The Panorama Interview: November 20, 1995


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Having read the entire report, and the appendixes, all of which is available on the BBC's reports site, I am left feeling sad for Diana and the members of the Royal Family and Diana's friends who were smeared by Bashir.

There is no doubt that the meetings between Bashir and Diana negatively impacted her impression of many people who were in her corner, or were at least not as actively against her as she was lead to believe.

It is an overall very sad day for William and Harry. William, especially, was old enough to understand much of his mother's last years and the pain she endured.
 
Just as an aside, it'll be interesting to see where this leaves the BBC. It's been repeatedly accused, justifiably so, of political bias, when, as the "state broadcaster", it's supposed to be neutral. And it was badly hit by the Jimmy Savile scandal, when it emerged that a very popular broadcaster of the '70s and '80s was a child abuser, and that there'd been reports of this at the BBC but that no action had been taken. There've been many issues with newspapers acting unethically, but you can choose to stop buying a newspaper, whereas the BBC is funded by TV licence money, and you can't have a TV with no licence.
 
Its absolutely dreadful and I have lost all respect for the BBC so glad the Duke issued that address last night.

All involved should hang their heads in shame for the hurt and pain caused.
 
Just as an aside, it'll be interesting to see where this leaves the BBC. It's been repeatedly accused, justifiably so, of political bias, when, as the "state broadcaster", it's supposed to be neutral. And it was badly hit by the Jimmy Savile scandal, when it emerged that a very popular broadcaster of the '70s and '80s was a child abuser, and that there'd been reports of this at the BBC but that no action had been taken. There've been many issues with newspapers acting unethically, but you can choose to stop buying a newspaper, whereas the BBC is funded by TV licence money, and you can't have a TV with no licence.

Its been a LONG time since the BBC was genuinely respected (or deservedly so). Its left wing bias, its shameful behaviour over sexual antics and child abuse from Saville etc.. the rubbishy programmes that it puts on, in spite of having a steady funding from the public
 
Just as an aside, it'll be interesting to see where this leaves the BBC. It's been repeatedly accused, justifiably so, of political bias, when, as the "state broadcaster", it's supposed to be neutral. And it was badly hit by the Jimmy Savile scandal, when it emerged that a very popular broadcaster of the '70s and '80s was a child abuser, and that there'd been reports of this at the BBC but that no action had been taken. There've been many issues with newspapers acting unethically, but you can choose to stop buying a newspaper, whereas the BBC is funded by TV licence money, and you can't have a TV with no licence.

Very good point raised and I would also like to add that this Panorama scandal provided ammunition/fuel to the "Defund the BBC" campaign, judging by their social media account (with the same name).

Some politicians have spoken out against the BBC. One of them praises The Duke of Cambridge's public announcement.
 
Its absolutely dreadful and I have lost all respect for the BBC so glad the Duke issued that address last night.

All involved should hang their heads in shame for the hurt and pain caused.

Yes, very unethical!
I hope the scandal results in some change for the better, but I'm not very hopeful.
 
Its absolutely dreadful and I have lost all respect for the BBC so glad the Duke issued that address last night.

All involved should hang their heads in shame for the hurt and pain caused.

They should take that Bashir to the Courts and villify him.And the very same goes for the BBC!!
What a backward creature.And I am really polite here...?
 
I don't think that the Panorama deceptions can be responsible for every prior and subsequent decision and poor choice Diana made, including the fatal ones. On the other hand, it was not only shockingly and disgustingly unethical, it contributed to her unease, poor decision making, and unhappy state of mind. So I guess I'm with William on this one. It's quite sad, and must be very painful for him and Harry.

No, it did not cause every msitake she made.. but it was shockingly reckless in what it did. I think that William can remember his mother being a bit crazy and difficult in the last year or 2, and feels that she would not have been so bad, had it not been for the sustained deception and lying she heard. She wasn't very happy and this man's behaviour added to her feelings of isolation and mistrust...
 
