Members of broadcast network BECTU at the BBC have voted to accept a 2 per cent pay increase.
Two thirds of union members balloted voted in favour of accepting the offer, with the ballot closing at 12pm today.
The ballot result applies to BECTU members employed by BBC and by Studios and Post Production Ltd.
The BBC made the offer during talks with the union at the end of last month.
Channel 4 News presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy has an good post up on those awkward questions that tend to come toward the end of an interview, like asking Brown about bullying, Trump about toupées, or Pryce about penalty points.
Somehow the slightly awkward ones often fall on my days in the chair – those interviews about one thing with somebody currently famous for another, when colleagues say “obviously you’re going to ask about the sex change” as I walk into the studio when we are really supposed to be talking about credit default swaps.
This went up on YouTube a couple of days ago, so it may have already done the rounds a bit.
But for anyone who hasn’t seen it, make sure to stick it out to catch the unexpectedly exuberant weather forecast.
In an opinion piece in the Independent yesterday former chief correspondent of Panorama Tom Mangold called on the BBC to conduct a “searching inquiry into why its system of firewalls broke down”, in reference to last week’s finding of the BBC Trust’s editorial standards committee that certain footage within a Panorama documentary was “more likely that not”, not genuine.
The BBC was ordered to make an on-air apology after a Panorama documentary about retail outlet Primark was found to have breached editorial guidelines on accuracy and fairness. The ESC said it had examined a “substantial body of evidence”, including rushes tapes, emails to the programme team from the freelance journalist who obtained the footage and witness evidence, in relation to a specific piece of footage which appeared in the film.
Although it admitted it was not able to say beyond reasonable doubt, the committee concluded that it was more likely than not that the footage was not genuine.
Writing in the Independent Mangold claimed the delay in this admission has caused “an editorial catastrophe”.
It is only now, three years after the programme was broadcast, that the BBC Trust has forced Panorama to admit the error of its ways. In the meantime, the BBC’s arrogant refusal to admit it was wrong has resulted in an editorial catastrophe not only for Panorama, the flagship, but for all the corporation’s journalism.
I joined Panorama from Fleet Street, where none of us had entirely clean hands. We coloured our stories as much as we could and thought nothing of doing things our editors never wanted to hear about. But, whatever we did, we never lied, deceived or made stories up. It was the short cut to the dole. And if a story wasn’t good enough or couldn’t be made to work – then there was always another round the corner. I know what it means to have to deliver with a tiny budget, but I also know when to give up.
Related:
Panorama documentary found in serious breach of accuracy and fairness rules
Last week, Guardian journalist and newly-elected Labour councillor for Southwark Rowenna Davis used Twitter to liveblog the heart operation of a two-week-old girl at Great Ormond Street hospital.
Her updates were also posted on the Guardian’s NHS liveblog alongside photos she took during the surgery (see above) and tweets from followers.
Going through Davis’ @ messages and tweets that used the #nhsblog hashtag shows the response on Twitter was, as she said, “overwhelmingly positive”. The Media Blog called it “A perfect use of Twitter“.
But interestingly, the response on the Guardian’s Comment is free site, where Davis blogged about the reaction to her coverage, was almost completely the opposite.
The comments that follow the CiF post are almost overwhelmingly negative, with Davis’ live coverage of the surgery called, “mawkish”, “ghoulish”, “a stunt”, “revolting sensationalism”, and more.
An interesting point of comparison for the coverage, which has been raised in the CiF comment thread, is broadcast, but it is hard to see people reacting quite the same way about a fly-on-the-wall documentary.
A few commenters suggested the problem with Davis’ liveblog was that it was live, and that the risk to the girl’s life made that inappropriate (according to Davis the operation carried a 1 or 2 per cent risk). Whereas a documentary, commenter davidabsalom said, would be recorded in advance.
But Channel 4 screened a series of programmes in 2009 that showed live surgery, during which viewers were invited to interact with the surgeons using Twitter, email and the telephone.
Channel 4’s David Glover said at the time that the programme was designed to “demystify surgery, encourage discussion and help viewers to understand their own bodies, as well as showing the care, dedication and skill that goes into modern surgery”.
Ofcom archives show no record of any complaints about the programme (less than 10 complaints are not recorded).
The Surgery Live patients were adults, rather than children as in this case, but Davis obtained consent from the girl’s parents. And the operations – brain, heart, and stomach surgery – seem no less risky than the one in this case.
So I can’t help but wonder whether the discrepancy between the responses on Twitter and on CiF stems from the medium itself, with those who use Twitter – and so responded via the network – much more likely to see the coverage in a positive light, and those on Comment is Free more likely to construe it negatively. (I can’t assess how many of those who commented on the CiF post use Twitter, so this is something of a shot in the dark).
