A year ago, it would have been difficult for many to find Amol Rajan. As the BBC’s media editor, he was a solid middle-ranker rather than broadcasting A-List.
Now it’s hard to miss him. He is on the presenting roster for Radio 4’s Today programme — and during the past two weeks his profile has risen even higher with his controversial royal documentary The Princes And The Press, in which he appeared in front of the camera rather more than is usual for an interviewer.
It’s clear he is the BBC’s new golden boy.
There is plenty of evidence he’s a talented broadcaster. Rajan’s breezy informality on Today makes a refreshing change from the sometimes hectoring presenting style of the past.
With his relaxed demeanour, it’s easy to imagine him putting guests at ease — often an extremely effective way of lulling an interviewee into revealing more than they had intended.
Rajan is also perfectly capable of grilling a politician or other public figure, as the audience expects from Radio 4’s flagship current affairs programme. His intelligence, knowledge and warmth are unmatched.
By all accounts, his ability to make friends has made him a skilled networker, an attribute that’s vital if you want to get ahead in broadcasting.
He is said to be so energetic that he has been nicknamed ‘Amol Nitrate’ (after the stimulant drug amyl nitrate).
While he may be ambitious, praising someone who is sharp in television and radio is like accusing Lewis Hamilton for driving too fast.
Most recently, a photo has come to light of Amol Rajan (second from left) with the Duchess of Sussex’s close friend Misha Nonoo (second from right) at a fashion party in 2015, though he says he has no recollection of ‘exchanging a word with her. Pictured, from left to right, Evgeny Lebedev, Amol Rajan, Misha Nonoo, Alexander Gilkes
However, my feelings have been growing increasingly troubling in recent weeks. I have been thinking of one thing in particular: impartiality.
Because while I felt I had to leave the BBC after a long and respected career because my impartiality on air was doubted as a result of my personal views, questions over Rajan’s impartiality seem to be no barrier to his inexorable rise.
The allegations against him have been a lot more frequent than they were a week ago, especially in relation to his feelings toward the Royal Family. This is in light of the documentary he made that delved into sensitive areas of William’s and Harry’s relations.
Most recently, a photo has come to light of him with the Duchess of Sussex’s close friend Misha Nonoo at a fashion party in 2015, though he says he has no recollection of ‘exchanging a word with her’.
It has also been revealed that he once described the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s public role as ‘a total fraud’ and called Prince Philip a ‘racist buffoon’.
These are the most partisan of all comments. They were made during his 2012 tenure as an editor at The Independent.
In 2007, he joined the newspaper to work as a reporter. He held several jobs until he was appointed editor in 2013, at just 29 years old.
And yesterday it emerged that he also posted around 20 tweets that were critical of the royals between March 2010 and January 2013, including criticising the Duchess of Cambridge during her wedding for her ‘false royal wave’, which he said was ‘desperately sad’.
Rajan has now apologised fulsomely, tweeting that he ‘deeply’ regrets what he wrote, adding: ‘I’m completely committed to impartiality and hope our recent programmes can be judged on their merits.’
This word is again used: impartiality.
I don’t doubt his sincerity and it’s fair to point out that these comments were made some ten years ago.
Still, I think the issue of Rajan’s personal views raises doubts not only about his impartiality — his columns were, after all, written for a national newspaper rather than views expressed privately — but, just as pertinently, about how the BBC applies its policy on impartiality.
The BBC has so far only expressed its support for Rajan, saying: ‘Once journalists join the BBC, they leave past views at the door’ — but what concerns me is that the latest comments did not come in a vacuum.
The Mail reported last Sunday that Amol had made some bizarre political moves during his tenure as editor at The Independent. A ‘senior political source’ claimed to the MoS that Amol changed his newspaper’s political stance, swinging its position away from Labour to back David Cameron’s Conservatives two days before the 2015 general election.
Why? The source claimed that Rajan, who denies the allegations, had agreed to support the Tories if David Cameron said he would attend the 35th birthday party of Rajan’s boss, the newspaper’s proprietor, Russian businessman Evgeny Lebedev.
Readers of The Independent, who tend to be Left-leaning liberal types, were both bemused by the dramatic shift in position and not best pleased to find their daily paper’s editorials suddenly switching from severe criticism of Conservative influence in the coalition government to praising Cameron’s ‘exceptional achievement’ in creating jobs.
