:00:25. > :00:30.Welcome. Later in the programme - it was it responsible to broadcast
:00:30. > :00:35.this interview, predicting financial Armageddon. I dream of
:00:36. > :00:41.another recession. First, it was Ed Miliband's moment in the public eye.
:00:41. > :00:50.His speech on Tuesday was going fine, until 15 minutes in, this
:00:50. > :00:57.happened. My message to the public is simple... Ed Miliband having a
:00:57. > :01:06.few technical problems, we rather having technical problems. We would
:01:06. > :01:10.try to find another link to pick up on this. This led to this, and,
:01:10. > :01:15.what kind of broadcaster are you? It is only from the double, it is
:01:15. > :01:20.not rocket science. It took five minutes until the picture was
:01:20. > :01:25.restored. The news channel played some of the audio feed from the
:01:25. > :01:29.speech. An absolute disaster for his media Presteigne here. Everyone
:01:29. > :01:34.seems to have lost power with Liverpool, which means nobody is
:01:34. > :01:37.able to broadcast this page life. All TV channels were affected by
:01:37. > :01:44.the problem, which stemmed from a generator failure in a contractor's
:01:44. > :01:48.truck. No plane to be attached to the BBC there. On Tuesday evening,
:01:48. > :01:57.Ed Miliband was again cut off, this time as a result of an editorial
:01:57. > :02:03.decision. The Government's austerity plan is failing. You can
:02:03. > :02:09.sense the fear people have as we watch the economic crisis that has
:02:09. > :02:15.bought a country in 2008... Arab ologies, we will return to the
:02:15. > :02:21.Labour Party Conference later. We go back to Los Angeles, where
:02:21. > :02:27.proceedings have continued against Dr Conrad Murray. Who was the cause
:02:27. > :02:30.of Michael Jackson's death? Here is what a viewer had to say it - I am
:02:30. > :02:36.aghast that you are suddenly speaking -- switching from a Labour
:02:36. > :02:42.leader's speech to inconsequential vision of a trial from Michael
:02:42. > :02:47.Jackson's doctor. I am a Tory voter, so I am simply left utterly
:02:47. > :02:54.speechless and frustrated at the decision of this trial being more
:02:54. > :03:00.important than British politics. When BBC interview this week caused
:03:01. > :03:05.a huge storm of protest. This man is described as an independent
:03:05. > :03:10.financial trader speaking to us on Monday. I am very confident that
:03:10. > :03:15.this particular rescue plan - it does not matter how much money they
:03:16. > :03:21.put in - it will not work. This problem cannot be solved. I am
:03:21. > :03:26.fairly confident the euro is going to crash. It will fall harder.
:03:26. > :03:31.Markets are ruled by fear. For most traders, it is not about - we do
:03:31. > :03:36.not care much about how to fix the economy. Our job is to make money
:03:37. > :03:40.from it. Personally, I have been draining of this moment for three
:03:40. > :03:45.years. I have a confession, I go to bed every night and dream of
:03:45. > :03:48.another recession. If you could see the people around me, jaws have
:03:48. > :03:54.collectively dropped at what you have just said. We appreciate your
:03:54. > :03:58.candour, but it does not help the rest of the eurozone. I will say
:03:58. > :04:03.this to everybody who is watching this. These economic crisis is like
:04:03. > :04:08.a cancer. If you just wait thinking this is going to go away, just like
:04:08. > :04:14.a cancer it will grow. Tweedy users immediately question his
:04:14. > :04:17.credentials, asking whether the new channel had been hoaxed. -- Twitter.
:04:17. > :04:22.The BBC said it had carried out detailed investigations and could
:04:22. > :04:29.not find any suggestion that it was a hoax. Was is a suitable
:04:29. > :04:33.interviewee? It turns out he had never been approved. He told a
:04:33. > :04:40.newspaper that he was an attention seeker. By Wednesday he had
:04:40. > :04:45.capitalised on the interview Bibury branding his YouTube Journal. It is
:04:45. > :04:55.guidance of as one more concerned about the interview. -- one viewer
:04:55. > :05:24.
:05:24. > :05:30.We wanted to talk to somebody from BBC News about why he had been
:05:30. > :05:33.chosen to appear on the Channel, but our request was refused. They
:05:33. > :05:39.referred to the state then there was no evidence that he was a
:05:39. > :05:43.hoaxer. Instead, I am joined by the presenter of Radio's for news show.
