:00:00. > :00:00.withdrawing its support. At ten o'clock we have a round-up of the
:00:00. > :00:10.day's news, but now it is time for Newswatch.
:00:11. > :00:19.Welcome to Newswatch. On this week's programme, they got their envelopes
:00:20. > :00:24.mixed up, but did BBC News get its news priorities the wrong way round?
:00:25. > :00:27.We discuss complaints that the embarrassment of the Oscars was
:00:28. > :00:36.reported on as if it was an event of major global significance but
:00:37. > :00:38.really, was it? Did you know that things did not go entirely as
:00:39. > :00:45.planned at the Oscars this year? Thought so. Any BBC news programme
:00:46. > :00:50.on Monday, the strange events on stage were hard to avoid. It really
:00:51. > :00:53.should not have been that difficult, opening the right envelope at the
:00:54. > :00:56.right time and naming the right film, but at the Oscars last night
:00:57. > :01:01.in front of a global audience of billions, it all went horribly
:01:02. > :01:03.wrong. Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway announced to the world that
:01:04. > :01:17.the winner of Best film was George Best: All By -- La La Land, but the
:01:18. > :01:20.only problem, it wasn't. As well as taking a significant airtime, the
:01:21. > :01:25.envelope mix-up occupied the first seven or so minutes of the News at
:01:26. > :01:28.one and the news at six and that pushed what many considered more
:01:29. > :01:34.significant subjects out of or down the running order. Such is the first
:01:35. > :01:37.public hearings in the government's independent inquiry into child
:01:38. > :01:46.sexual abuse. 2-mac viewers recorded their thoughts for us. -- two. I
:01:47. > :01:50.can't believe the BBC would consider this important enough to devote so
:01:51. > :01:56.much of the programme to. When there is so much happening around the
:01:57. > :01:59.world. I have no objection to this getting a mention, but keep the
:02:00. > :02:05.headline spot for truly important newsworthy items. You are after all
:02:06. > :02:10.providing a public service. Let me just say that I'm a great fan of the
:02:11. > :02:16.BBC, and especially the breakfast programme in the morning. However, I
:02:17. > :02:21.was absolutely gobsmacked the other day when Warren Beatty made this
:02:22. > :02:26.envelope mistake for the award ceremony and it just seems that
:02:27. > :02:32.suddenly the BBC is twisting us into a separate universe. We have people
:02:33. > :02:39.in south to Dan starving to death, -- seltzer down. We have Donald
:02:40. > :02:41.Trump manipulating the media and North Korea threatening a new arms
:02:42. > :02:46.race, and yet the whole world comes to a standstill because Warren
:02:47. > :02:52.Beatty opens the wrong envelope for the is the BBC losing perspective?
:02:53. > :02:55.It dominated breakfast and it dominated the whole of the news for
:02:56. > :03:04.the rest the day and in fact the next-day. I was sick to death of it.
:03:05. > :03:06.Come on, BBC, get a grip. No awards from viewers for best news
:03:07. > :03:13.broadcaster. Disgruntlement continued through the week. BBC News
:03:14. > :03:14.reported on Thursday that the accountants from
:03:15. > :03:18.PricewaterhouseCoopers responsible for the fiasco would not be working
:03:19. > :03:23.on the Oscars again, and on Friday that they had been given bodyguards
:03:24. > :03:28.following threats on social media. Giraldo another viewer who thought
:03:29. > :03:37.be news was living in La La Land -- Brian Hughes. BBC News still banging
:03:38. > :03:46.on about the simple mistake by the PricewaterhouseCoopers two. Why? We
:03:47. > :03:51.are with the daily controller of BBC News. What was your objection? I
:03:52. > :03:56.felt the same as those viewers who had just given their views. There
:03:57. > :04:04.was so much time spent on this one silly item. And I think, my views
:04:05. > :04:07.were off on the breakfast drove them, Dan Walker and Louise were
:04:08. > :04:14.trying desperately to keep the momentum going -- programme. They
:04:15. > :04:17.were so excited, going to the red carpet, and we went to the red
:04:18. > :04:22.carpet and there was this poor man standing in a kilt, desperately
:04:23. > :04:26.trying to speak to someone. He didn't get anybody to speak to him.
:04:27. > :04:32.I think he would have grabbed a cleaner if he could. It was just
:04:33. > :04:35.silly. I know there is always an issue every year with Oscars
:04:36. > :04:40.coverage, but this year it was compounded. Because it is far it
:04:41. > :04:47.makes a nice fresh and change, but viewers feel you have overdone it.
:04:48. > :04:52.On the six o'clock news we did a five-minute item on this, so it was
:04:53. > :04:57.at the top of the running order. I'm not saying that we underplayed it.
:04:58. > :05:01.That was 12 hours after. But many people this will be the first time
:05:02. > :05:04.coming back from work they will have the chance to see what happened and
:05:05. > :05:09.why it happened and what is the outcome and the ramifications. It is
:05:10. > :05:13.more than just a fun night and, this is the major event in the calendar
:05:14. > :05:16.for the entertainment industry. And this is the biggest blunder in the
:05:17. > :05:24.entertainment history's history, Julie. It is right that we cover a
:05:25. > :05:28.range of stories and that includes entertainment and popular culture.
