Key Points
- A 'contributor due care' risk assessment should be carried out to identify the psychological impact on a contributor, of taking part in content unless it is justified in the public interest not to do so.[1]
- Where risks have been identified the contributor should be provided with relevant information about those risks and any steps that will be taken to mitigate them.
- It is helpful to keep written records of discussions with contributors before filming, in addition to informed consent in writing. It may also be helpful for contributors to be provided with information about the process of taking part in the production such as any areas of questioning, in writing, where practical.
- It is good practice to keep a welfare log and retain any records, contemporaneous notes or any other documentation. This can assist in demonstrating what information and support was offered and provided to a contributor during productions. These records should be held by productions and shared with the BBC. This should be a 'live' record as details may change during production depending on circumstances.
- Where appropriate protocols should be written setting out the procedures and key considerations for working with contributors to particular programmes. Production staff should read and understand these and have access to them throughout the production process.
- Where possible, contributors should be given a nominated single point of contact within the production team with whom they can liaise throughout the production process (and, where possible, for an appropriate period of time after the programme is broadcast).
- Potential contributors may sometimes be psychologically assessed by an appropriately qualified independent expert before final decisions are taken as part of the pre-production or selection process for choosing contributors. Continuing assessment after their participation, and ongoing support after transmission may also be appropriate. Editorial Policy may be consulted.
- The psychological impact is likely to be higher for contributors when the format or nature of the programme means they'll be put in highly pressurised or exposed situations, for example talent searches and reality immersive shows, even though they may not appear to have pre-existing vulnerabilities.
- Production should be tailored to suit the likely needs of vulnerable contributors. It may not be apparent until part way through the production process that a contributor is vulnerable. Once it is established this guidance should be followed when assessing whether to proceed and how to meet their likely needs
- Any aftercare needs to be proportionate to the ongoing risks identified and have clear boundaries and time frames. Budgets should be adjusted accordingly.
Introduction
We owe due care to our contributors or potential contributors as well as to our sources, who may be caused harm or distress as a result of their contribution. Due care is the level of care that is appropriate to the individual and particular circumstances. We must judge this taking into account the editorial content, the nature and degree of the individual's involvement and their public position, along with other relevant factors such as safety risks or whether the individual is vulnerable.
(See Section 6 Fairness 6.4.23)
The term contributor covers a wide range of people taking part in content under very different circumstances, from those taking part in any news coverage to contestants in any talent search. They have very different needs. example, a contributor to a vox pop will not require as much information as an individual who has agreed to take part in a constructed reality programme to be filmed over a period of months.
News
This guidance is not intended to apply to individuals who appear in our news coverage when they are caught up in current events.
There may be occasions when it is unnecessary or impractical to inform the contributor of potential risks, for example in the production of many news and current affairs programmes and other programmes where it is warranted in the public interest not to do so.
In other News & Current Affairs content then the risks to the welfare of the contributors can be assessed through discussion or a formal risk assessment.
In longer form content, or content where a high level of duty of care is necessary, such as an investigation that deals with vulnerable people having to talk about difficult experiences, then best practice after assessing the risks and discussing them with the contributor could include keeping a welfare log; offering an assessment and potentially support from a psychologist or psychiatrist; checking in just before and just after publication; and offering guidance around social media where appropriate.
Risk Factors
We should consider whether a contributor might be regarded as being at risk of significant harm as a result of taking part in BBC content for reasons including (but not limited to) the following:
- they are considered a vulnerable person
- they are not used to being in the public eye
- the programme involves being filmed in an artificial, constructed or intense environment, especially if it involves being away from home
- the programme is likely to attract a high level of press, media and social media interest
- key editorial elements of the programme include potential confrontation (such as competitive confrontation), conflict, emotionally challenging situations
- the content requires them to discuss, reveal, or engage with sensitive, life changing or private aspects of their lives; or
- they will be put in a situation of close contact with those they may never have encountered before or whom they may have consciously avoided.
Risk Assessment
We should conduct a 'contributor due care' risk assessment to identify any risk of significant harm to the contributor/contestant , unless it is justified in the public interest not to do so.
A risk assessment, if required, should be considered at the earliest stage in the production process. Carrying out a risk assessment can be a useful way to determine what level of care is 'due' in each case and which specialists, if any, are required at each stage of the production.
Ofcom has produced an example of a 'Risk Matrix' that can be used as a tool for supplementing this guidance identifying, assessing and managing potential risks to contributors in content.
In a case where there are immediate and clear concerns in relation to significant harm to the contributor themselves or a third party, it may be necessary to direct them to the emergency services, or arrange it on their behalf, preferably with their consent. Editorial Policy and BBC Safety, Security and Resilience may be consulted.
