:00:26. > :00:31.The welcome to NewsWatch. Later in the programme, was it responsible
:00:31. > :00:36.to broadcast this interview, predicting financial Armageddon?
:00:36. > :00:40.dream of another recession, another moment like this. Tuesday's speech
:00:40. > :00:46.by the Labour leader at his party's annual conference was going fine,
:00:46. > :00:53.until a quarter of an hour in, this happened. My message to the public
:00:53. > :00:57.is simple... Ed Miliband, having a few technical problems... We are
:00:57. > :01:02.having a few technical problems with our feet from Liverpool. I
:01:02. > :01:12.think we are going to try to find think we are going to try to find
:01:12. > :01:13.
:01:13. > :01:19.another link to pick up on that. It was five minutes before the
:01:19. > :01:22.picture was restored, during which time, BBC Two went blank. The news
:01:22. > :01:28.channel played some of the audio feed of the speech.
:01:28. > :01:31.An absolute disaster for his media press team. Everyone seems to have
:01:31. > :01:34.lost power with Liverpool, which means nobody is able to broadcast
:01:34. > :01:39.this speech alive. All television channels were
:01:39. > :01:46.affected by the problem, which stemmed from a generator failure in
:01:46. > :01:56.the contract to's truck. Which was supplying a feat to broadcasters --
:01:56. > :01:57.
:01:57. > :02:03.The new channel broke into a report by Nick Robinson. The government's
:02:03. > :02:09.austerity plan is failing. You can sense the fear we have as we watch
:02:09. > :02:13.the economic crisis that stalked our country in 2008. Apologies to
:02:13. > :02:17.leave that, we will return a little later, but we are heading back to
:02:17. > :02:23.Los Angeles, because proceedings have resumed in the case against Dr
:02:23. > :02:33.Conrad Murray. What was, who was the cause of Michael Jackson staff?
:02:33. > :03:00.
:03:00. > :03:04.One BBC interview caused a huge storm of protest. This is a man
:03:04. > :03:09.described as an independent market trader, speaking to the news
:03:09. > :03:12.channel on Monday. I am very confident that this particular
:03:12. > :03:17.rescue plan, it doesn't matter how much money they want to put in, it
:03:17. > :03:21.is not going to work. Because this problem cannot be solved. I am
:03:21. > :03:27.fairly confident the euro is going to crash and fall pretty hard.
:03:27. > :03:31.Because markets are ruled by fear. Foremost writers -- for most
:03:31. > :03:36.traders, we don't really care too much, how they are going to fix the
:03:36. > :03:40.economy or the whole situation. Or job is to make money from it.
:03:40. > :03:44.Personally, I have been dreaming of this moment for three years. I go
:03:44. > :03:48.to bed every night, I dream of another recession. If you could see
:03:48. > :03:51.the people around me, jaws have collectively dropped at what you
:03:51. > :03:57.have just said. We appreciate your candour but it doesn't help the
:03:58. > :04:01.rest of us. I would say this to everybody who is watching this.
:04:01. > :04:05.This economic crisis is like a cancer. If you wait and wait,
:04:05. > :04:11.thinking this is going to go away, just like a cancer it is going to
:04:11. > :04:15.grow, and be too late. Twitter users questioned his credentials?
:04:15. > :04:19.Asking whether the news channel had been hoaxed. The BBC said it
:04:19. > :04:24.carried out detailed investigations and couldn't find any evidence to
:04:24. > :04:28.suggest the interview was a hoax. Was this trader is to double
:04:28. > :04:33.interviewee anyway? It turned out he had never been authorised by the
:04:33. > :04:41.Financial Services Authority -- was he a suitable interviewee? He said
:04:41. > :04:44.he was an intention sika and he rebranded his YouTube channel as
:04:44. > :04:54.trade on the BBC -- he said he was trade on the BBC -- he said he was
:04:54. > :05:23.
:05:23. > :05:26.an entire -- he said he was an We wanted to talk to someone from
:05:26. > :05:31.BBC News about why he had been chosen to appear on the news
:05:31. > :05:35.channel, but mac got request was refused. We were referred again to
:05:35. > :05:40.the statement saying there was no evidence he was a hoaxer. I am
:05:40. > :05:46.joined by the journalist and preventer of Radio 4's radio show -
:05:46. > :05:52.- presenter. Was he an appropriate person to have a national news
:05:52. > :05:56.channel? The problem is, that in his own words, he is a self-
:05:56. > :05:59.confessed attention seeker who describes financial trading as not
:05:59. > :06:04.really a business, more of a hobby. You are left wondering how he
:06:04. > :06:07.appeared on BBC News. Not in any old role, but as an expert on the
:06:08. > :06:13.financial crisis. Should his credentials have been better
:06:13. > :06:17.checked before he was suddenly thrust to national fame? I don't
:06:17. > :06:22.know what credentials he has. The BBC could fairly say, the news
:06:22. > :06:26.channel has lots of people on it, represents a wide range of views.
