Episode 12 Points of View

Good afternoon and welcome to Points of View. We start with

another programme I am involved in which you have concerns about. What

evidence does South Africa have that Sharlene was behind the

killing of his wife? -- Shrien Dewani. Last week's programme

raised really difficult questions Dewani. Last week's programme

from viewers. Obviously, as the presenter of

Points of View, I need to get a response to that. We put your

complaints directly to the editor. We are confident and satisfied this

was not a case of trial by television. It did not set out to

prove whether or not Shrien Dewani was innocent or guilty. We thought

it was a broadcast in the interest of the public. New evidence

suggested the police case had not been fair and properly done. We are

mindful of the sensitivities of her family. We warned them sufficiently

many weeks beforehand we were doing this. We sought to represent their

position in the film with regard to Shrien Dewani having to stand trial

and would regard to their own feelings about having to make a

broadcast. It was not the family history that Marianne Faithfull

uncovered so much as the language she used to express her surprise.

Asleep or delighting in offending? I doubt programme-makers will be

pleased with either of those descriptions.

without meaning to repeat the offence on a Sunday, she exclaimed

Jesus Christ Price, Jesus once and, oh my God, five times throughout

the show. It was a dangerous situation. A miserable situation.

We know the trauma and the horror and the lifelong trauma. Yes. My

mother particularly and my grandmother naturally enough really,

really hated men. Worth pointing out that in 2010 Ofcom said the

kinds of words we are talking rat here are generally acceptable

across society because they are frequently used. -- talking about.

Colin felt there was too much chat and not enough action in some BBC

sports programming. His fan base is growing faster than a footballer's

salary and is still growing numbers. Viewers are saying they heartily

salary and is still growing numbers. agree with him.

We have passed those comments and all the others on this subject to

BBC Sport. Wading through those will not leave them much time for

what forkfuls of these comments might trigger a similar folly of

agreement. Why is it with television, you find a suitable

folly him and then, all of this sudden, things changed. -- volume.

Page you are. Another loud trailer for a programme coming up. Why oh

why do you cranky it up so much? Surely it is above the legal

decibel limit. Why is it every time there is a trailer I have to refer

to this button on the Controller to equal it out. The way we usually

tell is by using peak level - measuring the tops of the

programmes in their electronic signal. This meter shows the

programmes in their electronic needles moving up to six - the

maximum level specified for all programmes and trails. It is not

good at measuring madness, which is the way human beings perceive sound.

-- loudness. An international group of experts has come up with a thing

which measures loudness units and more accurately represents the way

we perceive sound and loudness in particular. We hope we can maintain

the dynamic excitement of audio in programmes was meaning you do not

have to reach for the volume control in between. -- whilst

meaning. We have a new regulation. When will it happen? It will not

happen overnight. We expect it to have a gradual but sustained

improvement in the perceived loudness of programmes. Hopefully

that will be to the approval of those who think we're not getting

it right. Now to the past and debate over how we like history

it right. Now to the past and documentaries served up, with a

healthy dose of fun or a straight faced respect for material? A crowd

gathered outside the front door. A neighbour shouted, murder, murder.

These people outside knew the family and they had the question -

where was the baby? From the ghetto to the salon, and

the hallowed past to the promised future, this was one of the

greatest human journeys in the shortest space of time ever made.

I think we will talk that up as 50/50. No such split in the

treatment of greyhounds in the Wonder of Dogs. I watched the

programme and I was disgusted the programmes were only shown as

magnificent machines for racing. They are a marvellous animal, a

marvellous machine. Coming out of the trap up to the first bend, they

reach speeds of nearly 40 miles an hour. They were not portrayed as

the wonderful, cuddly pets they are. The show showed all other breeds of

dogs as doing fun things with agility and cuddling their owners.

The greyhounds were only shown as races. So many retired greyhounds

do need homes. So, BBC, if you are going to the two dogs that are

involved in an industry many people find cruel, it would be good if you

could redress the balance by showing them as the happy, cuddly

pets they really are. Dip the Greyhound get a rough deal in the

show? -- did. By calling it a machine, did it miss some of the

story? do say will be ignored. You have

skipped bail. Three counts of assault in August and skipped bail

again. Policing may be a grey area but

again. Policing may be a grey area response to

again. Policing may be a grey area the light hearted, hustle style to

If it is entertainment you are after,

If it is entertainment you are biggest names to get in the same

If it is entertainment you are room. Miranda Hart made a programme,

If it is entertainment you are went Miranda met Bruce.

We are up and running on Twitter. Until