Assessing the Suitability of Contributors
Even when a person gives informed consent to contribute, we should consider whether it is in the best interests of that person to take part. In some cases we should also consider the impact and wider implications for those around them such as close family.
Any potential benefits of participation should also be considered alongside the risks.
With contributors who are already vulnerable we should normally establish with the professionals responsible for their medical care as well as any day-to-day carers that vulnerable contributors are medically fit and psychologically robust enough to take part in production. It is sometimes advisable to ask for a statement of health from their GP or consultant.
Where this is not possible, for example, in some cases internationally, it can be helpful to consult with appropriate organisations, such as health services, NGOs or other agencies, working in country and with an area of expertise relating to the contributor, in order to make a judgement about the risks to an individual, including medically or psychologically, if we involved them in our output. There is additional guidance in relation to contributors and charitable appeals.
(See guidance: Charitable Appeals)
We should consider the psychological impact for all contributors even though they may not appear to have pre-existing vulnerabilities.
It can sometimes be advisable to engage a mental health professional to carry out a psychologically assessment as part of the pre-production process. This can be especially useful with constructed and immersive content or other types of content in which contributors, some of whom may be vulnerable, will be recorded outside of their normal living environment or face challenges of a new kind.
(See guidance: Talent Searches and Contestants)
In Factual & News and Current Affairs content, psychological assessments may be required on a case by case basis, depending on the vulnerability of the contributor and the sensitivity of the subject matter that will be discussed. The resulting psych reports will be discussed by the commissioner, production team and editorial policy adviser. Discussions about the level of support needed will be held, taking into account the contributor's support network and circumstances. Advice from external organisations such as those dealing with trauma, or rape survivors may be consulted about interview techniques, especially if the presenter is unused to talking to people who may be vulnerable.
These assessments should be carried out by appropriately registered and qualified health professionals, for example psychologists or psychiatrists, who if possible also understand how the media works, have experience of working with specific genres or types of contributors and understand the potential impact on contributors. They should be contracted with a clear commitment to provide advice which is in the best interests of contributors irrespective of whom they are contracted to. They can advise both the content-makers and the individual about the impact – if any – of taking part on their personal welfare and condition.
In content in which contributors are placed outside of their normal living environment or face challenges of a new kind consideration should also be given to the possible impact on their ability to return to their day to day lives following their involvement with the BBC.
Editorial Policy can provide information on the suitability of any mental health specialist.
Other independent expert advice may be sought from appropriately qualified specialists where it may be required at different stages of the production.
It is important to manage the expectations of contributors, some of whom may be viewing the opportunity to take part in BBC content as providing a life changing opportunity. It is important that they understand that this may not be the case so any decision by them to take part is not down solely to this expectation.
Doing due diligence on a contributor by looking at their social media and any news articles about them, in conjunction with something like a self-declaration form, or a criminal records check (where appropriate) can help ensure that if any focus is put on anything contained in these when content is published, the contributor can withstand these issues being raised.
The safety of the contributor should also be considered. Would their life be in danger or would they be at risk of additional violence, for example within their community? Seek advice from BBC Safety Advisors (for in-house productions). BBC Safety can also advise on potential risks to BBC staff. Independent companies should seek advice from suitably trained professionals.
There may be personal events or behaviours which it might not be in a contributor's best interests to reveal to a wider public but which may be integral to telling a true and accurate story about their experience, and which might therefore make it difficult or sometimes impossible to feature a particular contributor.
Even after seeking professional advice, it remains the producer's and BBC's responsibility to choose whether to go ahead with a particular contributor. If the decision is taken to proceed it should be established what further safeguards, support and resources are required to manage or mitigate risk of significant harm and to ensure responsible inclusion. Any decision about a single contributor should take into account the obligations this will put on the production as a whole when taking into account all contributors.
If a decision is made to not go any further forward in the process with a contributor then it is important that they are stood down as soon as possible, and in a manner that doesn't make them feel that they have 'failed' in some way. These are editorial decisions that are often made because of a number of factors.
It is good practice for the production team in conjunction with BBC Commissioning and Editorial Policy, to establish written protocols to set out the agreed procedures to assess and mitigate the risk of significant harm to contributors. These should be shared amongst the production team to ensure that everyone understands what to do and when to escalate issues
Informed Consent
Where risks to a contributor have been identified in relation to their contribution to BBC content, they should be provided with relevant information about those risks and any steps that will be taken to manage them. The information should be given clearly at the earliest stage of the production process in a way that is understandable to the contributor, with further information given during the production process, particularly where the risks may change significantly as the production evolves.
