To be hurt and annoyed at being dropped by the BBC?

[Ladyof2025]

BBC contacted me asking me to speak on camera about an aspect of local history I happen to know a bit about. I agreed and spent the next few days brushing up on the facts and then writing and rewriting a script and reading it out loud again and again until I knew it by heart and could speak confidently to camera as though I'd never said it before.

I do not have a pretty face, and am in my 60s and rather podgy, but I went to the trouble of going through my wardrobe for the perfect outfit that flattered my podginess, and had my hair cut specially and put on some make up, so I could be the best possible version of me that I could.

The production team visited, took me to the site and filmed me speaking. I did it smoothly and confidently and was glad that I had put in all the rehearsal so I came across as knowledgeable, professional and confident of my material. They said my performance was perfect, thanked me profusely and left.

After about a week they rang me to say that due to time and space issues the section of the programme that featured my input had been dropped. I felt absolutely gutted, not because I want to see myself on TV but because I had used up a lot of my valuable free time for several days preparing and rehearsing for it (for no fee I should add).

A few months later the programme I was dropped from came on TV and to my utter astonishment an attractive, slim young lady appeared, at the same site I was filmed at, and she spoke the exact words I had written and rehearsed! I nearly fell off my chair - the absolute bloody cheek of dropping ME but stealing the script that I had written. Thinking about it, I realised that they wanted my expert input, but not my saggy face or ample figure.

AIBU to be hurt and angry?

Thanks

OP, very few people on here will be 'smooth, confident TV presenters' so take no notice of the few spiteful posters who would literally find an argument in thin air. They don't know you - ignore!

Take notice of the vast majority of supportive people and get answers from the BBC.

I think they filmed the other presenter saying my words later the same day as they filmed me, or the next day, as they stayed overnight in a hotel as there was more filming to be done the next day. I did my thing at 10am they collected me by car and then brought me home again. They could have then looked at the film, decided they wanted someone else and gone back that day or the day after.

The new presenter stood in front of the plaque same as I did and you can see a blue van in the car park. That same blue van was there when I was filmed. But then again maybe that blue van is parked there 24/7/365. Who knows?

Because I’ve spent a couple of decades making history docs, so I am pretty familiar with how they work.

The OP has been asked on the show as an expert / or local enthusiast - the idea of these contributions is that they are delivered naturally. If the OP rehearsed a script, it won’t have worked as good TV. It’s upsetting to get dropped from a programme, but the programme makers’ primary obligation is to make a good programme for the audience, so sometimes it has to be done.

The person who replaced the OP is either a similar enthusiast, who talked on the same topic in her own words - or a presenter, who may have used a phrase or two the OP used, but delivered in a succinct piece to camera. No one will have delivered chunks of the OP’s script, because that’s not good TV.

If the OP’s original research was used by the presenter then it would have been nice to acknowledge that, if it was a full programme with a thanks section in the credits, and there’s nothing wrong with the OP writing to the BBC to say that. It may of course turn out that other people had turned up the same info and the programme makers also got it from
the national trust team (or whatever) in which case the programme makers will write back saying so.

Gosh that is a nasty take.

I don't have egg on my face actually because the handful of people I told - my closest friends and family - are not laughing at me (as you clearly are) but are upset on my behalf.

Are you saying that after being invited by the BBC to be on TV I should not have told my closest friends?

I'm not surprised there are people making you you're the one in the wrong here @Ladyof2025, this is MN, site for the contrary. And to call you vain?! There is not a single person on this planet that wouldn't spare a minute to think about how they might look their best on tv.

YANBU. I would be upset too. They have been really sly and I would follow up with the producer about it.

I think you could be right that it was not the way I look but my delivery that was not considered good enough for TV. Society has made me feel so bad about the way I look that I may be jumping to the conclusion that this was why I was dropped when it wasn't.

Had I turned up in my grubby trackie bottoms, a baggy hoodie and with scruffy hair I was have EXPECTED them to not use me in the programme.

Ah, so none of this happened, then? That's great, because now I know it was a figment of my imagination, I no longer have to feel upset about it!

Thanks, Sapienza.

They emailed me the questions that they wanted me to answer in my little speech. "Lady, what have have found out about this building...." and "did you discover that it had any famous residents or visitors?"

I’d be very surprised indeed if it were anything to do with how you look - history documentaries feature lots of people who do not have glossy TV looks (eg Mary Beard) - the audience that watches them is happy to see lots of different people represented.

If you do something like this again, then just avoid learning a script, focus on 3 key facts you want to get across. However it’s quite possible the issue was at least party time - so they took some key info and got the presenter to say it succinctly.

If they only got the info from you, they should have written to thank you and explain at least, so if you complain they will write and apologise. It is also possible someone else they interviewed had turned it up, in which case they’ll write and tell you that.

I’m sorry you had a bad experience, but don’t tell yourself it’s to do with how you look - it won’t have been that.

Without the piece I spoke to the camera, how would she have been able to name the exact same list of people that I did? It took me YEARS to uncover that information. It is not on the internet. They could not have done all the research to have discovered those names during the hours or days between filming me and filming her. And also the list of names was delivered by her in exactly the same order that I recited them. How?

