:00:00. > :00:00.start the investigation into what caused this tragic accident. We will
:00:00. > :00:11.keep you updated throughout the night on BBC News. Right now it is
:00:12. > :00:18.time for the return of Newswatch. Welcome to the new series of
:00:19. > :00:23.Newswatch. On this programme, 800 complaints over the BBC's coverage
:00:24. > :00:27.of the police raid on Cliff Richard's house, helicopter and all.
:00:28. > :00:33.Did they report a story or make one? As footage of a beheading is
:00:34. > :00:39.released by Islamist militants, should broadcasters be screening
:00:40. > :00:45.anything from their videos? Welcome back to Newswatch. August proved
:00:46. > :00:50.anything but quiet for major news events. The BBC exclusive has proved
:00:51. > :00:54.one of the most controversial. Its lead story on the lunch time
:00:55. > :00:57.bulletin on the 14th of August, that police were raiding the home of one
:00:58. > :01:01.of Britain's most famous popular entertainers cirque refrigerant in
:01:02. > :01:08.connection with a single sexual assault allegation, although he had
:01:09. > :01:12.not been arrested, charged investigation `` investigated. The
:01:13. > :01:16.BBC were there to investigate as it happened. A small convoy arrived
:01:17. > :01:20.mid`morning and headed through the security complex of apartments near
:01:21. > :01:25.Sunningdale. From the air, though, the cars could be seen as they
:01:26. > :01:30.parked, and as the police team made its way towards the empty apartment
:01:31. > :01:34.owned by Sir Cliff Richard. At that stage, the singer, who was in
:01:35. > :01:37.Portugal at the time of the search, had made no comment about the police
:01:38. > :01:41.operation, but that afternoon he issued a statement denying the
:01:42. > :01:42.allegations. BBC One bulletins continue to lead with news of the
:01:43. > :01:54.raid. Police have searched the home of Sir
:01:55. > :01:58.Cliff Richard following the allegation of a sexual assault
:01:59. > :02:03.dating back to the 1980s. The singer who is a broad says the allegation
:02:04. > :02:08.is completely false. Officers from two police force has spent much of
:02:09. > :02:12.the day at his flat in Berkshire. How the BBC learned of the surge in
:02:13. > :02:16.advance and what conversations its journalists have had with South
:02:17. > :02:21.Yorkshire Police beforehand and became the subject of a dispute
:02:22. > :02:24.which has continued this week. Three BBC executives, a director`general,
:02:25. > :02:28.director of news and head of news gathering appeared on Tuesday in
:02:29. > :02:33.front of the House of Commons home affairs select committee to discuss
:02:34. > :02:39.how the story emerged, as did David Crompton, Chief Constable of South
:02:40. > :02:42.Yorkshire Police, who said the corporation had put the force and a
:02:43. > :02:45.difficult position and the TV coverage was disproportionate. And
:02:46. > :02:51.made the actions of the police look heavy hand at and intrusive.
:02:52. > :02:56.Hundreds of viewers agreed with that loss assessment including David
:02:57. > :03:14.Kenny who e`mailed us to say: `` handed.
:03:15. > :03:22.With me in the studio in London is the BBC's head of news gathering
:03:23. > :03:26.Jonathan Rowe, one of the BBC managers who gave evidence this week
:03:27. > :03:29.to the home affairs select committee. What was the nature of
:03:30. > :03:34.your complaint about the Cliff Richard coverage? It is clearly a
:03:35. > :03:38.newsworthy item that it was the overkill on the coverage, especially
:03:39. > :03:42.the helicopter shots of two policemen wandering around. I don't
:03:43. > :03:47.know what that was supposed to add. It didn't enlighten or enhance the
:03:48. > :03:53.story. It made me feel tainted. As if I was snooping around. Part of
:03:54. > :04:01.the snooping story which was over covered. Jonathan, that is the heart
:04:02. > :04:05.of a letter of complaint. It felt the BBC was excessive in how it
:04:06. > :04:09.covered the case of a man who hadn't been questioned arrested or charged.
