Ben Frow explains why Channel 5 will not commission a Sarah Everard drama

Ben Frow’s public stance on a Sarah Everard drama

During a recent interview Ben Frow, chief content officer at Channel 5, made it clear that the broadcaster would never green‑light a drama based on the murder of Sarah Everard. He explained that certain subjects are simply off‑limits for the channel because they conflict with its public service obligations.

Key reasons cited by Frow

Respect for the victims and their families
Potential harm to ongoing investigations
The risk of sensationalising a recent tragedy
Channel 5’s commitment to balanced, responsible storytelling

Frow stressed that while Channel 5 regularly produces true‑crime series, the timeline and sensitivity surrounding Everard’s case place it in a different category.

The BBC’s parallel project

In contrast, the BBC has announced that veteran screenwriter Jeff Pope is developing a drama that follows the police investigation into Everard’s 2021 murder. The project, described in a BBC drama commission release, aims to explore systemic issues highlighted by the case.

Jeff Pope, known for his work on high‑profile true‑crime narratives, says he hopes the series will provoke a national conversation about safety and policing. The BBC, as a public service broadcaster, argues that it has a duty to examine matters of public interest, even when they are uncomfortable.

Public service remit and audience expectations

Channel 5, owned by Paramount, operates under a public service licence that requires it to serve the public interest while remaining commercially viable. Frow noted that the network’s audience expects a mix of entertainment, factual programming and drama, but not at the expense of ethical standards.

He added that the channel’s editorial guidelines, which align with the Ofcom broadcasting code, place a strong emphasis on avoiding content that could cause undue distress.

Balancing commercial goals with responsibility

Channel 5’s revenue model relies on advertising and subscription partnerships. Producing a drama that could attract controversy might alienate advertisers who prefer a neutral brand environment. Frow explained that the network must weigh potential viewership gains against reputational risk.

Ethical considerations in dramatising recent tragedies

The decision not to commission a Sarah Everard drama reflects broader industry debates about the line between storytelling and exploitation. Experts argue that dramatising events that are still fresh in public memory can re‑open wounds for survivors and families.

Legal scholar Dr Emily Jones of the University of London notes that “media portrayals of recent crimes must be handled with extreme care to avoid defamation and to respect the dignity of those affected.”

In the United Kingdom, the Home Office issued a statement following the public outcry, urging broadcasters to consider the impact of their content on victims’ families. The statement can be read on the UK Home Office website.

Potential consequences of a dramatisation

Legal challenges from the family or involved parties
Public backlash that could damage the broadcaster’s reputation
Increased scrutiny from regulators such as Ofcom
Emotional distress for viewers who have personal connections to the case

Industry reaction and future implications

Frow’s comments have sparked discussion among peers. Some producers argue that avoiding the story altogether may miss an opportunity to educate the public. Others agree that the timing is simply not right.

The Guardian recently covered the debate, noting that “the line between public interest and sensationalism is thinner than ever in the age of streaming” (Guardian coverage of drama debate).

Looking ahead, both Channel 5 and the BBC will continue to navigate the tension between compelling storytelling and ethical responsibility. While the BBC proceeds with its project, Channel 5’s stance signals a cautious approach that may influence other commercial broadcasters.

Ultimately, the decision underscores a fundamental question for the media industry: how to honour the truth without compromising the very people the stories aim to serve.