:06:26. > :06:30.You go on the street and talk to people, you take what you get. In
:06:30. > :06:33.this case, he was put up as someone who knew what he was talking about
:06:33. > :06:38.the relation to the global financial crisis and business
:06:38. > :06:44.matters. He is a self-confessed potential sicker he describes
:06:44. > :06:49.financial trading, which was his designation... Self-confessed
:06:49. > :06:53.attention seeker. He describes financial trading as a hobby. Is he
:06:53. > :06:59.credible as a financial trader? Make your own mind up, but not as
:06:59. > :07:03.credible as others. With markets so volatile and potentially influenced
:07:03. > :07:09.by broadcasts like that, should the BBC have been more careful? On the
:07:09. > :07:13.face of it, they did not represent -- did not misrepresent him. He is
:07:13. > :07:20.technically a financial trader. But is the most credible voice, given
:07:20. > :07:23.that if he happened to... If his views ended up representing a broad
:07:23. > :07:27.opinion amongst financial traders, one would guess it was more by luck
:07:27. > :07:31.than judgment. This apparently went through a general producer rather
:07:31. > :07:40.than the specialist business unit. Is that likely to have been a
:07:40. > :07:45.problem? I would be surprised if given the minor rumpus... It wasn't
:07:45. > :07:50.a hoax and what is it doesn't appear to be that far out of kilter.
:07:50. > :07:55.I would be surprised if BBC are not reviewing how they assess their
:07:55. > :07:59.contributors in matters like this. Thank you.
:07:59. > :08:04.There were more question-marks over guests election after Wednesday
:08:04. > :08:08.night's Newsnight. Jeremy Paxman showed a discussion about the euro
:08:08. > :08:12.which involved a spokesman from the European Commission and the
:08:12. > :08:18.opinionated journalist, Peter Oban. These guys are in total and utter
:08:18. > :08:24.denial. It is terribly frightening, listening to that idiot in Brussels.
:08:24. > :08:29.Would you like to respond? No, I think these words speak for
:08:29. > :08:36.themselves. This idiot in Brussels... Will you stop referring
:08:36. > :08:40.to him as that. If you listen to the catastrophic quality... You may
:08:40. > :08:44.think he is out of contact with reality... He is now walking out of
:08:44. > :08:46.the studio. Well done, we can't even hold him to account, because
:08:46. > :08:56.you have been gratuitously offensive.
:08:56. > :09:19.
:09:19. > :09:24.Sarah Miller was one of a number of If I said we are currently in the
:09:24. > :09:28.year 2011 C E, would you know what I was talking about? It stands for,
:09:28. > :09:35.an era, and newspapers reported that the BBC had decided to use
:09:35. > :09:40.that instead of AD, and B C E, instead of BC, or before Christ.
:09:40. > :09:50.Many of you were furious about the Many of you were furious about the
:09:50. > :10:00.
:10:00. > :10:04.The Andrew Marr showed discussed the story in its paper review, but
:10:04. > :10:08.presenter and guests appeared to be off-message. According to the Mail
:10:08. > :10:16.on Sunday, BBC turns its back on year of Our Lord, and we are going
:10:16. > :10:21.to say, nearer, and before, era. I'm not. I say AD, and BC, because
:10:21. > :10:26.that is what I understand. Good, I agree. What was going on? The Mail
:10:26. > :10:32.on Sunday and Boris Johnson based their stories on a statement on BBC
:10:32. > :10:37.religion's website, saying it used these C and C, instead of BC and AD.
:10:37. > :10:47.Is there a corporation wide band? No, according to a statement we
:10:47. > :10:57.
:10:57. > :11:00.No shortage of criticisms about BBC News this week, but there was a
:11:00. > :11:05.reminder on Tuesday that other broadcasters are not all perfect.
:11:05. > :11:09.ITV admitted that images used in its new current affairs series,
:11:09. > :11:17.supposedly of the IRA shooting down a helicopter with weapons supplied