However, there may be occasions when it is unnecessary or impractical to inform the contributor of potential risks, for example in the production of many news and current affairs content and other content where it is warranted in the public interest not to do so.
It is helpful to keep written records of discussions with contributors before recording, in addition to informed consent in writing. It may also be helpful for contributors to be provided with information on any areas of questioning, in writing, where practical. Records are useful because complaints about unjust or unfair treatment may occur after production teams have disbanded.
Vulnerable contributors need all the information given to contributors generally as part of the consent procedure. When communicating with contributors/contestants who are vulnerable and have specific needs, it is important to use the methods that are the most suitable for communication with them. These may include, for example, using verbal recorded consent methods.
The BBC is committed to being inclusive and accessible to all and supporting reasonable adjustments, such as access requirements, across productions. Help may be obtained from the BBC Creative Diversity team who can give advice on how to support diverse and inclusive practices, such as the use of access co-ordinators.
(See Section 6 Fairness: 6.4.1 – 6.4.11 or guidance: Informed Consent)
Social Media
The BBC has a large footprint and even experienced social media users, such as influencers, may not expect the reaction they could get following a BBC broadcast or publication. Discussions should take place with contributors as part of the informed consent process, highlighting the pitfalls and advising them how to reduce risks on social platforms.
During Production
Production staff may sometimes require appropriate training or guidance in order to deal sensitively and practically with contributors.
Productions should be tailored to suit the likely needs of vulnerable contributors.
In some formats a senior member of the production team will be designated as the welfare producer to oversee duty of care provisions and protocols. They can check in with every participant on a regular basis and escalate issues. The welfare producer's sole task is to ensure the welfare of those taking part. That means they are separate from any editorial concerns or pressures, and won't use any info to build story lines. They are expected to be senior enough for editorial team to listen to. In other genres a single member of the production team may lead on welfare as the single point of contact.
A 'point person' may also be identified by the contributor, who is the nominated adult, usually a close family friend or member of the immediate family. They can be contacted if necessary throughout the production, with the contributor's consent.
Support During Production
There may be circumstances when it is appropriate for contributors to have direct access to specialists without having to request this through the production team. For example, if a contributor wants to raise concerns or questions directly with a specialist, we should consider how best to facilitate this in an easy and timely manner, while making sure that any information necessary to allow the production to fulfil their due care obligations is passed on. The BBC who has the ultimate editorial responsibility should also be informed.
Continuing support may also be needed from a mental health expert at 'pinch points' or set times such as after a sensitive interview or after an elimination in a competitive format.
Regular updates should be provided to the wider team of any welfare concerns.
Ahead of Broadcast or Publication
It may be useful for contributors to receive direct advice from BBC experts such as InfoSec or the Press office. In competitive or constructed formats that might be in the form of a meeting with all contributors and all the relevant experts, who can give briefings around issues such as what to expect, how to keep social media accounts secure, and how to deal with social media, press enquiries and being in the spotlight.
Promotional Activity
In making short-form content for social media from content that originated as long form, we should take care to make sure that we aren't putting one person's story in a position where it is judged more harshly because it is the sole story being told. We should also consider NOT publishing content to social if we think the contributor is particularly vulnerable to comment. We should ensure that the full and appropriate context is included in any cut down and we should keep a particular watch on comments, and potentially consider if comments should be turned off.
There are similar considerations when putting forward contributors forward to be involved in press interviews.
Aftercare
Aftercare is important. Any aftercare needs to be proportionate to the ongoing risks identified and have clear boundaries and time frames. We should be flexible to the type of support a contributor might reasonably require or request and remain responsive to a contributor's needs for an appropriate time after the programme has been broadcast.
At the outset the need for aftercare for vulnerable contributors and for all contributors when the nature of the programme means they'll be put in highly pressurised or exposed situations should be discussed.
An agreed plan should be drawn up with an outline of how aftercare will be delivered and for what period of time it should be available. It should be signed off by production and commissioning, who may consult Editorial Policy. This aftercare plan may need to be adjusted if any contributor develops a vulnerability during the production. A psychological assessment or conversation may be advisable post-production.
It may also be necessary to limit the period of time that content could be repeated for. However, the contributor and their families should be made aware that third party websites may reproduce the content without our knowledge or consent.
The aftercare plan should usually include details of a phased withdrawal at a suitable point. In some cases this needs to be done in liaison with external agencies/services that can offer ongoing and more tailored help and support. It is important that contributors/contestants do not become dependent on the BBC and its productions for their support.
- There may be occasions when it is unnecessary or impractical to inform the contributor of potential risks, for example in the production of many news and current affairs programmes and other programmes where it is warranted in the public interest not to do so. ↩