Davis has responded several times in the comment thread to defend the journalistic value of her coverage, including this post:
I think one key dividing line about whether this is defensible is intention. If you’re just blindly seeking ratings for entertainment value, that’s pretty grim. But if your aim is to offer some kind of insight into the reality of the job surgeons face and the trials families have to go through, that seems quite different. Especially when it helps bring to light the importance of the health service, and how vital it is that we get the reforms right.
That said, I think the points you are raising are valid, and it’s important to raise them. There are certainly ways in which I could see this being done insensitively.
You can follow the full debate here.
Today the BBC announced the launch of a new product for connected TVs which, according to a release will see BBC News video news clips brought to television via the internet.
The BBC News product for connected TV combines existing video and text content from BBC News Online and will initially be made available on Samsung’s range of Smart TVs. It will subsequently be made available on a range of connected devices over time.
This is part of a “value for money” strategy to re-purpose BBC Online products for a wide range of devices. Editorial teams in the BBC’s newsrooms will work to curate clips to complement the 24 news channel and to run alongside text-based news from BBC News Online. And the control of what content the user views will be in their hands, with navigation via the remote.
BBC Worldwide is also said to be launching an international version which will be supported by advertising. In a blog post BBC Online editor Steve Herrmann said in time the product will also be rolled out to other devices in the UK.
Yesterday we reported on the BBC Trust ruling that Panorama had broken editorial guidelines of fairness and accuracy in its programme Primark: On The Rack.
The BBC was ordered to make an on-air apology over the documentary, which was broadcast in June 2008, after the Trust said the programme contained footage that was likely not genuine.
Roy Greenslade said the Trust’s decision was “baffling”.
It goes against natural justice to find against the journalist and producers on what it calls “the balance of probabilities.”
Dan McDougall is an intrepid, award-winning investigative reporter with a superb record in exposing human rights violations.
Frank Simmonds is an experienced producer who has been responsible for many important revelatory Panorama programmes.
Yet this so-called judgment – which requires the corporation to apologise for the documentary – puts a black mark against their names on the most tenuous of grounds.
Having studied the report, I believe the Trust has got this wholly wrong.
According to reports, including this one published on CNN Money, a disabilities rights group has filed legal action against CNN parent company Time Warner, for publishing news videos online without captions.
As CNN reports, a defeat “could have significant implications for every online video provider in California”.
The Greater Los Angeles Agency on Deafness (GLAD) as well as four individual plaintiffs allege that CNN violates California’s Civil Rights Act and the state’s Disabled Persons Act by serving videos without closed captions online. The plaintiffs are seeking class action status on behalf of all deaf and hard of hearing persons in California, and want to get the court to issue an injunction against Time Warner as well as force the company to pay statutory damages.
A CNN spokesman was quoted as saying that the company had not been served and declined to comment further.
Here is a link to what the CNN report claims to be the lawsuit.
The Telegraph reports that as of yesterday afternoon a total of 898 people had “registered their disapproval” of the Choosing to Die documentary, broadcast on Monday by the BBC.
The documentary shows author Sir Terry Pratchett, who was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s three years ago, travel to the Dignitas Clinic in Switzerland and witnessing the procedures for assisted death.
The corporation said 898 people had registered their disapproval of the documentary presented by the author Sir Terry Pratchett, with 162 fresh complaints since it aired on Monday night.
A spokesman from the BBC was also said to add that the broadcaster has also received 82 “appreciations” of the programme.
Update: Journalism.co.uk has received updated figures from the BBC. There have now been 226 appreciations received and 408 complaints, bringing the total up to 1,150 complaints.
According to a spokesman the 226 appreciations make it one of the top 10 most appreciated BBC programmes this year.
Nick Broomfield, the filmmaker who has profiled such easy-going and likable characters as Eugene Terre’Blanche and Aileen Wuornos, is in the closing stages of a new film about Sarah Palin, according to a report from the Independent today.
Broomfield has reportedly secured interviews with Palin’s parents and former aides.
Broomfield turned to the former Republican vice-presidential candidate after lack of access forced him to abandon a planned Amy Winehouse documentary. The Palin film has “been a struggle because she has been difficult”, Broomfield revealed. “Making her evangelism intelligible and interesting was difficult. All that you’re trying to do is tell a story as simply as possible, putting together a cohesive piece that will entertain.”
At the same time another portrayal of Palin is in the works, likely to be altogether more sympathetic that Broomfield’s. Tea party activist Stephen Bannon is preparing a film called The Undefeated for released, based largely on interviews with Palin supporters.
Palin is currently having 24,199 pages of her work emails being pored over by press and public after they were released last week under freedom of information legislation.
Read the full Independent piece at this link.
Image by david_shankbone on Flickr. Some rights reserved