Countryfile: Taking on contentious issues, reflecting both sides of the argument

Writing in the Daily Mail last week, the veteran journalist Christopher Booker criticised the TV viewing habits of around Countryfile's 7.6 million viewers. He opened his article about Countryfile by describing it as: "one of the BBC's most spectacular recent success stories" - absolutely true. Since it is also currently the most popular factual programme on British television this might even be something to be celebrated. Not so, it seemed.

You might think that such compelling television, which persuades millions of viewers to reflect on the beauty, the variety and the reality of life in the British countryside, can only be a good thing. Instead he chooses to misrepresent the series, and to underestimate those who choose to watch it, claiming that Countryfile is in some way peddling its own agenda on countryside issues. In the article he cites two recent features - one on the decline in the number of farmland birds, the other on the proliferation of wind farms - as evidence that Countryfile is actually run clandestinely by "fluffy-headed environmentalists".

On the bird story his charge is that Countryfile concentrates solely on the damage done to wildlife habitats by intensive farming and toxic chemicals, but ignores the rising number of predators which feed on them, including buzzards, foxes, badgers and red kites. These, he says, we sentimentalise, aligning ourselves with: “powerful green lobby groups, including the RSPB”.

Even a cursory glance reveals that, while we may cover some “green” environmental issues, we also reflect points of view to the contrary.

We have, for example, analysed the contribution of shooting to the rural economy and its role in wildlife conservation, we’ve asked specifically whether the booming buzzard population has a downside and we’ve grilled the RSPB about their attitude to the Hen Harrier recovery project, which some see as obstructive. We have also covered both sides of the badger cull debate several times, including, memorably, an intervention from the Princess Royal, who asked whether gassing them might be a more human alternative to shooting.

On the wind turbine story, Mr Booker's charge is that our story is blindly supportive of wind farm expansion, he is wide of the mark and misses his target by a country mile.

Far from supporting the business, this piece actually spelt out the subsidies on which the wind turbine industry currently relies; it also explained the "constraint payments" - up to £1 million per week of tax-payers' money - that are routinely paid to operators not to supply energy, because the National Grid cannot yet handle the inevitable variations in their turbines' output.

While Countryfile readily takes on contentious issues, it never shows only one side of the argument; for every point of view on the rural agenda there is usually an equal and opposite one and we always endeavour to reflect this. If for some reason it isn't feasible to include every point of view equally in one single broadcast, the fact that we are on air 52 weeks a year means that we are able to revisit any story - particularly the most controversial and long-running ones - and very often, the second time around, we approach the subject from a quite different perspective. 

There is a straightforward reason why we work in this way and it comes down to a fundamental question: who is the countryside for? For me the answer is simple: the countryside is for everyone, and everyone's voice should be heard. So, yes, the DNA of Countryfile lies, historically, in its coverage of agriculture and in the farming communities that we regularly feature, but just as farming has had to change and diversify over the past quarter century, so Britain's countryside and the range of people within it has also changed dramatically.

Today those who feel they have a claim or connection with Britain's beautiful and varied landscape include both farmers and environmentalists; people who shoot game as well as wildlife enthusiasts; fell runners as well as photographers; artists, poets and rock-climbers - the list is a long one. It also includes, increasingly, a growing number of people who may actually spend their working week in the city, but would rather be in the great outdoors. Interestingly, few of these groups are mutually exclusive - many of them indeed overlap - but all of them appear to feel strongly about the British countryside. Equally important, they all have a part to play in the rural economy.

It's five years now since Countryfile moved from the relative calm of its original Sunday lunchtime slot to the more exposed environment of BBC One's peak time schedule. The programme has changed and evolved accordingly, but it has also retained the essential qualities that appeal to all these kinds of people, not just in our celebration of the passing seasons - through beautiful filming of wildlife and landscapes - but also in the way that we tackle hard subjects and encourage our audience to question, and understand, the origins of their food - from farm to fork.

We know that our Countryfile audience splits almost evenly between those who describe themselves as "rural" (51%) and those who think of themselves as "urban" (49%), but all of these viewers care about the countryside and all have the right to have their voices reflected in the breadth of stories that we cover.

Mr Booker's main focus seems to be that we are: "relentlessly positive and upbeat", thereby ignoring the tough issues in contemporary rural Britain. I'd argue that positiveness of mind is a virtue and that regular viewers of the programme will recognise rural realities very readily. Our recent stories include: the desperate plight of dairy farmers; dog theft; the lack of affordable rural housing; the threat to livestock from blue tongue disease; rural crime; the Somerset floods and an investigation into Halal slaughter.

The article suggests that the secret to Countryfile's bumper viewing figures is that we sell a gullible audience a make-believe image of rural life that ignores its grim reality. I feel that's a rather sour and mean-spirited mis-representation of the facts which, crucially, underestimates and patronises, not only our audience but also the Daily Mail's readers.

Countryfile does not "betray" the British countryside, it portrays it - in all its beauty and wonderfully varied reality; and, in so doing, it taps into the deepest affections of the British people. That's the reason that they come to Countryfile in their millions.

Bill Lyons is Executive Editor, Countryfile