:00:18. > :00:25.using broadband more. Now, it is Welcome to Newswatch. Coming up,
:00:25. > :00:30.did BBC show pride or prejudice? With more and more of us accessing
:00:30. > :00:37.our news via mobile phones and tablet computers, what effect would
:00:37. > :00:42.that have on the content? Are you shocked that they gave you a death
:00:42. > :00:52.penalty? Was it the time for that question for someone he was just
:00:52. > :00:52.
:00:52. > :00:56.$:/STARTFEED. Last Sunday a of millions of people were glued to
:00:56. > :01:01.Andy Murray's attempt to defeat Novak Djokovic. Quite a few others
:01:01. > :01:05.were frustrated by the weekly diet of current affairs being disrupted.
:01:05. > :01:11.The Andrew Marr Show was moved onto BBC Two, to the consternation of
:01:11. > :01:21.some. Sunday Politics was delayed by almost two hours. One viewer was
:01:21. > :01:27.
:01:27. > :01:31.And Another v were called in with a similar view. There were that
:01:31. > :01:36.television has been changed round just for tennis is a waste of time.
:01:36. > :01:43.A would have rather seen Sunday Politics, instead of being put off.
:01:43. > :01:49.It is not good enough. BBC One should keep the same programmes.
:01:49. > :01:52.Political shows like that have been discussing the topic of Britain's
:01:52. > :01:57.place in Europe, a debate kicked off again by the Prime Minister's
:01:57. > :02:01.speech promising a referendum last week. This is a clip of it as it
:02:01. > :02:05.appeared on the BBC News channel. It is wrong to ask people whether
:02:05. > :02:09.to stay or go before we have had a chance to put the relationship
:02:09. > :02:14.right. How can we centre bleak answer the question without being
:02:14. > :02:22.able to answer the most basic question - what is it exactly we
:02:22. > :02:32.are choosing to be in or a load of? Were no fewer centres reaction...
:02:32. > :02:43.
:02:43. > :02:46.Now, since last April, the Breakfast Programme has been
:02:46. > :02:51.broadcast from Salford, which has necessitated a longer journey for
:02:51. > :02:56.some of their guests. A few weeks ago, one of the newspaper reviewers
:02:56. > :02:58.on the red so far was Simon Fanshawe, who came with tales of
:02:58. > :03:03.our troubles and injury. I came all the way from Britain
:03:03. > :03:07.because I love you so much. Love to you did not take a plane!
:03:07. > :03:10.I got to the station having jet website all afternoon in full
:03:10. > :03:20.expectation the train would be running on time, and three minutes
:03:20. > :03:25.
:03:25. > :03:35.later it was cancelled. We put that point back to breakfast,
:03:35. > :03:55.
:03:55. > :03:58.and they responded with this On Thursday, Lindsay Sandiford lost
:03:58. > :04:04.her case for legal funding for an appeal against the death sentence
:04:04. > :04:08.should be given a in Bali for drug trafficking. The way the story has
:04:08. > :04:11.been handled has been controversial in some -- with some viewers. This
:04:11. > :04:14.is reporter Karishma Vaswani in the courtroom as the sentence was
:04:14. > :04:18.delivered. Any comment from what% at --
:04:18. > :04:22.sentence has been? Argue shock they gave you the death penalty?
:04:22. > :04:26.Visibly shocked and hiding her face from the glare of their cameras,
:04:26. > :04:30.Lindsey's and -- Lindsay Sandiford refused to speak.
:04:30. > :04:33.Diana was one of a number of viewers who contacted us with this
:04:33. > :04:38.response. A reporter that approached Lindsay
:04:38. > :04:41.Sandiford moments after she was sentenced to death for drug
:04:41. > :04:46.smuggling and after reaction. Does this reporter have no feelings for
:04:46. > :04:51.Lindsay Sandiford or the family and friends when she made this
:04:51. > :04:55.intrusion? Does she honestly think she would expect an answer? I was
:04:55. > :05:05.shocked and appalled. Coverage of the case has also led to a
:05:05. > :05:17.
:05:17. > :05:27.different objection voiced by Chris The another viewer observed on
:05:27. > :05:39.
:05:39. > :05:42.We know from your many e-mails and telephone calls that Newswatch
:05:42. > :05:45.viewers often disagreed with the priorities given to different
:05:45. > :05:49.stories by editors in charge of news bulletins, so what would it be
:05:49. > :05:54.like if news was tailored to be of particularly relevant interest a
:05:54. > :05:58.year before being delivered to your mobile our tablet computer, a race
:05:58. > :06:03.is increasingly used for accessing use. That is a proposal from Chris
:06:03. > :06:08.Russell, the head of product from BBC News Online. Chris, anyone who
:06:08. > :06:13.looks at the BBC website will see the most viewed section, the idea
:06:13. > :06:17.of you can choose where to go. What is different about your plans?