For those of us in the US who do not have access to BBC player, it is currently on YouTube put up by Gavin Martin and called Princess Diana Martin Bashir and the BBC, Panorama 20/5/2021. It is 32 min and 43 sec.

Wow! I’d encourage you to watch it soon as it will probably be taken down soon. I was unable to link the YouTube video but you should be able to find it.
 
They should take that Bashir to the Courts and villify him.And the very same goes for the BBC!!
What a backward creature.And I am really polite here...?

The awards Martin Bashir received for the Panorama should be revoked too.
 
It created more and more of a rift between Diana and the RF.. She believed that the RF and the Secret services were spying on her, she didn't trust her staff, nor the police who guarded her... nor her in laws. That led her to rely on the security provided by other people, and to her being "OUT" of the RF. Had she been less suspicious of the RPOs, and her husband's family, she would have had better security that night in Paris, adn would hopefuly not have ended up in a car driven by a drunken driver.
Yes, this is what really gets to me. Bashir’s fabrications caused her to mistrust staff and become more paranoid about whom she could trust. Absolutely despicable.:mad:
If you haven’t already seen, Earl Spencer took elaborate notes at their meeting which DM has published. Even though both he and Diana questioned the truth of some of what Bashir told them, Earl Spencer thought he was talking to a reliable and honest reporter from the “august” BBC. He says he even called someone high up at the BBC to make sure that he could trust Bashir and was told that he could.:ohmy: and he stated that he absolutely believed that the bank statements were real.
I believe that even if all the lies from Bashir hadn’t taken place and Diana gave an interview at that time, she would have most likely over shared as Charles did in his interview. But you can tell in the clips that they show that she really believed that in some way the RF was out to get her and that she could no longer trust BP - if she’d already suspected that, being told and having her brother believe that people were being paid to spy on her put her in a horrible position.
Bashir also made her distrust Jephson (spelling is wrong) who was the closest courtier she had. He stated that he could tell a difference in Diana right away after she’d met with Bashir but he didn’t understand why.
I have always revered the BBC and in our last four years in the US have often looked at what they had to say looking for honest, impartial reporting. Both the lies by one person and more importantly the coverup by many higher ups at the BBC have destroyed that for me.?
In addition to the implications for Diana and the RF, real people who tried to question what was going on and bring this to the light of day back then either lost their jobs or were lied to and told by BBC higher ups that everything was ok and being taken care of. So the ripple effect of all of this had huge ramifications for so many other people too. Including William and Harry.
William’s statement was excellent; how horrible to find out that lies colored his last two years with his mother and how things might have been different if she’d found out during the initial “investigation” that she and her brother had been conned. It would have impacted who she believed she could and couldn’t trust. :nonono:
I wish I could think of more apt words than unethical, despicable, and opportunistically vile. :furious:
 
I appreciate that this is very distressing for William and Harry, and for Earl Spencer, but, as disgusting as Martin Bashir's actions were, the faked documents only enabled him to gain access to Diana. No-one forced her to give the interview, and no-one forced the words out of her mouth. I don't see that the interview led to her death, which is what both Harry and Earl Spencer have suggested. She had the confidence to pursue a campaign against land mines, and to begin a relationship with Dodi Fayed, and possibly other people too. Yes, the interview made a bad situation worse, but ... well, there were two of them in the interview.
I agree that no one forced the words out of her mouth but I do believe that since both Diana and Earl Spencer believed the fake bank statements that she no longer knew who she could trust. That led to her not having proper security. I don’t think that directly led to her death, as Harry does.
 
Lord Hall's role, in congratulating Bashir post-interview, then quashing the later investigation, is serious. He is in the same cultural orbits as the PoW -- opera, art, etc., and I hope he gets a come-uppance.

In the lead-up to that interview, BBC personnel "in the know" took great pains to keep the BBC chairman, Marmaduke Hussey, in the dark. Duke Hussey's wife was Lady Susan Hussey, Lady-in-Waiting to HM since 1960. Tony Hall may have violated some corporation ethical guidelines in not informing the chairman of the BBC about the upcoming interview.
Excellent points - I think Lord Hall has some explaining to do. He seems very complicit in all of this.
 
