Thread by @BBCNewsPR

THREAD: We’ve had lots of reaction to this chart – here are answers to some of your questions & there are also FAQ on the #bbcqt website bbc.co.uk/programmes/art… (1/10)

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsPR/status/1040246958420578304

Why 2000? We were going to chart the figures since the start of QT in 1979 but since the political landscape has changed so substantially in that time, we decided a snapshot since the turn of the century would be more helpful. (2/10)

Lots of people have asked if we can run a shorter timeframe and show the figures on #bbcqt since 2015 so here they are (3/10)

Methodology: Chart represents the number of appearances. If someone has appeared on more than one panel, they are counted more than once. Where a panellist has appeared specifically as a representative of a political party, e.g an MP, they have been counted as Con/Lab/etc (4/10)

Nigel Farage has never been classed among ‘other panellists’; he’s always appeared as a representative of UKIP (5/10)

The panel nearly always includes a representative from the UK government and the official opposition – also features representatives from other political parties across the series, taking as our guide the level of electoral support at national level each party enjoys (6/10)

‘Other panellists’ - journalists, business people, authors, academics etc – have been a feature of QT since Edna O’Brien appeared on the very first episode in 1979 – so we represent a wide range of views (7/10)

'Other panellists’ clearly have their own views but don’t all have a party political affiliation so we don’t classify them as such – but each week, and across every series, we aim to represent a wide range of views and opinions (8/10)

QT is not a single issue programme and we can’t achieve mathematical ‘balance’ for every single question asked, not least because politicians from opposite sides sometimes agree with each other (9/10)

During formal Referendum period QT did ensure a balance between Brexit remainers & leavers. Since then the arguments have been less binary and more complex, so it’s no longer appropriate to categorise panellists like that. Our aim’s to reflect range of views over time (10/10)