You may be surprised to read this, but the Mail on Sunday carried a shock-horror story about the BBC at the weekend based on an interview I gave - and I can refreshingly report that my words weren't twisted, my quotes weren't taken out of context, and, apart from the slightly over-dramatic writing, the story was basically correct.
" " was the newspaper's revelation, after I mentioned on the BBC's Newswatch programme ( ) that Newsround didn't think Pete Doherty was a suitable role model for children, and that we have an "informal agreement" not to cover stories about him.
It's not a blanket ban forever (we might even report on him and Kate getting married, if it's ever confirmed).
But at the moment, yes, you won't catch Pete on Newsround, because he is known mostly for his drug-taking and crime - and, as I also said on Newswatch, his music is not exactly something that many nine-year-olds are listening to or interested in.
Some of you may think this is "censorship". Others may feel that he isn't a suitable role model, and I'd be very interested in your views.
But this also got me thinking about the BBC's slightly unusual relationship with some of the press - and wondering whether I should worry that my contribution has led to this story.
I previously worked on a project called iCan, now , which is all about helping people to take part in local democracy and take action on issues they care about. Before launch, we were concerned that the site could be interpreted as the BBC encouraging people to attack the government (in other words, undermining our commitment to political impartiality).
I spent many hours with our editorial policy teams devising ways of making the BBC's impartiality clear - all in an attempt to avoid a much-feared tabloid expose.
I was then rather surprised when, after one of our pre-launch briefings, a senior BBC News manager told me that actually the best - not worst - thing that could happen to the site would be "revelations in the Daily Mail". It would show that the site was rattling cages (what it was designed to do) - and it would get it publicity.
In the end, iCan was never featured in any tabloid newspaper, probably to its cost. This taught me that headlines in the newspapers aren’t always a bad thing - particularly when they’ve got the story spot-on.
We're about to make a few changes to how we show you audio and video on the BBC News website, and on the BBC Sport and Weather sites.
The range of audio/video on offer will be the same, but there will be a simpler approach to the way it’s displayed and accessed.
So in the coming days, within the News audio/video player which launches when you click on any bit of audio or video on this site, we’ll be replacing the current sub-indexes of content with a simpler range of options. These will include links to related and recommended audio/video and, of course, links back to the News website.
Most audio/video is viewed from story and section pages and we’ll continue to make sure the best and most relevant is added to the main stories of the day. We’ll also continue to signpost the best audio/video from our front page and section pages.
In addition there will be a page of links to the best of the day’s audio/video which you’ll be able to get to from the left-hand navigation of the site.
If you’re looking for a current audio/video story – a bit of news footage you've heard about or the interview that’s making the headlines - you'll be able to have a look there.
If you can’t see it there or if you’re looking for something that’s a few days, weeks or months old, you'll still be able to use our audio/video search. That lives behind the “Audio and Video” tab at the top of the main BBC site search on every page.
When the new-look player arrives on the site it will have a link in it for your feedback. We’re keen to hear what you think and it’ll help us work out what we need to do next.
For very assiduous readers of this blog with long memories (I realise this must be a small, if select, group): back in August that we would revisit one or two of the changes we made then to audio/video promotion on our front page.
Notable among these was the fact that the audio/video area of the page doesn’t stay hidden on return visits if you’ve chosen to close it, which you generally found annoying. We haven’t done that yet because we’ve had to get some other technical projects finished first, but it's on the to-do list and not forgotten.
Later this year the BBC is hoping to make wider changes to audio/video provision right across the www.
bbc.co.uk website.
Subject to approval by the BBC Trust, the plan is to introduce a new, unified ‘iPlayer’ service which will involve a consistent design for all audio/video players, more content on offer and the ability to download some of it.
Declan's kicked off what's to be a year-long series for us this morning, introducing us to our Breakfast .
The idea has nothing to do with chips - and everything to do with emissions.
We have challenged the family, the Hawksworths who live in Castle Donington, to see if they can reduce their emissions (they got in touch when just before Christmas).
We'll return once a month to see how they get on and also, more importantly to explore some of the issues around climate change and global warming.
We had some encouraging this morning - and a lot of interest in our carbon footprint feature.
But it's fair to say we also had some scepticism around the science of global warming, with a few people getting in touch to dispute whether it is really a serious issue.
On the science, we have pledged to explore those questions, with the Hawksworths helping put the questions.