:04:10. > :04:13.Let's deal with the helicopter first of all. Anthony make some points
:04:14. > :04:21.we've heard from other viewers. It is another news`gathering force. ``
:04:22. > :04:25.resource. Any photographer will want to get a clearer view of an event
:04:26. > :04:30.happening which is newsworthy. It was a newsworthy event. Only by
:04:31. > :04:35.begetting a clear view could we see how many officers were involved, and
:04:36. > :04:39.viewers could make a judgement about whether the search was appropriate.
:04:40. > :04:44.`` by getting. The helicopter footage on the 10pm and 6pm news was
:04:45. > :04:48.only ten seconds of coverage and that there was less than a minute of
:04:49. > :04:53.life helicopter coverage late afternoon. We used a very restrained
:04:54. > :05:00.portion of the helicopter footage. Tracy, what do you make of what
:05:01. > :05:05.Jonathan said? To be honest, I think the helicopter was very much
:05:06. > :05:10.intrusive. It was highly inappropriate. This man had not been
:05:11. > :05:19.questioned by the police. At any point. Before the search. He hadn't
:05:20. > :05:24.been charged with an offence. He has not been arrested. The helicopter
:05:25. > :05:26.was browsing through his windows. As a police officer was inside
:05:27. > :05:36.searching through his things. That is wrong. People think it is a BBC
:05:37. > :05:40.exclusive. Some people felt that gave the impression there was
:05:41. > :05:44.something to hide, there was killed. In terms of justice, that is what
:05:45. > :05:48.bothers people. Do you have no qualms against the scale of the
:05:49. > :05:54.coverage given this man had not been questioned or charged? There are two
:05:55. > :06:01.issues, the first is the scale, the second is the status of the enquiry
:06:02. > :06:04.knowing he hadn't been charged. The case of reporting a criminal
:06:05. > :06:09.investigation before being charged as a common thing. Parliament has
:06:10. > :06:13.not granted the right of anonymity to anyone at that stage with the
:06:14. > :06:18.exception of some specific cases involving children in certain size
:06:19. > :06:23.and stances and national security issues. It cannot be down to
:06:24. > :06:27.journalists on a case`by`case basis. Rolf Harris got complete
:06:28. > :06:31.anonymity until he was charged. The difference with Rolf Harris is
:06:32. > :06:36.nobody knew for certain he was under investigation until the point of
:06:37. > :06:40.charge. Many people feel this was a tabloid type of news exclusive and
:06:41. > :06:44.it shouldn't have been given the amount of coverage and the lead
:06:45. > :06:49.story aspect it was. In terms of the scale of the coverage we lead the
:06:50. > :06:53.bulletins with it at 6pm and 10pm for one day. The vast majority of
:06:54. > :06:57.the last few weeks have been dominated by stories with much more
:06:58. > :07:02.airtime. In Iraq, Syria, and Rotherham. We have given them an
:07:03. > :07:06.enormous airtime and quite rightly. On this particular day it was the
:07:07. > :07:09.lead story because it was the most interesting story to break that day.