:05:43. > :05:48.He may not have been a hoaxer, but was the appropriate to have on a
:05:48. > :05:53.national news channel on the subject? The problem is that in his
:05:53. > :05:57.own words, he is a self-confessed attention seeker, who describes
:05:57. > :06:03.financial trading as more of a hobby. You are left wondering quite
:06:03. > :06:08.how this person appeared on BBC News. Not just in any or raw, but
:06:08. > :06:12.in a role of financial expertise. Should his credentials had been
:06:12. > :06:22.checked before he was suddenly thrust to national fame? I do not
:06:22. > :06:26.know what can do Chelsea has. -- credentials. The BBC represents a
:06:26. > :06:30.wide view of the opinions. In this particular case, this man was put
:06:30. > :06:36.up as someone who knew what he was talking about the global financial
:06:36. > :06:40.crisis and matters of business. As I said, he is a buy at -- self-
:06:40. > :06:45.confessed attention seeker who does financial trading as a hobby, not a
:06:45. > :06:50.profession. He has never been registered already a thing of the
:06:50. > :06:57.sword. His incredible as a financial trader? Make your own
:06:57. > :07:02.mind. With markets in volatile and possibly influenced by a broadcast
:07:02. > :07:05.like that, should the BBC had been more careful? They did not race
:07:05. > :07:12.represent in in the says they said he was not something he wanted --
:07:12. > :07:17.wasn't. But is he the most credible voice of opinion on these things?
:07:17. > :07:20.Iffy happen to agree... If his views ended up representing a
:07:20. > :07:25.broader base of opinion amongst financial traders, one would guess
:07:25. > :07:29.that it was good judgement. This apparently went through a general
:07:29. > :07:38.producer, rather than a specialist business producer. Is that a
:07:38. > :07:42.problem? I would be surprised at this being a big problem. It was
:07:42. > :07:52.not a hoax. And what he said it does not to be too far out of
:07:52. > :07:52.
:07:52. > :07:57.kilter with what other big -- others think. Thank you very much
:07:57. > :08:03.indeed. They were more question marks over
:08:03. > :08:06.best selection after Wednesday night's question night. It involved
:08:06. > :08:12.a spokesman from the European Commission and an opinionated
:08:12. > :08:17.journalist. These guys are in total and utter denial. It is terrible
:08:17. > :08:25.frightening listening to that idiot in Brussels. Mr idiot in Brussels,
:08:25. > :08:35.would you like to respond? I think the words speak for themselves.
:08:35. > :08:35.
:08:35. > :08:40.Will be stopped to have -- the Beast of referring to him as that?
:08:40. > :08:47.You may think he is out of contact with reality, but that one has
:08:47. > :08:52.stopped him walking out of the studio in Brussels.
:08:52. > :09:02.There were a number of viewers who were offended by what they saw. One
:09:02. > :09:18.
:09:18. > :09:22.Meanwhile, I never asked: -- If I said we are currently in the
:09:22. > :09:27.year of 2011 C E, what you know what I was talking about? Well, the
:09:27. > :09:35.sea stands for, and Iraq. A newspaper has reported that the BBC
:09:35. > :09:45.has decided to use this term instead of BC or ad. Many of you
:09:45. > :09:59.
:09:59. > :10:04.were furious about the suggestion. Sunday's into Marcio discussed the
:10:04. > :10:08.story in the pay review. According to the Mail on Sunday, BBC turns
:10:08. > :10:17.its back on year of Our Lord. We are going to say, Iraq and the poor,
:10:17. > :10:22.near Rye. I say ad and PC, because that is what I understand. I agree.
:10:22. > :10:28.What was going on? The Mail on Sunday and Boris Johnson on the
:10:29. > :10:34.next paper based their stories on the BBC website, saying it used BC
:10:34. > :10:44.and BC be. Is there a corporation wide then on the use of the terms?
:10:44. > :10:54.
:10:54. > :10:58.No, according to a statement we No shortage this week of criticisms
:10:58. > :11:02.about BBC News. Finally, there was a reminder on Tuesday that other
:11:02. > :11:06.broadcasters are not perfect. ITV admitted that images used in its
:11:06. > :11:10.new current affairs series, supposedly of the IRA shooting down
:11:10. > :11:17.a helicopter with pilot -- weapons supplied by Colonel Gaddafi, or
:11:17. > :11:23.actually taken from a computer game. Please keep your eyes and ears on