Others felt that it was unfair to single out a family for our 'low carb' challenge - we should be "going after big business" instead.
My answer to that final point is that we do - and will continue to - question businesses on their environmental credentials.
Last week, , Stuart Rose, on the issue of food miles.
Declan frequently puts similar questions to the CEOs and chairmen who visit his studio.
Finally, some got in touch wondering why we cover so many stories relating to the environment, CO2 emissions and recycling.
"Frankly I am sick of listening to Breakfast going on and on about green issues", was one such comment.
Maybe we do too much of it?
And we must certainly think about the sheer volume of such stories we cover. But we get an enormous response every time we do.
The Independent: Stephen Glover on the media's handling of Kate Middleton's birthday.
( )
The Independent: Columnist Matthew Norman on Kelvin MacKenzie's Question Time appearance. ( )
Mail on Sunday: "Pop star Pete Doherty has been banned by the BBC from appearing on their children's television programmes." ( )
The Guardian: Report on Panorama's new primetime slot on Monday nights.
( )
The Guardian: "Three years ago the BBC issued an unprecedented apology to the government over the Kelly affair. But who authorised the announcement and why is there no record that it was discussed by the governors?" ( )
I watched the FA Cup game last Saturday when Liverpool fans made their protest against Kelvin MacKenzie.
It was certainly one of the best organised and dramatic protests I’d ever seen at a football match and there can't be any doubt about on the issue. In my view, that doesn't mean that Kelvin MacKenzie should be banned from appearing on television. Not least, because that's one way his views can be challenged by those who disagree with them.
It’s worth saying it wasn't the original plan for this week's show. A - Lord Falconer, George Osborne, Charles Kennedy and Clare Short - had been booked and announced before the show's Christmas break. The fifth panellist - also announced - was .
The change of plan only happened yesterday - David Starkey had an accident and had to pull out at the last minute. We wish him a speedy recovery.
Clearly this was a major problem.
Appearing on Question Time is a daunting prospect at the best of times but with an experienced panel and a few hours notice, the field of candidates willing to take on the challenge is pretty limited, to say the least. In addition, we needed to retain the broad balance of the line-up - with paparazzi coverage of Kate Middleton a likely subject, Kelvin MacKenzie fitted the bill. So that's why he was on.
What about the show itself ( )? He was given a pretty rough ride. Clare Short said she'd been contacted by someone who said they'd lost a relative at Hillsborough.
David Dimbleby pressed him on which aspect of the original Sun story he still stood by and which he did not. There were calls for him to apologise for his recent comments. Question Time is probably the country's leading forum for the discussion of controversial issues.
Viewers may not like the people they see on the programme or the views they express, but if Question Time only had uncontroversial panellists the programme would quickly become irrelevant.
There is clearly a lot of anger towards Kelvin MacKenzie. His appearance gave the audience the chance to judge for themselves whether they agree with him or his many critics.
So I’ve moved up in the world - literally - from the Newsroom on the first floor of Television Centre in west London to the Sport department on the fifth floor, to to be launched in the coming months.
I’ve done launches before on News 24 and on BBC Four and they all start the same way..
. it’s just a desk, a phone and a PC.
Before Christmas I appealed for ideas from you and I’d like to renew that appeal now – what would you like to see on the new programme?
Which sports? What subjects?
What about the tone of the programme – it will probably be a late night 1030/11pm sort of start time – what would make you watch?
And if you’re not a sports fanatic, what might make you turn on? Oh - and any ideas for a name??
?
I'm eager to hear from you - as I wean myself off the two daily-deadline diet of my previous job (in charge of the One and Six O'Clock News) and get involved in recruiting a team, creating a look for the programme and thinking about potential stories.
My new colleagues in BBC Sport couldn’t have been more welcoming.
I’ve had so many people come up to me with good wishes and ideas I already feel it’s a project people want to get involved in, both in sport and in news, as the programme is a collaboration between the two.
So please let me know your thoughts - all ideas gratefully received, as they say.
Previously, she was editor of daytime news
Ruth Kelly’s decision to send her son to a private school brought an avalanche of emails to the BBC.
More than 3,000 of you sent your thoughts on the story – some accusing Ms Kelly of hypocrisy; others supporting her decision as a parent.
But some of you questioned whether the BBC should be doing the story at all, saying that how she organises the education of her children is her own business, and that broadcasting rides roughshod over the interests of the child.
