:00:00. > :00:00.which are the important issues to report on conference of late? And so
:00:00. > :00:11.for wars. He sits on the left and she sits on the right. Coincidence
:00:12. > :00:14.or something of a power game? The economy took centrestage this week
:00:15. > :00:20.with the Chancellor unveiling a budget. The BBC's economics editor
:00:21. > :00:23.was crunching the numbers on Wednesday's news bulletins. This
:00:24. > :00:29.graph shows the government will borrow more over the next four
:00:30. > :00:38.years. Unmounted borrowing higher than falling more slowly. -- on
:00:39. > :00:42.amount. That will still turn despite all the economic gloom, says the
:00:43. > :00:45.Chancellor, into a ?10.4 billion surplus the following year come just
:00:46. > :00:52.in time for the election. That mention of the election is an
:00:53. > :00:56.increasingly political area with every statistic and forecast
:00:57. > :00:59.disputed and fought over by government and opposition. But could
:01:00. > :01:02.the BBC be more objective and factual in this area? James thinks
:01:03. > :01:25.so, writing the following. Another criticism we have received
:01:26. > :01:57.is outlined by Godfrey. And then there is the problem of
:01:58. > :02:01.varied levels of knowledge about economics among the audience and
:02:02. > :02:05.this colour would like a little more explanation of the terminology
:02:06. > :02:10.used. When you say something on the news, and you might use the initials
:02:11. > :02:16.GDP, not everybody knows what it stands for. So would it be possible
:02:17. > :02:21.to every so often, when you say something, say it in. We know what
:02:22. > :02:28.you're talking about? We don't all know what GDP is. At the end of a
:02:29. > :02:33.very busy budget week, come all on the joins us now. Let's start with
:02:34. > :02:37.that last point. Many people if they are honest would admit that many
:02:38. > :02:43.people don't understand quite basic economic terminology, so how do you
:02:44. > :02:47.pitch your coverage? You do try to steer clear of acronyms. I think the
:02:48. > :02:51.lady makes a very good point about GDP on the gross domestic product,
:02:52. > :02:57.no one uses that in normal language down the pub. I try to speak, I am
:02:58. > :03:01.just one of a big set of people in the BBC's economics unit for the
:03:02. > :03:05.BBC, I try to use national income so at least you have a notion of how
:03:06. > :03:10.much the country is earning as a nation, which I think is slightly
:03:11. > :03:14.more helpful in trying to get across the idea of GDP. Then also trying to
:03:15. > :03:19.get across the idea that it matters because economic growth is how we
:03:20. > :03:27.create more jobs, is how we create higher wages for everybody, and how
:03:28. > :03:31.we create a degree of prosperity. Is always helpful to drive economics
:03:32. > :03:35.coverage so is engaging to people in their realise. Let's talk about
:03:36. > :03:39.budget week. It is the most important time in your job among
:03:40. > :03:42.many people would think, and there is so much information packed into
:03:43. > :03:45.that speech. How do you deal with trying to unpack it under the time
:03:46. > :03:49.pressures you have without compromising on getting things
:03:50. > :03:53.right? Absolutely. It comes down to the fact that I am just one of a
:03:54. > :03:58.whole group of people who are outputting tons of information about
:03:59. > :04:02.that online and across all our broadcast channels and radio. My job
:04:03. > :04:11.as the economics editor of the BBC is to really try and pick out two or
:04:12. > :04:15.three big themes that are important for our viewers, our listeners, our
:04:16. > :04:21.online readers to understand what George Osborne, the Chancellor, is
:04:22. > :04:25.trying to do or at least selling to the public. Paul Johnson of the IFF
:04:26. > :04:31.was on the Newsday quite recently and he bemoaned the pressure for
:04:32. > :04:36.having overnight analysis of something more complex. Can you see
:04:37. > :04:42.his point? I think we have to do both, sadly. The BBC can't be in a
:04:43. > :04:46.vacuum all we go into our chance chance for a bit and wonder what
:04:47. > :04:51.this really means. You have to give some type of news with your
:04:52. > :04:55.expertise, some type of instant response on the programme live. But
:04:56. > :05:01.let's not forget, the following day I was back on the Ten O'clock News
:05:02. > :05:06.the day after the budget, giving a more 24-hour view. So yes, instant
:05:07. > :05:10.response, but Paul Johnston is absolutely right, we need to give a
:05:11. > :05:14.considered view with a bit of time and perspective. One of the
:05:15. > :05:15.complaints that came in was from that third-year economics
:05:16. > :05:20.undergraduate saying, actually economics is neutral and you should
:05:21. > :05:25.be able to say if a policy is sound and is going to do what it says it
:05:26. > :05:28.is. Is that true? There is the old jokes, if you lined up every
:05:29. > :05:34.economics person and, they still wouldn't reach a conclusion. It is
:05:35. > :05:38.not a science in the same way that physics is a science. If you drop a
:05:39. > :05:44.ball it goes down. Economics is full of a lot of opinion and judgement,
:05:45. > :05:49.and therefore I don't think there can be a simple right or wrong.
