It goes without saying. the Beeb aren't very happy. The trust itself said: “According to this high standard, the report had not been duly accurate in how it framed the extract it used from Mr Corbyn’s interview." So she totally misrepresents the Leader of Her Majesty's Official Opposition.
But the Trust then go out of their way to say "That there was no evidence of bias or of intent on the part of the senior BBC journalist". Then enter James Harding, the director of BBC news. He rejected the Trust’s ruling and called Kuenssberg “an outstanding journalist and political editor with the utmost integrity and professionalism”. He would say that, wouldn't he?
A former chairman of the BBC trust, Sir Michael Lyons has also been vocally critical of the BBC's treatment of Corbyn and the Labour Party. An appearance on Radio 4's World at One show led him to say this - "There have been some quite extraordinary attacks on the elected leader of the Labour party. I can understand why people are worried about whether some of the most senior editorial voices in the BBC have lost their impartiality on this. All I’m voicing is the anxiety that has been expressed publicly by others."
Harding is an interesting character. As most people know, he was a former editor at The Times and on the pay roll of Rupert Murdoch. But does he have links to the Tories? Just a few. He and George Osborne attended the delightful St Paul's public school together and remain long-term friends and before David Cameron became an MP he and Harding used to enjoy a game of tennis together.
Anyway, take in to account what I just told you and decide for yourself if Mr Harding is the best person to judge Kuenssberg's neutrality and integrity.
Back to Kuenssberg, Journalist of The Year 2016 - This isn't the first time her neutrality has been called in to question. A study carried out last year by the Media Reform Coalition looked at supportive and critical views of the Labour leader during main news programmes. The results revealed the BBC were being hugely critical of Jeremy Corbyn during their main news bulletins. The report criticises Kuenssberg's reporting of Corbyn, one particular bulletin said she offered "the perspective of rebel MPs that was unattributed and reported as ‘fact’ whilst the view of Mr Corbyn’s team is both attributed and questioned." In other words Corbyn's team would issue a statement to Kuenssberg and she would question it, but if she got a whisper from an 'Labour source' (anti-Corbyn MP), she reported it as fact without even offering a name or shred of evidence to back it up.
Back In September last year it was also reported that The Media Reform Centre were considering legal action against the BBC due to the “clear and consistent bias” shown against Jeremy Corbyn in their news coverage with the chair of MRC Justin Schlosberg saying: "We are looking at taking it to Ofcom and potentially even the courts. The BBC has to be held to account."
Who are the BBC actually broadcasting for? OK, I'm no Einstein, but I had it in my little head that the BBC are supposed to be a public broadcaster, not a platform for a journalist to spout their own personal views. All they achieve with their clear and consistent bias is a few less people paying their licence fee and whole load more people having confirmed what they already know.
The establishment and political elite working arm in arm to ensure Corbyn is portrayed as a monster seems to be the norm now. Kuenssberg herself is just a small part of this. But she knows she has a huge audience on the 6 and 9'Oclock news, as well as the Daily Politics show. These programmes are viewed by big numbers, and some people are easily swayed. Others question everything, and with Kuenssberg reporting, they are right to do so.
I'm more than happy to call out her lack of neutrality. Personally, I find her technique (if that's what you call it) when interviewing Jeremy Corbyn really quite pointless. He plays it well and remains calm, that's what Corbyn does, and you can see Kuenssberg chipping away at him and getting nowhere. If I was sat in Corbyn's place I would be asking her why she doesn't have the same passion for reporting on Tory election fraud, or really put some journalistic effort in to getting right in to the heart of the NHS crisis.
Bottom line is this Laura: You have been found guilty of inaccurately reporting Jeremy Corbyn's views. You should be ashamed. We all know this is just scratching the surface when it comes to your targeted anti-Corbyn campaign, and I really hope it all comes out in the end. Perhaps the Press Gazette will ask for their trophy back, or are they just establishment puppets like you?
@Rachael_Swindon - Twitter