I don't think that the Panorama deceptions can be responsible for every prior and subsequent decision and poor choice Diana made, including the fatal ones. On the other hand, it was not only shockingly and disgustingly unethical, it contributed to her unease, poor decision making, and unhappy state of mind. So I guess I'm with William on this one. It's quite sad, and must be very painful for him and Harry.


I do not believe that William said or thinks this either. What he said was very clear. The interview was exploitation at its worst, and the fallout was great.
 
Very good point raised and I would also like to add that this Panorama scandal provided ammunition/fuel to the "Defund the BBC" campaign, judging by their social media account (with the same name).

Some politicians have spoken out against the BBC. One of them praises The Duke of Cambridge's public announcement.

There have been many public figures, and private ones too, remarking how 'king-like' William was with this statement. I think he was deeply impressive and many have remarked that they feel heartened to know that he will one day be our King.
 
So very sad for everyone involved.
The interview was exploitation, but I don't think that only the BBC is to blame.
Every one was after Diana. I lived in Great-Britain from '95 till '98 and I was surprised about the "tabloid culture" so many Brits read those tabloids. And Diana sold! always. I have seen the interview and I saw a distressed lady, and I really wondered why she did it, she had two young sons, can you imagine your mother telling on television that your father is unfaithfull, that she had relationships with other man.. and 23 million people hearing this.!! Poor William and Harry.
Only very few colleagues did agree with me, the most said things as " so good she kicked Charles in his balls" etc. As if it was watching a game without real people.
And than the complete over the top crying on the streets when she died. Yes tears in your eyes I understand but this was almost ridiculous. I think many many people must be ashamed. If we all stopped reading this tabloids ... what would happen? I think the world would be nicer without them.
 
I honestly don't think Charles and Diana were that "close" even before the interview as well as after. I think wariness on both sides existed. Plus Charles' interview where he admitted his affair was a sort of game changer, since the PBs subsequently divorced. His confessions to Dimbleby included that he did not love Diana, apparently, the entire time, He preferred another woman. Diana's and Charles' relationship was "damaged" in late 1992, so much so they officially separated. I think Diana and Charles were cordial to each other but good friends, at the time she died? I don't think so. Also would not it upset the boys to hear their father admit being involved with another woman during his marriage to their mother? Or heard he did not love their mother. Diana's interview was by no means the only one with comments that would hurt them.
 
Here is a BBC article that more clearly explains the timeline of Panorama interview events. To me it is bizarre that BBC Panorama did an investigative news story on a 25 year old Panorama interview..... surely someone else should have done this?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56680229
 
Morton did refer to the issues with that interview in his book from 2004: Diana In Pursuit of Love. Perhaps that should be promoted by Morton now?
 
I honestly don't think Charles and Diana were that "close" even before the interview as well as after. I think wariness on both sides existed. Plus Charles' interview where he admitted his affair was a sort of game changer, since the PBs subsequently divorced. His confessions to Dimbleby included that he did not love Diana, apparently, the entire time, He preferred another woman. Diana's and Charles' relationship was "damaged" in late 1992, so much so they officially separated. I think Diana and Charles were cordial to each other but good friends, at the time she died? I don't think so. Also would not it upset the boys to hear their father admit being involved with another woman during his marriage to their mother? Or heard he did not love their mother. Diana's interview was by no means the only one with comments that would hurt them.

I keep reading that Charles told Dimbleby that he never loved Diana. But from reading the transcript of the interview and from my (admittedly) foggy memory of it, I do not recall Charles ever saying this.

Where is it coming from?:sad:
 
No, it was said in the book. DImbleby as Charles authorized biographer had access to Charles personal papers, letters, to Charles' friends and Charles himself. The confessions in the book were from Charles himself.
 
I think that both Diana and Charles regretted doing the TV interviews, and letting so much be said in the books about them. Hitting out in anger's understandable, but it's not usually very wise.
 
