India, Nov. 16 -- Is the BBC a corporation in crisis? Or is it being held up to higher standards than the rest of the media? The answer to both questions seems to be yes. The tragic part is that the trauma it's going through is self-inflicted and could easily have been averted or, at least, better handled. This is because it's tripped over several compounding errors of judgement, but it's not guilty of institutional bias. The principal cause of the crisis is the unforgivable editing of a Panorama documentary on US president Donald Trump. It stitched together two different parts of a speech he gave in January 2021, which were said 54 minutes apart, to create the impression he was advocating violence. This was clearly a manipulation, and, therefore, fake, although it was not inaccurate in suggesting that Trump's role in supporting and, even, encouraging what happened on Capitol Hill raises serious and disturbing questions. The BBC should have admitted its mistake and apologised without being forced to do so after Trump called it out and threatened to sue the Corporation. It was thus guilty of both reprehensible documentary making and refusing to accept its grievous error. But there are two further strands to the present crisis. The BBC has been accused of a pro-Hamas bias and of woke handling of gender and sex issues. For a while now, there have been concerns that its Arabic service is broadcasting a perspective of the Israel-Hamas war that many find anti-Israeli. Whether true or false, that perception should have been responded to. It wasn't. That's equally true of the BBC's handling of trans issues. Its own anchors are said to have been disturbed by this. In fact, its own internal processes have highlighted these allegations, but, again, it failed to respond. The BBC is guilty of not appreciating the seriousness of these concerns. So, at multiple levels, the BBC has let itself down - editorially, managerially, even, presentationally. Perhaps a measure of complacency had paralysed the Corporation. Now, these are serious failings, no doubt, but they don't change the fact that the BBC is and remains perhaps the most trusted media organisation in the world. Even whilst criticising the Corporation, the Financial Times (FT) called it "the UK's most important creative and journalistic organisation". And let's not forget: Rajiv Gandhi only believed his mother had been assassinated when he heard Mark Tully confirm the news on the BBC. For hundreds of millions suffering in despotic regimes, where there isn't a free press, the BBC is the voice of truth. That's where it scores over CNN. What compounds this crisis is, it has occurred about a year before the Corporation's royal charter is renewed in 2027. For a while, there has been talk of scrapping the licence fee and privatising the BBC. This week's developments will undoubtedly fuel such pressure. But it would be a terrible mistake if British politicians act in any way to diminish the BBC's standing. That would cripple one of the two British institutions held in high esteem, if not awe, across the world. The other is the Crown. The Corporation has already paid for its lapses with the resignation of its director general and head of news. Maybe more scalps are called for. For instance, did the Corporation's board act in time or was it slow and initially reluctant to do so? Perhaps they too must go. The price the BBC has to pay could be steep. But if it protects the BBC, it's worth it. In its 103-year history, the BBC has weathered many squalls. This may be, as the FT believes, one of the most serious. But with sensitive handling, transparency and recognition that it's not perfect but needs to strive to be, the BBC can survive and flourish. Not only does it deserve to, but we, its viewers, require that it should. Britain and the world need the BBC. It's made terrible mistakes, but they are not - and must not be taken to be - fatal....