How Did the BBC Miss This Shocking Slur During the Baftas Broadcast?
The BBC is facing mounting questions after a racial slur was aired during its coverage of the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (Bafta) Film Awards — despite the ceremony being broadcast on a two-hour delay specifically designed to prevent such incidents.
The offensive remark was shouted from the audience as Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo stood on stage to present the first award of Sunday night’s ceremony. Both actors are Black. The slur was clearly audible during the broadcast on BBC One and was later available on demand via BBC iPlayer before being removed.
At the centre of the controversy is John Davidson, a guest at the ceremony whose life story inspired the film I Swear. Davidson has Tourette’s syndrome, a neurological condition that can cause involuntary vocal tics. In rare cases, Tourette’s can include coprolalia — the uncontrollable utterance of socially inappropriate or offensive words. While this context has prompted calls for understanding, it has not stemmed criticism of the broadcaster’s handling of the situation.
The BBC swiftly apologised after viewers expressed shock on social media. “We apologise that this was not edited out prior to broadcast and it will now be removed from the version on BBC iPlayer,” a spokesperson said. But the apology has done little to quiet the central question: how did the slur make it through editorial checks in the first place?
Awards ceremonies are rarely aired completely live. Even when marketed as “live,” broadcasters typically build in a short delay — often ranging from several seconds to several minutes — to guard against unexpected profanity, political protests, or other unscripted moments. In this case, the Baftas were shown with a two-hour delay, offering what would appear to be ample time for producers and compliance teams to review and edit the footage.
Industry experts say that during delayed broadcasts, teams monitor footage in real time while preparing the final transmission version. Editors can cut audio, switch camera angles, or remove entire segments if necessary. Given those safeguards, critics argue that the incident represents a breakdown in process rather than an unavoidable slip.
For viewers watching at home, the moment was jarring. The slur was heard as Jordan and Lindo prepared to announce the winner, briefly disrupting what had been a celebratory atmosphere. Neither actor visibly reacted on stage, and the ceremony continued without acknowledgment of the outburst.
However, once the clip circulated online, the reaction was immediate. Many questioned whether proper oversight had been applied, particularly given the sensitivity of the language used and the context in which it was heard. The fact that the remark occurred while two prominent Black actors were addressing the audience heightened the seriousness of the lapse.
There has also been discussion about how broadcasters balance compassion and compliance. Tourette’s advocates stress that individuals with the condition do not choose their vocal tics and should not be vilified for symptoms beyond their control. At the same time, broadcasting standards require networks to shield audiences from offensive language, especially racial slurs with a long and painful history.
The BBC, as the UK’s publicly funded national broadcaster, operates under strict editorial guidelines concerning harm and offence. Its code requires particular care around discriminatory language and mandates that potentially offensive material be justified by context. In this case, there was no editorial justification for including the remark — a fact underscored by the corporation’s decision to remove the segment from its streaming platform.
By Monday morning, the Baftas programme had been temporarily taken down from BBC iPlayer while edits were made. The corporation confirmed that the offending audio would not appear in the revised version. It has not, however, detailed whether an internal review will examine how the error occurred or whether additional safeguards will be introduced for future live-event broadcasts.
The incident arrives at a time when broadcasters face increasing scrutiny over diversity, representation, and accountability. Awards ceremonies, in particular, are high-profile events watched by millions and dissected instantly across social media platforms. Even brief lapses can generate outsized backlash.
So how did the BBC miss this shocking slur? Without a formal explanation, observers can only speculate: a technical oversight, a breakdown in communication between production teams, or a failure in final compliance checks. Whatever the cause, the controversy underscores the challenges of managing unpredictable live audiences — even with a delay in place.
For now, the BBC’s apology stands as its primary response. But as viewers continue to demand higher standards and transparency, the broadcaster may find that a simple statement is not enough to close the chapter on a moment that many believe should never have reached the screen.