So why did we do it?
I think the answer comes partly in the volume of emails.
This story raises all sorts of issues which strike a chord with many viewers, listeners and readers – provision for special needs in schools; whether this works best in mainstream or special schools; how the government’s record on this stands.
But it’s also about the rights and wrongs of a cabinet minister and former education secretary - from a party which champions state education – going private for her own children. In some people this rouses strong passions.
As a group of our emailers have observed, it can be seen as the difference between what the powerful say and what they do.
Some of you say that a politician’s private life should remain private. But in this information-rich age, it can be argued that’s a privilege which people surrender when they enter public life.
The parent’s one thing; the child’s another. The BBC has no interest in invading the privacy of any child. Indeed we – like most of the rest of the news media – actively try to protect the privacy of children.
But once a story like this is in the public domain – a decision taken by the - it’s difficult and probably wrong for us to try to put the genie back in the bottle.
Look at it the other way round – what if the BBC had chosen not to broadcast the story? It’s front page news in most newspapers, the lead on other broadcasters, and all over the blogosphere.
.. and the BBC ignores it.
.. Would that have served our audiences well?
Or would it have made you angry that we were in some way protecting the people in power?
Is it not rather our job to set the story in its proper context and tell it in a measured, balanced way, allowing you to make your own judgements?
Gary Smith is editor, political news
The story was the decision by cabinet minister, Ruth Kelly, to move one of her four children that could provide better for his special educational needs.
Interestingly our audiences across radio, TV and don't seem to see this as a political story - most were sympathetic to Ms Kelly - which is at odds with many of the headline writers in the press and political journos, as well as some MPs who accused her of hypocrisy.
The thing that's really generated interest is the way children with special needs are catered for in our education system with many people offering moving personal stories. It's part of the brief of The World Tonight to offer a different take or angle on the big stories to our Radio Four sister programmes, , and .
They had already looked at the political side of the story, so we decided to look at the substantive issues relating to special needs provision highlighted by Ruth Kelly's case (you can listen to the programme ). In the event this seemed to chime with our listeners and, in my opinion, shows the strength of BBC Radio news which has part of its editorial mindset that each programme should offer listeners something different and - dare I say it - new.
This editorial remit meant The World Tonight was the only programme on Radio Four yesterday to cover the interruption of energy supplies from Russia to the EU via Belarus, as a result of the row between Russia and Belarus about the price Russian companies charge Belarus for its gas and oil.
Although there is no imminent danger of the lights going out around the EU, the story is important as it raises the question again of the reliability of Russia as an energy supplier, on the eve of the European Commission announcing its plans to ensure energy security in the light of our increasing dependence on Russian fossil fuels (which the World Tonight will also cover).
The story also challenges assumptions made by journalists and commentators last year that Russia was using its energy supplies to former Soviet states as a tool to punish those - like Ukraine and Georgia - who are pro-western. Belarus is in no way pro-western - indeed its leadership is subject to sanctions due to their human rights record - but has now fallen foul of the Kremlin as well - though in the event the EU is caught in the crossfire so to speak.
On the Daily Politics we're launching a new series, and an interactive vote to determine .
Every Monday from now until Easter we’ll showcase one of the ten post-war prime ministers, and ask viewers to give their judgement.
We’ve decided to exclude Churchill from the list, for two reasons: it would be impossible to disentangle his wartime and post-war leaderships; and, , he’d probably win by a mile anyway.
So that leaves nine men and one woman: Clement , Anthony , Alec , Harold , Harold , Edward , James , Margaret , John and Tony . We have scripts, archive and celebrity champions for all of them bar poor old Eden - so if you’re interested in championing him let me know.
. what do you think?
We started today with a curtain raiser film and a debate between William Hague, Tony Benn and the historian Andrew Roberts (which you can watch ).
The first vote was cast by a viewer from France for Ted Heath.
Surprisingly, Hague, Benn and Roberts all agreed on their top two ‘greatest’ - Clement Attlee and Margaret Thatcher - though they disagreed on the order. None were keen on Blair.
And that’s how it stands in the popular vote as I write.
Anyone can vote anytime between now and Easter , and following the links. And as Today programme editor Ceri Thomas wrote , even if you campaign for votes it won’t spoil the fun.
Welcome to The Editors, a site where we, editors from across BBC News, will share our dilemmas and issues. , but to join in, all you need do is add a comment .
News RSS