I was coming to say that a lot of fluff being said by different people would sound similar , although I would be offended they didn’t ask you to come back and reshoot if they wanted to do it again .

is it possible the woman they asked was unavailable for filming when you were available, but she was their first choice?

do you know who your replacement is? Is she trying to become a TV presenter for historical stuff? Could be why they pushed her into your place, rather than you weren’t enough - they want more from her.

a few things to put in a formal complaint

1. being a subject expert you know about other experts of the same subject and you hadn’t come across X. You would like to know why they chose X as a talking head on the topic when you or Y and Z would be better
2. How did X come about the knowledge of Y and Z, as far as you are aware you are the only one with the historical data to formalise those conclusions

Then I would write in guff about how not using local experts diminishes local knowledge and how working with the public and communities on important projects is part of the BBC charter (I mean, I’d find the relevant bits to quote, maybe ask Chat GPT?)

I just wanted to say I really recognised myself in your post about your reluctance to ask why you weren’t reinterviewed. Shame already there about them saying “You’re not good enough” when you don’t even know if that’s the reason - but you’re so afraid it is.

If it helps, I strongly suspect the woman they went with is a BBC rising star, their new darling they want to give screen time to. It’s not about you.

doesn’t mean it won’t sting though.

Oh dear more posters accusing me of being wooden.

Or of making up the entire thing.

If I change my username to Pinocchio that would nicely reflect both accusations!

In fact I asked Chat GPT for you

The situation described involves the BBC replacing your on-camera contribution with another individual delivering your prepared script, without prior notification or consent. This raises concerns regarding fair treatment and respect for contributors.

The BBC’s Editorial Values emphasize the importance of trust, truth, accuracy, impartiality, and fairness. Specifically, Section 1.3 of the Editorial Guidelines states:

“We will be open in acknowledging mistakes when they are made and encourage a culture of willingness to learn from them.”  

In your complaint, you should highlight that the BBC did not inform you about the replacement or seek your consent to use your script, which contradicts their commitment to openness and fairness. Additionally, the lack of acknowledgment for your contribution and the use of your script without permission may constitute unjust or unfair treatment, as outlined in Sections Seven (“Fairness”) and Eight (“Privacy”) of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code. 

To address this, you can file a complaint directly with Ofcom, as fairness and privacy complaints are exempt from the ‘BBC First’ approach. Ensure your complaint includes:
• The programme’s name and broadcast date.
• Details of your involvement and the subsequent replacement.
• How this action caused you unjust or unfair treatment.

For guidance on submitting your complaint, refer to Ofcom’s “Procedures for the consideration and adjudication of Fairness and Privacy complaints.”

By detailing these points, you can effectively communicate how the BBC’s actions conflicted with their stated values and regulatory obligations.

OP when you watched the footage of the replacement "Talking head" presumably they would have named her? Ie in a subtitle at the bottom of the screen, or during the introduction given by the presenter.
Have you googled this new "expert"?
Is it worth trying to find more information out about her or contacting her directly to find out what her connection is to the local
History?

@Ladyof2025 people always accuse, try and ignore them. Seems a bizarre thing to make up, and lots of others on here believe you and have given great advice.

Will you contact the BBC/producers about it?

What did the on-screen text say when the woman came up? If someone of the production team or an an actress was portrayed as a local citizen then you have grounds for fabrication.

The Daily Mail love this sort of thing, I bet they pick it up and identify the programme.

I am sorry I made you feel bad with my comment OP. It's obviously been a very wounding experience. The programme makers should have explained much more clearly what was expected in terms of presentation. The re use of your material must have been very upsetting.

Just to say I believe you on this OP. I have heard of it happening before. Please do write in a complaint. Its one thing if they drop your segment due to time constraints; but to take your work and not credit it is appalling. If they didn't want to use 'you' they should have credited you at the end for research or content.

I think what you really need is some recognition that you played a part in their show. Even if you didn't make it on screen, they used your info, and you deserve a shout-out in the credits.

The market for selling photography is not as lucrative for 99% of people as you think it is, and sometimes people are just proud of their work and want other people to see it.

It really doesn't matter if you were wooden, if your skirt was tucked in your knickers and they didn't realise - you are entitled to feel upset that they didn't have the nous to tell you up front that they were going to go ahead at another time with a different presenter.

It's very poor show from a professional organisation at the least.

Of course not, only that, in my experience as a fairly frequent talking head, it quite often ends up on the cutting room floor. Not because I did anything ‘wrong’, but just for reasons of time, pacing, didn’t suit the narrative thread etc.

A former colleague and I were invited last year to the film festival premiere of a documentary we’d both been extensively interviewed for, as we’re two of the leading experts on the subject. Colleague was freaking out in the cinema at the idea of seeing herself on a big screen. It turned out that she was only featured in voiceover, talking over some archival footage, and she was saying ‘I wasted a really good blowdry! I could have done that in my pyjamas!’ I think the filmmaker used me more, not because I was ‘better’, but because they just wanted more input from people of my nationality (relevant to film topic).