How is it possible that the BBC has had so many complaints about a single interview that it has decided to direct viewers about what their complaints should be?

To recap: on Sunday morning, the PM was interviewed by Andrew Marr. The story began, of course, when Johnson declined to be interviewed by Andrew Neil, having – well, promised is a strong word, especially from Johnson – but it was the BBC’s understanding that he would, when they secured and aired an interview with Jeremy Corbyn.

Not intending to run any more interviews with Johnson until the situation was resolved, the BBC then decided that, following the awful deaths in London Bridge, a Sunday interview was necessary. The 28-minute conversation was, at least, democratically and impartially, horrible for everyone to watch – staccato, overenunciated, hostile, hard to follow. A large number of complaints split between those who felt Johnson’s untruths were insufficiently challenged and those who felt that Marr challenged him too much. It is unclear which camp most fall into, but the BBC had better hope the majority are anti-Marr, because the line they added to the complaints form – “Some viewers have complained Boris Johnson was interrupted too much and the interview was biased against him” – is unaccountable otherwise.

In fact, it is perfectly possible to hold both views: Johnson did deliver numerous untruths, and they were allowed to lie there like fish out of their bowl, flapping on the floor until they died. Also, Marr was pretty rude; “You’re chuntering,” he said at one point, which he never would have said to Theresa May, who chuntered constantly. I suspect a bit of professional pride, Marr smarting that he is seen as softer than Neil (he is). I also think Marr did well – and maybe it is right to be rude to a prime minister who has done so much to corrode civility and trust in such a short time.

The interesting thing is the urgent partisanship. Viewers have surmised, probably correctly, that a complaint about bias is only as strong as its numbers, and so are supporting their team in droves. It doesn’t matter how good a case you make, so long as you are in the majority. This is, I suppose, the lesson of the referendum.