25/11/2011 Newswatch

That is the news. It is now time for BBC News watch. What

implications could be let us an Welcome to Newswatch. Since the

phone-hacking scandal emerged earlier this year, addressing

journalists has plummeted. In response to the revelations, the

Prime Minister has set to the left as an inquiry into media ethics

which this week heard witnesses. Although from St by behaviour from

the tabloid press, the inquiry is set to impinge on journalism as a

I cannot think of any conceivable source except those voice messages

on my mobile telephone. It just felt like such an intrusion into a

really, really private grief. The parade of celebrities and other

victims of phone hacking all bore testimony of widespread intrusion

into people's private lives. It was too much for some viewers, who

wrote SVRs, certainly for me the dialler's family, it is disgusting.

But that is on a personal level. The media likes stories about their

own industry. This inquiry is not main news and the media need to

stop acting as if it is the story Where blame should be attached is

just one of the questions the Lord Justice will be facing over the

next few months. His other considerations about the limits and

responsibilities of investigative journalism, how the media should be

policed and how to restore public confidence. These could have

ramifications for many organisations, including the BBC.

To discuss these, and joined the BBC's editor of political standards.

The chair of the media standards trusts and the journalist and chief

Executive of Index On censorship. First of all, are you worried that

there might be some negative implications flowing from this

inquiry that might affect BBC journalism? Yes. This inquiry is

entirely right and these facts of bullying and illegality by tabloid

newspapers needs to be looked at and looked out of very hard. But

there is another type of journalism and my constant complaint about

journalism over many years is not this kind of journalism. It is not

that it is too strong, it is that it is two weeks. If you look back

at the big issues of the last five or 10 years. The bankers, weapons

of mass destruction. These are journalistic, not political points.

Did journalists find out too much or too little?

Is there a danger that BBC journalism could be made even

weaker as a result? I like the unbiased way in which

she asked that question. I would not accept that the BBC's

journalism is weak at the moment. We can always be better. It is very

difficult to disprove that. Where I sit, I do not get the impression

that there is a lack of rigour to the BBC's journalism. Can we do

better? Should we have done better with the bankers? Yes, I would

agree with John. You are interested as a

documentary-maker and a journalist as higher media standards. Are you

worried that there could be on for seen consequences for investigative

journalism arising out of something at this?

The unforeseen consequences in this case might be good. If he actually

manages to cod defied the law on privacy and libel laws and the laws

of confidence, which is the one we use for super injunctions, then

that would be a good thing for us. The one thing that I could see that

would be negative would be that the cost of investigations remains high

but legal threats remain very expensive and as the cuts for the

next couple of years after 2013 - I gather there is another set of cuts

expected - it becomes a vulnerable target. Good investigations are

open-ended. You do not know how much it will cost.

I think Roger makes a very important point. There should be a

reaction that goes beyond what is necessary to solve the problems

that it is addressing and has a chilling effect on those people who

are doing investigated journalism in the public interest.

This is really good stuff. The public interest issue is something

we hope the inquiry will introduce into the next round of legislation.

A proper definition of what the public interest is would help

everybody. At the risk of sounding too

concerned sure, we have been leading the libel reform. The state

of the English defamation what is shocking. It has chilled freedom of

speech for many years, not just for people in the UK but for people

around the world - London has become a town called Sue. We have a

small subsection of the media that his side of control, chasing people

on motorbikes, rusting and haranguing. My real concern, and

particularly at the BBC, there is a web of compliance. There are all

these points that have come out of various mistakes in the past. I do

just worried that apart from programmes like Panorama, which are

correctly held up, and there is a risk for the BBC. There is no

career progression for causing trouble.

Is there a danger that that is true and that after this, it might get

worse? It is a curious time to be

criticising a web of compliance at a moment when there is a complete

lack of compliance that has got the tabloid newspapers and other

outlets into the situation where there having to be investigated. In

those areas, we have those things broadly right. I obviously await

the result of this investigation. The bill be recommendations for

broadcasters which we may want to take into account. Where we may

have to think about what we do is in relation to the use of private

investigators, although we very rarely use them for any

investigative purposes. If anybody is doing something on our behalf

that they are adhering to the same values when we're doing things on

our own behalf. Do you recognise this assertion

that there is up a web of compliance that limits the baldness

of BBC journalism? Speaking with David, whose

department I have worked very closely in a number of quite high

risk programmes, I have have to say I have had both experiences. I got

tremendous report for a big Panorama specials. Compliance has

been terrific. Under previous films about children, fantastic. There

are other times when I thought they have been on the cautious side. It

is an important point. He under Mick -- younger film-makers need to

know what the rules are, where the boundaries are. That is missing.

The short deadlines mean that a lot of press releases just get recycled

the fight anybody thinking where are the primary sources? Have

rechecked this? What are the implications? The combination of

the lack of experience under pressure of deadlines and falling

budgets, that could harm the future of investigative journalism.

There has been some compliance around the stable today! Thank you

very much. The name of a nearly die there has

been back in the news, which On this theme, there is another

See if you can identify the following individuals simply by the

descriptive words used by news And the trial of two men accused of

murdering Stephen Lawrence also elicited another complaint

following an item on the news at six at the end of last week.

Dwayne Brooks wept as he recalled how the pair were attacked by a

gang who hurled racial abuse at them. He gave evidence despite his

father dying last night. This report contains racially offensive

language that is used in court. The use of that racially offensive

Up Wednesday's breakfast had a couple of guests and to talk about

a new TV series. His new series is called the cafe,

set and a cafe. All perfectly interesting, but the

problem and the opinion of some viewers was revealed at the end of

the discussion. You can see them in the Cafe