:00:03. > :00:13.Fang Q. -- thank you. Was there BBC's coverage of the M5
:00:13. > :00:26.
:00:26. > :00:31.crash guilty of televisual Will continue his watch. The term
:00:31. > :00:35.rubbernecking was coined to talk about drivers who slowed down to
:00:35. > :00:44.hang her neck out of the window to look at an accident. But is there
:00:44. > :00:51.such a thing of televisual rubbernecking? Despair if from
:00:51. > :01:01.motorists as they drive past the pile up.
:01:01. > :01:04.Some of these cars and lorries were exploding on impact. And an
:01:04. > :01:14.believable was what some viewers thought of the BBC pause might use
:01:14. > :01:41.
:01:41. > :01:51.There was an objection to some more Another viewer by the name of Paul
:01:51. > :01:52.
:01:52. > :01:57.Another concern about the coverage of the crash centred around some
:01:57. > :02:04.reports like this. It be have been no clear the debris, but this
:02:04. > :02:10.investigation is very much active. Its primary focus is a role that
:02:10. > :02:20.the fireworks display at a local rugby club played. This amateur
:02:20. > :02:31.
:02:31. > :02:35.footage showed the scale of the I have been pursuing those points
:02:35. > :02:41.to Our Correspondent from the BBC news channel. I asked whether the
:02:41. > :02:47.BBC got the tenor of its coverage right. Overall, I think we did.
:02:47. > :02:52.was a horrific crash, very upsetting for people involved. It
:02:52. > :03:01.was one of the worst of motorway crashes for many years. I think
:03:01. > :03:10.that, because we are I news channel, the audience to an extent can
:03:10. > :03:16.expect to see some quite strong images. If they are out of the way,
:03:16. > :03:23.potentially, distressing, we will warn people before we show it. We
:03:23. > :03:29.come up against this dilemma every day. We are in a completely
:03:29. > :03:34.different here are to say, even 10 years ago. Everybody has a mobile
:03:34. > :03:39.phone. Everybody has access to the Internet. There is a lot more
:03:39. > :03:44.material out there and available to us and to anyone who wants to go
:03:44. > :03:51.and find it. I am aware of the accusation of rubbernecking. I hope
:03:51. > :04:01.it does not sound crass, but our job is to rubber neck on behalf of
:04:01. > :04:01.
:04:02. > :04:07.the public. It is our job to explain to the UK and the rest of
:04:07. > :04:13.the world. It is our job to tell the story using the pictures
:04:13. > :04:23.available - not all, I have to say. One reviewer compares it to a snuff
:04:23. > :04:23.
:04:23. > :04:28.movie. That is the most difficult decision we have to take. We have a
:04:28. > :04:35.general policy in the BBC which is not too sure the moment of death of
:04:35. > :04:41.any individual. The pictures that we showed of the firewall from the
:04:41. > :04:45.other side of the motorway were not specific enough for anyone to be
:04:45. > :04:53.able to say, that is the moment that that person died and we just
:04:53. > :04:59.don't know. Some people would say the at the BBC indulged in too much
:04:59. > :05:03.speculation before the fact were known. I think that, not just as a
:05:04. > :05:08.journalist but as a human being, once you have got over it and had
:05:08. > :05:13.the initial reaction of your hard going out to the people involved,
:05:13. > :05:20.surely, as a human being, you very first responses, how on Earth could
:05:20. > :05:24.this have happened? What could have caused such a horrendous crash? I
:05:24. > :05:28.think we are responsible in the way in which we tried to get to the
:05:28. > :05:33.causes. The police were talking quite soon about the wet road, the
:05:33. > :05:41.fog, the smoke from the fireworks display near by. That was what
:05:41. > :05:46.people wanted to know about. How did it happen? Now for some of your
:05:46. > :05:52.other thoughts. Tuesday night's late evening news.
:05:52. > :05:55.And a late breaking story to go with it. Tonight at 10, Michael
:05:55. > :05:59.Jackson's Dr or is found guilty of manslaughter.
:05:59. > :06:04.He was convicted during a six-week trial in which she refused to
:06:04. > :06:10.testify. Outside the court, Jackson fans welcomed the verdict they had
:06:10. > :06:20.been demanding for two years. Are you utterly unaware of what is
:06:20. > :06:20.
:06:20. > :07:08.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 48 seconds
:07:08. > :07:18.We were given a statement in Meanwhile, we were contacted on
:07:18. > :07:51.
:07:51. > :07:58.On Thursday, David Cameron was shown on the news channel making a
:07:58. > :08:01.speech about the economy in London. We're not going to do that with a
:08:01. > :08:06.permanent state of warfare between the banks and politicians.
:08:06. > :08:11.We sat down with the bankers and said, if you lend more to small and
:08:11. > :08:17.medium-sized businesses... We will leave the Prime Minister for now.
:08:17. > :08:27.More or at the top of the hour. Now, time for the weather. The
:08:27. > :08:33.
:08:33. > :08:37.Audiences for news bulletins at the BBC and elsewhere tend to be older
:08:37. > :08:44.than the average for general television viewing. Does that
:08:44. > :08:49.suggest I young viewers are not interested in news? Or does it mean
:08:49. > :08:59.that the BBC is catering less well for them. One of those two things
:08:59. > :09:04.the latter is the case is this person. I and 17, but when I was
:09:04. > :09:06.younger I used to watch Newsround which I used to love, because it
:09:07. > :09:10.was simplified but I could understand what was going on in the
:09:10. > :09:15.world. Now, when I watch the news,
:09:15. > :09:20.although I get most of it, there are things I still do not get and
:09:20. > :09:25.if I want to find out things it is important that the news gives me
:09:25. > :09:34.this kind of information. Then uses for a slightly older people, there
:09:34. > :09:38.is nothing targeted specifically at people around the Newsround age. It
:09:38. > :09:45.assumes that people watch it every day. I wish I could watch the news
:09:45. > :09:50.every day, but if you do not know the whole story, and you get bits
:09:50. > :09:55.and pieces, baby start assuming stuff and you get the wrong idea. -
:09:55. > :09:59.- maybe you start assuming staff. I was watching the St Paul's protest
:09:59. > :10:03.and I did not understand why they were protesting outside St Paul's.
:10:03. > :10:11.It made me think that there might be young people out there who do
:10:11. > :10:15.not understand about stock exchange and politics. It is definitely true
:10:15. > :10:21.of economic stories, because unless you have had teaching on economics,
:10:21. > :10:26.he would not be able to understand it. Unless you are all there and
:10:26. > :10:31.you have had it explained to you. What is actually happening in
:10:31. > :10:34.Libya? Unless you are following up the whole time, you would not know
:10:34. > :10:42.exactly what is happening. That is the sort of thing I would like to
:10:42. > :10:47.see. Next Friday, some BBC newscasters will be making fools of
:10:47. > :10:57.themselves in aid of Children In Need. This year, and dancing
:10:57. > :11:13.