a strong belief in the case the corporation has put forward, and in its defence.

What are Trump's legal options?

Trump has signalled an intention to bring any eventual litigation in the US state of Florida, where he has legal residency, rather than in the UK.

There is normally more "respect for freedom of expression in the US" courts, legal expert Joshua Rozenberg told BBC Radio 4. Someone in Trump's position would normally have to show "that the person you're accusing acted with malice", he said.

The president would also have to show that he has suffered some major loss from the programme.

"So there are definitely restrictions on being able to sue, and arguments that can be put [by the BBC]," Mr Rozenberg said. "But I think it's worth looking at what happens in the real world."

Chris Ruddy, founder and chief executive of conservative US media outlet Newsmax Media, and an ally of Trump, said he was very familiar with Florida's libel laws and is "very assured" that the BBC would win if it does reach court.

"They would prevail because the state of Florida has pretty strong libel laws that defend media companies and free speech," he said. "What's happening is that a lot of media companies would prefer not to go through the media spectacle of all this."

When faced with legal threats from Trump, other US news organisations have chosen to settle - paying out millions before a case reaches court.

As part of his case, Trump would also have to show that the relevant part of the Panorama programme was actually available to view in Florida.

The president's lawyer has said the "fabricated statements that were aired by the BBC have been widely disseminated throughout various digital mediums, which have reached tens of millions of people worldwide".

The story has been widely reported, and the relevant clip of Panorama has been available online in recent days during the coverage, but there is no evidence so far to suggest that the documentary itself has been shown in the US.

What else was in the leaked internal memo?

Mr Prescott raised concerns about several other elements of the BBC's news output.

He claimed its reporting of trans issues was effectively "censored" by its specialist LGBT reporters, who promoted a pro-trans agenda.

"I was told that time and time again the LGBTQ desk staffers would decline to cover any story raising difficult questions about the trans-debate," the memo said.

And he pointed to problems with BBC Arabic's coverage of the Israel-Gaza war, including a claim that the service's "story treatment was designed to minimise Israeli suffering and paint Israel as the aggressor".

Other "troubling matters" were raised:

• Mr Prescott said the BBC's coverage of the 2024 US election was more critical of Trump than of his opponent, Kamala Harris

• He said the BBC published "ill-researched material that suggested issues of racism when there were none", including in a now-removed BBC Verify story about car insurance

• There was a "selection bias" against sending stories about migration and asylum seekers to BBC News app users as push notifications

• His other criticisms include misrepresenting the percentage of Palestinian women and children who have been killed by Israel's military in Gaza, and misrepresenting the likelihood of children starving under Israel's aid blockade

Shah said action has been taken to address "underlying problems" at BBC Arabic.

He also said it was "simply not true" the memo had uncovered issues the BBC had "sought to bury" - nor was it correct to suggest the BBC had done nothing to tackle concerns raised.

Who resigned from the BBC?

Tim Davie, who stepped down, was appointed BBC director general in 2020. Earning between £540,000 and £544,999 a year, he oversees the corporation and is responsible for its editorial, operational and creative leadership.

He did not directly mention Panorama in his resignation statement, although he said: "While not being the only reason, the current debate around BBC News has understandably contributed to my decision.

"Overall the BBC is delivering well, but there have been some mistakes made, and as director general I have to take ultimate responsibility."

He later told staff that "we've got to fight for our journalism".

Deborah Turness, who also resigned, was appointed CEO of BBC News in 2022, overseeing news and current affairs programmes.

Earning between £430,000 and £434,999, she had responsibility for a team of about 6,000 people, broadcasting to audiences of almost half a billion across the world, in more than 40 languages.

In her statement, Turness said: "The ongoing controversy around the Panorama on President Trump has reached a stage where it is causing damage to the BBC - an institution that I love.

"As the CEO of BBC News and Current Affairs, the buck stops with me - and I took the decision to offer my resignation to the director general last night."

She added: "While mistakes have been made, I want to be absolutely clear recent allegations that BBC News is institutionally biased are wrong."

Which other controversies has Davie faced?

Tim Davie has weathered many scandals and crises during his five years leading the BBC.

These include:

• The UK media regulator Ofcom ruling in October 2025 that the BBC committed a "serious breach" of broadcasting rules by failing to disclose that the narrator of a documentary about Gaza was the son of a Hamas official

• The broadcast of Bob Vylan's set at Glastonbury 2025, during which the duo led a chant of "death, death to the IDF [Israel Defence Forces]". The coverage broke editorial guidelines, the corporation's complaints unit ruled

• Gregg Wallace being sacked in July 2025 as MasterChef presenter as a result of an inquiry into alleged misconduct. Fellow presenter John Torode was also sacked after an allegation that he had used "an extremely offensive racist term" was upheld

• Match of the Day presenter Gary Lineker leaving the BBC in May 2025 after sharing a social media post about Zionism that included an illustration of a rat, historically used as an antisemitic insult

• The BBC launching an investigation in August 2025 into alleged drug use by two Strictly Come Dancing stars

• Professional dancers Giovanni Pernice and Graziano Di Prima leaving the same show in 2024, following allegations about their behaviour towards their dance partners

Davie's resignation comes at a sensitive time for the BBC, with the government set to review the corporation's Royal Charter before the current term expires in 2027.

The charter is the constitutional basis for the BBC which sets out the corporation's "Object, Mission and Public Purpose".

The charter review also includes reviewing how the BBC is funded.

Currently, the BBC is largely funded through an annual licence fee that is charged to all British households that watch or record live TV, watch programmes live on streaming services, and use iPlayer.

Funding from the licence fee is used to produce TV, radio and online programmes for the BBC, as well as to fund the BBC World Service, the Welsh language TV channel S4C, and Local Democracy Reporters.

The licence fee is supplemented by commercial incomes and other activities such as grants, royalties and rental income.

How will the BBC choose Davie's replacement?

The director general is appointed by the BBC Board, which is responsible for ensuring it delivers the corporation's mission and public purposes.

The BBC Board is led by chair Samir Shah who is one of 10 non-executive members, plus four executive members, including the director general.

Davie's successor will be the 18th director general in the BBC's 103-year history.

Names who have been rumoured as potential contenders include Charlotte Moore, the BBC's recently-departed chief content officer who was in charge of all programming except news.

Other names include Jay Hunt, one of the most experienced executives in British TV, and James Harding, the BBC's head of news from 2013 to 2018.