This would indicate that Rajan has a very poor sense of judgment.
The revelation occurred at the end a week after Rajan, who was also implicated in deep unrest within the Royal Family via his BBC2 series.
While Meghan’s lawyer Jenny Afia was given extensive airtime, the Palace were said to be unhappy that they had not been offered a preview.
The royals were given a kind of ‘right of reply’ at the end of part two, which aired on Monday. The Palace said in a statement: ‘Too often, overblown and unfounded claims by unnamed sources are presented as fact and it’s disappointing when anyone, including the BBC, gives them credibility.’
It has also been revealed that Rajan once described the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s (pictured, right) public role as ‘a total fraud’ and called Prince Philip a ‘racist buffoon’. Pictured: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge watch a flypast to mark the centenary of the Royal Air Force from the balcony of Buckingham Palace on July 10, 2018
My half-life spent with the BBC. I did my best to uphold that fundamental Reithian command. The BBC must remain impartial.
Like every BBC journalist, I also have opinions. But I defy anyone who listened to me day after day in the 33 years I hosted Woman’s Hour to have any idea which way I might have voted.
It was a challenging job to interview Margaret Thatcher, John Major and Tony Blair as well, Nick Clegg, Theresa May, Gordon Brown and Gordon Brown.
My views on the Royal Family were never shared, but I did say that I was glad the Queen agreed to being interviewed for the program. She didn’t, even though I knew she was an avid listener.
However, my writing about my beliefs in sex and gender was inconsistent with impartiality. Trans women deserve protection and respect, but we need to keep them from being denied access to female-only areas.
For that I was branded a TERF — trans-exclusionary radical feminist — and received death threats.
Not quite enough to paper my house with — as JK Rowling says she could have done — but a relentless Twitter-storm of them.
I did not speak my views on air. However, BBC bans me from chairing interviews or debating the topic.
A year after that unnecessary humiliation, I was banned from appearing on Woman’s Hour for the six weeks leading up to the 2019 General Election. Again, my opinion on exiting the European Union was not discussed on-air.
However, I wrote a brief essay about the results of the referendum for a book. It contained different opinions. I discussed how vital freedoms to travel and European citizenship were for me as a postwar generation.
Accused again of failing to be impartial and denied the right to do the job I had done well on so many occasions in the past, I decided I’d had enough of the employer I once loved.
I had to be exposed and free from the constraints of my own voice.
It isn’t something I do alone. I hesitate to blow my own trumpet as one of the ‘broadcasting greats’ who have now turned their backs on the Beeb, but Andrew Neil and Andrew Marr come to mind at once. Less than two weeks ago, Marr expressed exactly the same reason as mine for quitting — the need to find his own voice again.
Now, he has announced his intention to become the chief political commentator at Left-leaning New Statesman magazine. What about Mr Rajan?
Even taking out of the equation the comments he made when he was at The Independent, it all raises the question: where is the impartiality in a journalist who is a self-confessed Republican being asked to make programmes about the Royal Family’s nightmare of recent years?
Rajan has been a rising star in the last two weeks with The Princes and The Press. In which Rajan appeared more often than usual in front of the camera, it was a controversial documentary about Rajan.
In his documentary, we learned nothing we didn’t already know about William and Harry going their separate ways with a lot of pain and upset.
The Queen, grieving for her husband and facing her 70th anniversary on the throne, doesn’t need to hear from an anti-monarchist journalist probing who leaked what to the Press from whose household.
It’s a big mistake by the BBC management who, it seems, have lost any co-operation from the Palace and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in the immediate future. That is a pity, when the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations are just a few months away.
Even more concerning is the report that Rajan may be in strong contention to take over the position of political editor for Laura Kuenssberg, which requires an impeccable reputation for neutrality.
Rajan, it is clear that he is an excellent broadcaster. It is crucial to bring in voices from diverse backgrounds and classes.
Although he is only 38 years old, the father-of-two likes to rock a diamond earrings stud.
He’s no Old Etonian either, and attended state schools before university, although arguably his Cambridge degree — he studied English — still makes him more Establishment than those of us who graduated from redbrick institutions.
Perhaps the BBC was more concerned about Brexit and the transdebate than the Royal Family, who have taken their support for granted.
It is concerning that his intransigence continues to cause me concern. And if nothing else, he has already broken the number one rule for journalists: ‘Don’t become the story’.