No, it was said in the book. DImbleby as Charles authorized biographer had access to Charles personal papers, letters, to Charles' friends and Charles himself. The confessions in the book were from Charles himself.

Can you point me to a place in the book that has a quote from Charles about not loving Diana. My book indicates that David Dimbleby concluded that Charles was never "in love" with Diana. But the comment was not backed up from anything Charles directly said.
 
Can you point me to a place in the book that has a quote from Charles about not loving Diana. My book indicates that David Dimbleby concluded that Charles was never "in love" with Diana. But the comment was not backed up from anything Charles directly said.

I dont think that Charles explicitly said so.. but it was clear that he had never been deeply in love wiht Diana and by the time of Dimbley the marriage was all over....
 
I dont think that Charles explicitly said so.. but it was clear that he had never been deeply in love wiht Diana and by the time of Dimbley the marriage was all over....

I think he loved her but was not "in love" with her but that is my opinion. The only person who knows is Charles and he has never said that he didn't love or was not "in love" with Diana.
 
I think he loved her but was not "in love" with her but that is my opinion. The only person who knows is Charles and he has never said that he didn't love or was not "in love" with Diana.

I think he was attracted to her at first and she was sweet and seemed to be in love with him so he was disposed to fall in love with her at the time. But in his heart, I think he knew that Camilla would always be very special to him. however I dont believe that he explicitly said in the book or on TV that he didn't love Di at all.
 
Can you point me to a place in the book that has a quote from Charles about not loving Diana. My book indicates that David Dimbleby concluded that Charles was never "in love" with Diana. But the comment was not backed up from anything Charles directly said.

I don't have the book in front of me. But Charles did tell Dimbleby his feelings for Camilla had not changed when he married Diana. He also confessed to Dimbleby (via the book) he would not stop seeing Camilla (despite the fact at the time the book came out, both were married to others). Sarah Bradford cited the passage about Charles "feelings for Camilla, in her book about Diana and wondered why Charles would marry a besotted young woman knowing he still had feelings for Camilla. Not fair to Diana. The literature of the time (reviewers of the book) noted that he did not love Diana when he married her according to the book. Diana also realized during the honeymoon that Camilla was not out of Charles' life, they were in touch one way or the other. A man should not marry anyone if he has feelings for someone else. I think he was attracted to Diana and liked her but was not "in love" with her. Perhaps he had feelings for her as mother of his children. I think she did have feelings for him as father of her children. But as she said, after a time they could not live under the same roof anymore.

Also it does not scream "Love" when a man says his father "made him" marry a woman.

https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19941017&slug=1936490
 
Last edited:
I'm not disagreeing with this but Charles never stated that he didn't love Diana. A person can love more than one person at a time.

I doubt if he said anything to that effect. by the time of the Dimblelby interview I think that his love for Diana had faded away after several years of unhappiness and incompatibility, but I doubt if he said it. Its some time since I read the book.. but I can't see Charles saying explicitly "I never loved her".
 
Relationships are complex things and I don't think we'll ever really get a clear picture of the extent of feelings that Charles or Diana or even Camilla really held at any time. One thing is for sure though, Charles' relationship with Diana was different from his relationship with Camilla. I think its possible that Charles could have loved and appreciated both women but in very different ways. One big difference I can see between his relationship with Camilla that wasn't there with Diana is that element of being "best friends". The kind of person that you are so comfortable with that you can and do bare your soul to them. That's a degree of intimacy that Charles never reached with Diana. They were just too different people to really be able to "get" each other on a deeper level.

I talk a lot about unconditional love. The no matter what happens kind of love and there's a Greek name for it. Agape. It withstands the test of time. What Charles and Diana had was more at first at the Eros (physical) level and they were honestly attracted to and "in love" but the difference were too great in their personalities to actually go much deeper. As much as I know Charles was into philosophy, I think he was very aware of these different kinds of love and that's what he was referring to when he stated "whatever "in love" means".
 
Back
Top Bottom