:06:17. > :06:22.We have seen a massive growth in the number of people accessing our
:06:22. > :06:27.services from mobile phone so. We saw a 50% increase last year, and
:06:27. > :06:30.the number of people accessing from tablets doubled in 2012 alone.
:06:30. > :06:34.People increasingly expect to follow things of personal interest
:06:34. > :06:39.on their mobile devices, so we are working on trying to make the news
:06:39. > :06:45.more relevant to people when using those mobile devices. Explain how
:06:45. > :06:49.that would work. Basically, you may be able to select the areas of
:06:49. > :06:54.interest that you have. It may be a ground where you are located. We
:06:54. > :06:58.produce a lot of content about local services. It may be about
:06:58. > :07:02.location based services, and it might just be the way that we can
:07:02. > :07:07.track and see what you are already looking at and produced stories
:07:07. > :07:12.that may be of interest to do you, as well. For example, a story about
:07:12. > :07:15.a big employer that has a national importance, but importance for a
:07:16. > :07:21.local area, you could direct people to that and find it useful. There
:07:21. > :07:25.is a worry that if you ask people to click on, water cooler news, as
:07:25. > :07:29.it is called, it is the fluffy kitten story, that is not news, but
:07:29. > :07:34.people watch it on the internet. Does the BBC want to be encouraging
:07:34. > :07:38.that? We clearly want to balance this with a clear editorial voice,
:07:38. > :07:41.and we don't want people to be accessing news they know they are
:07:41. > :07:46.interested in and miss out on something incredibly important to
:07:46. > :07:50.them. We will always balloted with the editorial voice, what the BBC
:07:50. > :07:55.thinks his most important. We are already seeing that the use of
:07:55. > :07:59.mobile is not a boat those kind of stories are born, we had a record
:07:59. > :08:03.use after the presidential election. People are interested in the big
:08:03. > :08:08.stories and spending more time with tablet devices, getting into the
:08:08. > :08:12.depth and looking at special features and reading for longer.
:08:12. > :08:17.Are you interested to see how you can carry them both of? There is a
:08:17. > :08:23.fear that the editorial news bulletin is the BBC's purpose, and
:08:23. > :08:29.if you make it easy for people to self-select, not being interested
:08:29. > :08:32.in politics or American news, people will be accessing stories --
:08:32. > :08:37.will not be accessing stories that the BBC needs them to be interested
:08:37. > :08:42.in. Indeed, if you're looking at the wider industry, there are a lot
:08:42. > :08:44.of services that aggregate things by interest. The interesting
:08:44. > :08:51.research and development we're doing is looking at how you can
:08:51. > :08:56.balance that with the editorial. We can see what a BBC journalist made
:08:56. > :08:59.some light as interesting. There correspondent -- the Correspondent
:08:59. > :09:03.has Twitter fields, you can see what they find interesting. When
:09:03. > :09:07.can we expect this? In the next year or two we will be increasingly
:09:07. > :09:12.developing these services. Finally, it is a truth universally
:09:12. > :09:15.acknowledged that every item about prejudice -- pride and prejudice
:09:15. > :09:22.should contain that phrase as if no one else thought of it. There were
:09:22. > :09:27.many examples as we celebrated 200 years since the novel was published.
:09:27. > :09:32.It is a much bigger, deeper, more serious, more important novel
:09:32. > :09:38.banned the movie versions have allowed it to be. We do have a very
:09:38. > :09:42.jolly, spirited girl in the middle of it, buried - it -- dashing,
:09:42. > :09:46.handsome and rich man on the other side.
:09:46. > :09:49.This is the sign the Manchester version of the book.
:09:49. > :09:53.I want to be Elizabeth falling in love with Mr Darcy over and over
:09:53. > :09:58.again. Andy were not the only person doing this, are you?
:09:58. > :10:05.And no, this is a very good friend of mine, Victoria Connolly. This is
:10:05. > :10:10.Mr Darcy's diary. Yes, and Monica Fairview, who has written Mr
:10:10. > :10:20.Darcy's cousins. Darcy, Darcy, Darcy.
:10:20. > :10:39.
:10:39. > :10:43.17 -- one reviewer reacted with Before we goal, following that the
:10:43. > :10:46.rumpus around event at the BBC last autumn and the Pollard report into
:10:46. > :10:51.matters arising from the Jimmy Savile scandal, many have contacted
:10:51. > :10:54.us to ask how the BBC intends to move on. Transcripts compiled as
:10:54. > :10:58.part of that increase are due to be published shortly, and once
:10:58. > :11:02.everything is in the public domain Helen Boaden, the BBC director of
:11:02. > :11:07.news, will come on the programme to discuss the way forward. Keep your
:11:07. > :11:13.questions coming in about that and any aspect of BBC News. Next week,