Jane Devine: BBC's response to a Today question shows Auntie running so scared it can't function WAS it wrong for Evan Davis to ask Rabbi Jonathan Sacks what he thought of the situation in Israel? It's clear that when he did so, on Radio Four's Today programme, Rabbi Sacks thought he was off air, but it is also clear that Davis was not trying to trick him. As a regular contributor to Today's Thought for the Day slot, Rabbi Sacks could be accused of naivety only as much as Davis could be accused of underhandedness. Neither would be true. That's why it was good journalism: a legitimate question was asked of a credible person and the astoundingly honest answer "it's to do with Iran" was given. Yet when the Chief Rabbi complained to the programme's production team, Davis issued an apology, swiftly followed and endorsed by the BBC. One senior BBC source was quoted as saying it was another example of the growing crisis in the BBC. They were referring to it as being yet another blunder. It seems though, it is an example of a different kind of crisis - a crisis of confidence. News programmes can be dull, unexciting set-pieces with interviewees following the PR mantra of repeating the point they want listeners to remember over and over, almost regardless of the questions they're being asked. But, in this instance, the journalist extracted something all journalists aim for, but rarely achieve: an honest response. Yet the BBC apologises. On the face of it, they apologised because they didn't want to offend a religious contributor who didn't come on the programme to talk about, or be questioned about, politics. But it is more complicated than that. In issuing an apology, the BBC seems to be saying that it is only legitimate to broadcast the things that people mean to say. That doesn't sound like the BBC. Did they refrain from using the clip of Gordon Brown calling a woman a bigot - a comment made when he didn't realise he was wearing a radio mic and thought he was speaking privately? It seems that in normal circumstances, the BBC would have seized this opportunity. But the BBC isn't in normal circumstances and it appears is becoming scared of its own shadow and petrified of getting anything (else) wrong. A lot rests on Tony Hall, the new director-general. He was appointed six days after Davis asked Rabbi Sacks about Israel, so it could be that the immediate mea culpa response was delivered because there was no one at the helm prepared to stand up for the corporation's right to good journalism. Hall can guide the BBC down one of two routes: it either becomes once again the broadcaster the public wants and needs it to be, which means having the courage of its convictions and confidence in its ability. Or, by default, the BBC will become paralysed by the fear of getting things wrong and deliver risk-free, PR-driven news. No thanks.