President Donald Trump has filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC, accusing the broadcaster of defamation and deceptive practices over a Panorama documentary that edited his January 6, 2021, speech to supporters. The suit claims the program falsely portrayed him as inciting the Capitol attack and was intended to damage his 2024 election prospects, while the BBC has apologized for the editing and says it will defend itself in court.
On Monday, President Donald Trump filed a federal lawsuit in Florida against the BBC, seeking up to $10 billion in damages. According to court filings described by NPR and other outlets, the complaint accuses the British broadcaster of defamation and violating Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act over an episode of the BBC’s "Panorama" documentary series that drew on Trump’s remarks from January 6, 2021.
The documentary, titled "Trump: A Second Chance?", aired twice in the United Kingdom shortly before the 2024 U.S. election. Reporting by NPR, the Associated Press and Reuters indicates that the program compressed Trump’s speech on the Ellipse, juxtaposing his suggestion that supporters "walk" to the Capitol with a separate exhortation to "fight like hell," while omitting his calls for a "peaceful and patriotic" demonstration. Trump’s lawsuit argues that this edit created a misleading impression that he incited the violence at the U.S. Capitol, where his supporters stormed the building as Congress met to certify Joe Biden’s victory.
The suit describes the Panorama episode as a false and malicious depiction intended to interfere with the 2024 election and harm Trump’s reputation. It alleges that the broadcast nonetheless reached viewers in Florida through the BritBox streaming service and through virtual private networks (VPNs) used to access the BBC’s iPlayer, even though the BBC itself says the documentary was geographically restricted to U.K. audiences and was not carried on U.S. partners such as PBS or NPR member stations.
In a Nov. 13 letter to Trump’s legal team, First Amendment attorney Charles Tobin, writing on behalf of the BBC, said the broadcaster had already demonstrated contrition by apologizing, withdrawing the broadcast and accepting the resignations of two senior executives linked to the episode, according to documents and correspondence reviewed by NPR. Tobin also argued that the program was not aired through U.S. distribution partners and emphasized that Trump went on to win Florida in 2024 by what he called a “commanding 13-point margin,” undercutting claims that the documentary swayed voters in the state.
NPR’s review of BritBox through Amazon Prime, one of the streaming platform’s primary distributors, found only a single episode of "Panorama"—from 2000—available there, and it did not locate the contested documentary on major U.S. podcast platforms such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Pocket Casts. Trump’s complaint nonetheless cites BritBox and VPN usage in Florida to argue that the episode reached voters. Analysts interviewed by NPR note that a sharp rise in VPN adoption in Florida during 2024 and early 2025 appears tied largely to a new state law requiring age verification for access to adult websites, rather than to demand for foreign news programs.
Legal observers say Trump’s case faces significant hurdles, including the need to prove that the BBC acted with “actual malice” and that the U.K.-only broadcast caused cognizable harm in Florida. Several First Amendment experts interviewed by NPR suggest the litigation could still end in a settlement, pointing to recent $16 million payouts by the parent companies of ABC News and CBS News to resolve defamation suits Trump brought following his 2024 election comeback. At the same time, other analysts quoted by outlets such as Reuters and the Guardian describe the BBC case as legally weak and potentially driven as much by politics as by prospects in court.
The BBC, a publicly funded broadcaster in the United Kingdom, has acknowledged that the January 6 segment in the Panorama documentary reflected poor editorial judgment and has apologized for the misleading edit. However, it maintains that the program did not defame Trump or materially affect U.S. voters and has vowed to vigorously contest the lawsuit in the Miami federal court where it was filed.