:05:29. > :05:33.Mary, is the biggest entertainment story of the year and that is what
:05:34. > :05:37.it merited that slot at that time. Yes, I don't think it is, actually,
:05:38. > :05:41.and I don't think with the greatest respect, that it is the big media
:05:42. > :05:45.event that everyone is interested in. Did you have a view about what
:05:46. > :05:54.other stories were then given less coverage? I don't know what they
:05:55. > :05:59.were, because it just seemed that everything was Oscars, Oscars, and I
:06:00. > :06:03.believed there was a child abuse item but it was squashed into a
:06:04. > :06:10.corner and I didn't really absorb it. That is one of the concerns that
:06:11. > :06:13.many people have. The abuse inquiry story should have been the lead, and
:06:14. > :06:18.maybe this could have been the third headline. It is the BBC giving
:06:19. > :06:23.priorities to something you shouldn't. The ten o'clock news did
:06:24. > :06:29.not lead with the Oscars, the six o'clock news did, and one thing to
:06:30. > :06:35.pick up, it was the most watched viewed shared item across the way,
:06:36. > :06:41.this gaffe. We hear that a lot. It is important. The audience for
:06:42. > :06:45.bulletins as opposed to online, who know they can read in-depth. When
:06:46. > :06:48.they turn on the bullet and they want to know the most important
:06:49. > :06:54.stories in the right order -- the bulletin. What is the right order?
:06:55. > :07:01.You're right order is going to be different to mine and Mary's. That
:07:02. > :07:05.is fine. It is a subjective matter and there is no correct order to
:07:06. > :07:11.these things, but what would have been incorrect if we had not covered
:07:12. > :07:14.the child sex abuse inquiry and so be previewed it the night before and
:07:15. > :07:18.we have substantial coverage across today. In the mix you have to have a
:07:19. > :07:29.range of stories, but what news can't be is just about death tolls
:07:30. > :07:33.in descending order is or disasters. It can feel like the BBC is trying
:07:34. > :07:37.to keep up with social media where these stories have huge traction.
:07:38. > :07:40.Some in the audience said it is not the business of the BBC to be trying
:07:41. > :07:45.to compete with that kind of show business social media that word. But
:07:46. > :07:49.it is our business to give audiences a range of stories, and there will
:07:50. > :07:56.be people who think we should not be covering sport. What difference does
:07:57. > :08:02.this make? Others feel differently. The same with politics. Some will
:08:03. > :08:05.feel that we bang on too much about politics and others feel that we
:08:06. > :08:10.don't get into the nitty-gritty of it enough. You always need a mix.
:08:11. > :08:13.This has gone on all week, and we knew there was a mix-up in the
:08:14. > :08:18.envelope and then it was detail about how, but that is it. Thursday
:08:19. > :08:24.and Friday, it was dominating a lot of airtime about these accountancy
:08:25. > :08:29.workers with bodyguards and are they going to work again at the Oscars.
:08:30. > :08:35.People say it wasn't warranted. Did it really dominate airtime? We
:08:36. > :08:39.returned to it. One of the justified criticisms of the BBC and the media
:08:40. > :08:41.in general can be that we do a huge amount on a story and then the
:08:42. > :08:47.juggernaut moves on and you never hear the end. What actually
:08:48. > :08:50.happened? With this, we are saying, there is a development, for those
:08:51. > :08:56.who are interested, and many were. Here is the next iteration. If it
:08:57. > :09:01.had been the lead story across five days, I would hold my hands up and
:09:02. > :09:07.say we have gone over the top. Final word, Mary, what you feel about what
:09:08. > :09:13.you have heard? I think over the weeks and news watch we have at
:09:14. > :09:18.items and complaints about the news actually putting the emphasis on
:09:19. > :09:24.show business things will stop my view is that, please, the majority
:09:25. > :09:29.of your viewers are licence payers and they want to switch on and see a
:09:30. > :09:35.very balanced view of the news and I don't think you are providing it.
:09:36. > :09:40.Please, please, we're trying make the BBC head and shoulders above the
:09:41. > :09:48.rest will stop -- will you try to make. We will certainly try to do
:09:49. > :09:52.that. Thank you. We look forward to hearing your thoughts on what you
:09:53. > :09:57.have heard in this programme or any other aspect of BBC News. Just time
:09:58. > :10:01.for a couple more of your comments about what you have seen this week.
:10:02. > :10:06.Some reaction on Thursday to this story headlined here on the news
:10:07. > :10:15.channel. The BBC News investigation has discovered nearly 4000 motorists
:10:16. > :10:22.a day in England are fined for the -- driving in bus lanes. That word
:10:23. > :10:26.lucrative which also featured on the BBC News website of England's most
:10:27. > :10:30.lucrative bus lane cameras infuriated Edward Taylor who felt
:10:31. > :10:34.the reporting emphasised motorists complaints about local councils
:10:35. > :10:53.making money. On Tuesday in inquest into the
:10:54. > :10:58.deaths of 30 British tourists killed in a gun attack in Tunisia in 2015
:10:59. > :11:02.found they were on -- unlawfully killed. James Franklin e-mailed his
:11:03. > :11:30.objection to the way it was treated. Thank you for your comments this
:11:31. > :11:37.week. Please share with us your opinions. We may feature them on the
:11:38. > :11:44.programme or you might feature in person. You can post your thoughts
:11:45. > :11:53.on Twitter and also have a look at our website where you can watch
:11:54. > :11:56.previous discussions. That is all from us. We will be back again next
:11:57. > :12:02.week. Goodbye.