:05:50. > :05:53.George Osborne is simply wrong to do this or John McDonald the Shadow
:05:54. > :05:57.Chancellor is wrong to argue this. I think we need to give people an
:05:58. > :06:01.understanding of the cases for what George Osborne is doing and the
:06:02. > :06:06.criticisms of some of what he is doing. But in economics, there is no
:06:07. > :06:09.right and wrong. It is really interesting how much the speculation
:06:10. > :06:12.in the air around economics exists given that people are always talking
:06:13. > :06:16.about real numbers. One of the other big complaints we have had it
:06:17. > :06:19.Newsday is the amount of airtime filled in the run-up to things like
:06:20. > :06:25.the budget with speculation. Asking people in workplaces about stuff
:06:26. > :06:29.they don't know. Does it annoy you? There is no point asking people who
:06:30. > :06:33.don't know things to tell you their opinion but the public, the opinion
:06:34. > :06:39.of the public, this is real stuff. This is about people's wages, jobs,
:06:40. > :06:43.where their children might go to work. The global economy is vital to
:06:44. > :06:48.us in terms of trade. These are vital issues to our country and to
:06:49. > :06:52.our viewers, listeners and online readers. I think it is important
:06:53. > :06:56.that we give lots of time to consider these things and to allow a
:06:57. > :07:00.whole host of voices to be involved in this debate. Because if you
:07:01. > :07:03.forget that this is about real people, and it is all academics and
:07:04. > :07:08.politicians who supposedly know everything, it would be a very
:07:09. > :07:14.sterile debate. I say bring in the people who are actually at the sharp
:07:15. > :07:18.end of this whether they are hairdressers or academics or have
:07:19. > :07:22.but kids or not the kids or drive a car or don't drive a car. Is really
:07:23. > :07:26.important and I think it is great that we do that. I think we should
:07:27. > :07:31.get involved in idle speculation, he may do this and this may happen and
:07:32. > :07:36.I hope I don't do that and they don't believe the BBC does that.
:07:37. > :07:41.Thank you. Do let us know your thoughts on the BBC's coverage of
:07:42. > :07:44.economics or any aspect of its news output. I will let you know how to
:07:45. > :07:49.get in touch with us shortly. Before that, we've got used to Top Gear
:07:50. > :07:52.controversy in the days of Jeremy Clarkson but now when you presenter
:07:53. > :07:57.has taken over and it seems the trend is continuing. Last weekend,
:07:58. > :08:00.one of the new hosts, Matt LeBlanc and a professional driver performed
:08:01. > :08:05.handbrake spans known as doughnuts near the Cenotaph in London. After
:08:06. > :08:09.protests that the filming was disrespectful, the Top Gear team
:08:10. > :08:13.said the footage would not be shown on the programme. But in reporting
:08:14. > :08:17.on story on Monday, BBC News showed video of the stunts shot by
:08:18. > :08:24.onlooker. That elicited this reaction from Phil. The Top Gear
:08:25. > :08:27.stunts at the Cenotaph had been deemed to be tasteless and
:08:28. > :08:31.disrespectful and do have rightly been dropped from erring on the
:08:32. > :08:35.programme. They had even been apologised for by the programme's
:08:36. > :08:39.co- presenter Chris Evans. What on earth are BBC News staff thinking in
:08:40. > :08:45.showing it on the Six O'clock News therefore? Does the right hand not
:08:46. > :08:48.know what the left hand is doing? This is just tabloid sensationalism
:08:49. > :08:53.and it is a shame and disappointment that the BBC saw fit to show it.
:08:54. > :08:57.When will they learn to live up to the reputation they have is a series
:08:58. > :09:03.news provider? We put that point, made by number of viewers, to BBC
:09:04. > :09:21.executives and they told us the following.
:09:22. > :09:28.Finally, a can of worms was opened On Breakfast this week on a subject
:09:29. > :09:36.that may never have crossed her mind before. Who sits where on the sofa
:09:37. > :09:40.and why? Hello and welcome back, this is Breakfast with Bill Turnbull
:09:41. > :09:44.and Louise Minchin up late until he left the programme recently, Bill
:09:45. > :09:47.Turnbull said on the left of the screen with Louise Minchin or
:09:48. > :09:51.whoever else was reporting with him on the right. His replacement, Dan
:09:52. > :09:55.Walker, seems to have inherited his seat but it turns out that the
:09:56. > :09:59.so-called camera left position is associated in TD convention with
:10:00. > :10:07.seniority. So why hasn't it been taken by the more experienced Louise
:10:08. > :10:10.Minchin? That appears to have been causing some disquiet, widely
:10:11. > :10:23.reported in the press this week. In a statement, Breakfast told us the
:10:24. > :10:27.following. But some have detected sexism at play here because it turns
:10:28. > :10:31.out that left of the green position always seems to be taken by a man On
:10:32. > :10:39.Breakfast. That is normally true elsewhere on television as well with
:10:40. > :10:43.the occasional exception. Many programmes have decided to shake it
:10:44. > :10:50.up on Wednesday that bill but what side shall we sit down on the sofa?
:10:51. > :10:53.Is the question. Some of you might be freaked out but we have been
:10:54. > :10:57.hearing that the male presenter always sits on the left and we had
:10:58. > :11:01.decided to switch it up. Twitter has gone into meltdown. Some people are
:11:02. > :11:05.watching the show in the mirror so we are the right way around. This
:11:06. > :11:13.apparently has to do with the fact that you lead from left to right. Is
:11:14. > :11:25.there sexism going on here or not? Lese thought to not. -- not. Tell us
:11:26. > :11:32.what you think about that and about any aspect of BBC News. You can call
:11:33. > :11:37.us at the following number or e-mail Newsday at the following address.
:11:38. > :11:40.You can find us on Twitter and to have a look at our website. The
:11:41. > :11:46.address for that is on your screen now. We are off air next week over
:11:47. > :11:53.Easter but do join us again the week after that. Goodbye.
:11:54. > :11:56.It has been a predominantly dry week, but each
:11:57. > :11:59.day we have been chasing cloud amounts around, and that has had
:12:00. > :12:06.A drab day with a lot of cloud pushing in from the North Sea.
:12:07. > :12:09.Where we did have sunshine in north-west Wales,