:07:10. > :07:11.That should judgement of the last few weeks have been dominated by
:07:12. > :07:13.stories with much more airtime. In Iraq, Syria, and Rotherham. We have
:07:14. > :07:16.given them an enormous airtime and quite rightly. On this particular
:07:17. > :07:23.day it was the lead story because it was the most interesting story to
:07:24. > :07:31.break that day. That should judgement be. It might be a nice
:07:32. > :07:38.visual thing. For me, I thought the pictures were monkey. You couldn't
:07:39. > :07:43.really tell what was happening. `` foggy. The fact they used so little
:07:44. > :07:48.probably says how much usage really was. Not much at all. It did have
:07:49. > :07:56.the effect of making lots of people very cross. Tracey? I found it
:07:57. > :08:02.fascinating it is constantly referred to as the story. This is a
:08:03. > :08:07.man's life you are picking apart. In public stop for the enjoyment it
:08:08. > :08:12.seems to me, or the entire country. There was nothing newsworthy in one
:08:13. > :08:18.happened on the day of that search. This man had she not been spoken to
:08:19. > :08:23.by the police. He happens to be a very famous man. `` had not. Your
:08:24. > :08:28.answer and media correspondent was sent to that search. That speaks
:08:29. > :08:29.volumes. `` you sent your arts and media correspondent. Thank you for
:08:30. > :08:42.joining us. The past month has also presented
:08:43. > :08:45.the BBC with the challenge of reporting on atrocities committed by
:08:46. > :08:50.so`called Islamic State militants. On Tuesday they released a video of
:08:51. > :08:53.the beheading of the American journalist Stephen subplots which
:08:54. > :08:58.also showed a British hostage who they also threatened to kill. The
:08:59. > :09:02.BBC has been highly selective of what it shows of such videos but not
:09:03. > :09:12.selective enough for Helen Rob Key who
:09:13. > :09:21.Jonathan Monro is still with me. What is the BBC's policy about what
:09:22. > :09:27.you use from these videos? This is about the most grotesque dilemma the
:09:28. > :09:31.media faces. It is a case`by`case policy. The blanket policy applied
:09:32. > :09:36.in all circumstances is bound to be run at something. We got very long
:09:37. > :09:43.and hard before sharing any of the video of Stephen. `` we thought. We
:09:44. > :09:48.showed the minimum we felt business theory to convey the sheer horror.
:09:49. > :09:53.With moving footage and sound? The sound was relative because of the
:09:54. > :09:58.vocal similarity with the so`called jihadi John who had previously been
:09:59. > :10:01.seen to murder James Foley. Other than that it was still is. We didn't
:10:02. > :10:07.show anything towards the moment of death or after death. `` stills. We
:10:08. > :10:13.stop showing the video at all on the night of the murder video being
:10:14. > :10:17.released. We felt it was no longer breaking news. We could illustrate
:10:18. > :10:22.the story using family stills, images of him at work as a
:10:23. > :10:26.journalist. If any footage is used it is clearly propaganda for the
:10:27. > :10:30.terrorists, even still images. Is there a case as an viewers
:10:31. > :10:34.suggestive report without anything from these videos? Of course there
:10:35. > :10:40.is a case for that. I don't think suppressing the news and saying we
:10:41. > :10:43.won't show the fact a terrorist group is murdering Westerners,
:10:44. > :10:48.whether they are journalists or not is not relevant to the discussion,
:10:49. > :10:51.is the right way forward. Using it extremely sparingly with a
:10:52. > :10:55.significant amount of warnings, analysis of context around it, and
:10:56. > :10:59.with minimal airtime, I think is the right way forward. It is a
:11:00. > :11:03.case`by`case thing. I think there were lots of other hostages in very
:11:04. > :11:07.acute and imminent danger in this part of the world at the moment. A
:11:08. > :11:15.policy we applied on one video may not necessarily be the right policy
:11:16. > :11:17.next month. I suspect we will have to discuss this again in future news
:11:18. > :11:20.watch programmes. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for all your
:11:21. > :11:23.comments this week. If you want to share your opinions on BBC News and
:11:24. > :11:25.current affairs or appear on the programme you can call us on this
:11:26. > :11:34.number: Or e`mail You can find us on twitter. And have
:11:35. > :11:39.a look at our website. The address for that
:11:40. > :11:44.That's all from us, we'll be back to hear your thoughts about BBC News
:11:45. > :12:01.coverage again next week. Goodbye. Let's get you up to speed with the
:12:02. > :12:07.weather. For the weekend. We have some sunshine around through the
:12:08. > :12:08.cause of the weekend. A few showers. The most of us it should