05/09/2014 Newswatch

start the investigation into what caused this tragic accident. We will

keep you updated throughout the night on BBC News. Right now it is

time for the return of Newswatch. Welcome to the new series of

Newswatch. On this programme, 800 complaints over the BBC's coverage

of the police raid on Cliff Richard's house, helicopter and all.

Did they report a story or make one? As footage of a beheading is

released by Islamist militants, should broadcasters be screening

anything from their videos? Welcome back to Newswatch. August proved

anything but quiet for major news events. The BBC exclusive has proved

one of the most controversial. Its lead story on the lunch time

bulletin on the 14th of August, that police were raiding the home of one

of Britain's most famous popular entertainers cirque refrigerant in

connection with a single sexual assault allegation, although he had

not been arrested, charged investigation `` investigated. The

BBC were there to investigate as it happened. A small convoy arrived

mid`morning and headed through the security complex of apartments near

Sunningdale. From the air, though, the cars could be seen as they

parked, and as the police team made its way towards the empty apartment

owned by Sir Cliff Richard. At that stage, the singer, who was in

Portugal at the time of the search, had made no comment about the police

operation, but that afternoon he issued a statement denying the

allegations. BBC One bulletins continue to lead with news of the

raid. Police have searched the home of Sir

Cliff Richard following the allegation of a sexual assault

dating back to the 1980s. The singer who is a broad says the allegation

is completely false. Officers from two police force has spent much of

the day at his flat in Berkshire. How the BBC learned of the surge in

advance and what conversations its journalists have had with South

Yorkshire Police beforehand and became the subject of a dispute

which has continued this week. Three BBC executives, a director`general,

director of news and head of news gathering appeared on Tuesday in

front of the House of Commons home affairs select committee to discuss

how the story emerged, as did David Crompton, Chief Constable of South

Yorkshire Police, who said the corporation had put the force and a

difficult position and the TV coverage was disproportionate. And

made the actions of the police look heavy hand at and intrusive.

Hundreds of viewers agreed with that loss assessment including David

Kenny who e`mailed us to say: `` handed.

With me in the studio in London is the BBC's head of news gathering

Jonathan Rowe, one of the BBC managers who gave evidence this week

to the home affairs select committee. What was the nature of

your complaint about the Cliff Richard coverage? It is clearly a

newsworthy item that it was the overkill on the coverage, especially

the helicopter shots of two policemen wandering around. I don't

know what that was supposed to add. It didn't enlighten or enhance the

story. It made me feel tainted. As if I was snooping around. Part of

the snooping story which was over covered. Jonathan, that is the heart

of a letter of complaint. It felt the BBC was excessive in how it

covered the case of a man who hadn't been questioned arrested or charged.

Let's deal with the helicopter first of all. Anthony make some points

we've heard from other viewers. It is another news`gathering force. ``

resource. Any photographer will want to get a clearer view of an event

happening which is newsworthy. It was a newsworthy event. Only by

begetting a clear view could we see how many officers were involved, and

viewers could make a judgement about whether the search was appropriate.

`` by getting. The helicopter footage on the 10pm and 6pm news was

only ten seconds of coverage and that there was less than a minute of

life helicopter coverage late afternoon. We used a very restrained

portion of the helicopter footage. Tracy, what do you make of what

Jonathan said? To be honest, I think the helicopter was very much

intrusive. It was highly inappropriate. This man had not been

questioned by the police. At any point. Before the search. He hadn't

been charged with an offence. He has not been arrested. The helicopter

was browsing through his windows. As a police officer was inside

searching through his things. That is wrong. People think it is a BBC

exclusive. Some people felt that gave the impression there was

something to hide, there was killed. In terms of justice, that is what

bothers people. Do you have no qualms against the scale of the

coverage given this man had not been questioned or charged? There are two

issues, the first is the scale, the second is the status of the enquiry

knowing he hadn't been charged. The case of reporting a criminal

investigation before being charged as a common thing. Parliament has

not granted the right of anonymity to anyone at that stage with the

exception of some specific cases involving children in certain size

and stances and national security issues. It cannot be down to

journalists on a case`by`case basis. Rolf Harris got complete

anonymity until he was charged. The difference with Rolf Harris is

nobody knew for certain he was under investigation until the point of

charge. Many people feel this was a tabloid type of news exclusive and

it shouldn't have been given the amount of coverage and the lead

story aspect it was. In terms of the scale of the coverage we lead the

bulletins with it at 6pm and 10pm for one day. The vast majority of

the last few weeks have been dominated by stories with much more

airtime. In Iraq, Syria, and Rotherham. We have given them an

enormous airtime and quite rightly. On this particular day it was the

lead story because it was the most interesting story to break that day.

That should judgement of the last few weeks have been dominated by

stories with much more airtime. In Iraq, Syria, and Rotherham. We have

given them an enormous airtime and quite rightly. On this particular

day it was the lead story because it was the most interesting story to

break that day. That should judgement be. It might be a nice

visual thing. For me, I thought the pictures were monkey. You couldn't

really tell what was happening. `` foggy. The fact they used so little

probably says how much usage really was. Not much at all. It did have

the effect of making lots of people very cross. Tracey? I found it

fascinating it is constantly referred to as the story. This is a

man's life you are picking apart. In public stop for the enjoyment it

seems to me, or the entire country. There was nothing newsworthy in one

happened on the day of that search. This man had she not been spoken to

by the police. He happens to be a very famous man. `` had not. Your

answer and media correspondent was sent to that search. That speaks

volumes. `` you sent your arts and media correspondent. Thank you for

joining us. The past month has also presented

the BBC with the challenge of reporting on atrocities committed by

so`called Islamic State militants. On Tuesday they released a video of

the beheading of the American journalist Stephen subplots which

also showed a British hostage who they also threatened to kill. The

BBC has been highly selective of what it shows of such videos but not

selective enough for Helen Rob Key who

Jonathan Monro is still with me. What is the BBC's policy about what

you use from these videos? This is about the most grotesque dilemma the

media faces. It is a case`by`case policy. The blanket policy applied

in all circumstances is bound to be run at something. We got very long

and hard before sharing any of the video of Stephen. `` we thought. We

showed the minimum we felt business theory to convey the sheer horror.

With moving footage and sound? The sound was relative because of the

vocal similarity with the so`called jihadi John who had previously been

seen to murder James Foley. Other than that it was still is. We didn't

show anything towards the moment of death or after death. `` stills. We

stop showing the video at all on the night of the murder video being

released. We felt it was no longer breaking news. We could illustrate

the story using family stills, images of him at work as a

journalist. If any footage is used it is clearly propaganda for the

terrorists, even still images. Is there a case as an viewers

suggestive report without anything from these videos? Of course there

is a case for that. I don't think suppressing the news and saying we

won't show the fact a terrorist group is murdering Westerners,

whether they are journalists or not is not relevant to the discussion,

is the right way forward. Using it extremely sparingly with a

significant amount of warnings, analysis of context around it, and

with minimal airtime, I think is the right way forward. It is a

case`by`case thing. I think there were lots of other hostages in very

acute and imminent danger in this part of the world at the moment. A

policy we applied on one video may not necessarily be the right policy

next month. I suspect we will have to discuss this again in future news

watch programmes. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for all your

comments this week. If you want to share your opinions on BBC News and

current affairs or appear on the programme you can call us on this

number: Or e`mail You can find us on twitter. And have

a look at our website. The address for that

That's all from us, we'll be back to hear your thoughts about BBC News

coverage again next week. Goodbye. Let's get you up to speed with the

weather. For the weekend. We have some sunshine around through the

cause of the weekend. A few showers. The most of us it should