21/04/2017 Newswatch

At ten p.m., Fiona Bruce will be hit with a full round-up of the day's

news. Now it is time for Newswatch. They are off again as BBC News

embarks on covering another general election campaign, how much

attention should be given to the views of people like Brenda from

Bristol? And correspondent John

Sudworth on the challenges of reporting from North Korea,

surrounded by government minders. My job is to work out how far I can

push being a nuisance and an annoyance without getting me or my

team into difficulty. Tuesday morning saw one of those

moments when, after an hour of speculative gossip, almost everyone

here in the niche broadcasting House listened to an announcement,

takes a deep breath and embarks on a period of frenzied,

journalistic activity which, in this case,

could last for seven weeks I have just chaired a meeting

of the Cabinet, where we agreed that the Government should

call a general election, to be held All day, reporters and presenters

flocked to Downing Street. Occasionally there

was some activity. Mr Johnson, are you looking forward

to an early election? Cabinet ministers have been

in there since 8:30am. Mr Hunt, are you looking

forward to an election? I get a feeling it's

going to be a futile task. No one is going to want

to tramp Theresa May. They will be very obedient and walk

straight down the street. And when Mrs May appeared later,

Eleanor Garnier was just as vocal. Have you changed your

mind, Prime Minister? How many more times are you going

to change your mind, Prime Minister? The practice of shouting

questions at Downing Street came under attack again

from Newswatch viewers. Norman Smith

interrupted his piece to camera to shout at Boris Johnson

and others as the entered Number 10. It makes these really experienced

reporters look foolish and amateur Alan Adams wrote him after watching

Eleanor Garnier in what he described as ridiculous questions,

such as the classic, how many more U-turns, which was delivered

as a personal, political statement? It must surely qualify

as the most pointless All this voting doesn't please

everyone, I'd Brenda, in Bristol. There's too much politics

going on at the moment. Less than 24 hours in

and you have already Brenda swiftly became

the overnight media sensation. The BBC rode the wave

enthusiastically with a follow-up report on the following

night from Jon Kay. This was all too much.,

such as Anthony Parry, who begged, please, please,

stop showing Brenda from The PM does not have a strong enough

mandate to fight for Brenda's rights during

the Brexit negotiations. The PM's reasons

are totally apparent. Why is the BBC

continuing to show her? There will be plenty

more to say on Newswatch about the BBC election coverage

over the next few weeks. But, for now, let's leave it

with this plea from Clare. Now that an election has been

called, can the BBC provide debate that is wide-ranging

and informative? and the referendum,

the public was not well of time spent

chasing fashionable hares possibility that Labour

might have a pact with This was a failure of effective

debate. BBC, please, raise your gain. Adversarial interviews are not

always the most enlightening. Away from all the political

excitement in Britain, world News has been dominated by escalating

tensions between the United States and North Korea. The highly

repressive and secretive state was preparing for a fixed nuclear test.

On Monday it warned of all out war if the United States used military

force against it. John Sudworth was invited to Pyongchang where he

interviewed the Vice Foreign Minister. We asked him on his

expectations of the journalistic trip with a difference. North Korea

is all about shows of strength. The first day came in this tae kwon do

demonstration. The journalists, when they arrive, and I have been on a

few of these trips now, you are met by at least one government minder.

In our case on this visit, two government minders, he were our own

personal minders for the rest of the six days we were in Pyongyang. So,

they basically followed our every step. More than

that, they set our itinerary in the first place. They came along and

watched over every interview we did. Occasionally quibbled over questions

we asked, or took issue with things I had said to camera. My own

recorded thoughts for the reporting I was doing upset them on occasion.

It is the same for any journalist who is ever given permission to go

into North Korea. You might think, what is the point? I would argue

there is a point. We can, given all that has limitations, still speak to

ordinary North Korean citizens and we are able, of course is to judge

for ourselves how much of what they are telling us is what they really

feel or how much is being filtered because they know they are being

watched by an official. The dear Marshall, Kim Jong Un, beats and

clothes us, this nine-year-old girl tells me. Somebody who wants to

speak their own mind, tell something a little different, that would

challenge the official line. The risks would be so extreme that we

have to assume that we're not getting anywhere close to real

opinion. That said, you know, you can still judge in people's

reactions to the sort of questions you ask. You can tell, through the

sorts of pauses they may before answering. You can see them

second-guess the questions and learn a lot from doing that. Even leaving

aside the difficulty of speaking to ordinary people, just to be inside

North Korea, this most totalitarian states. To feel for ourselves the

way in which every aspect of civil life, social life, is utterly owned

and controlled by the system, I think is useful. It is an

extraordinary sight. Every now and again, it wants the world to hear

something. We were invited in, along with a couple of other foreign

reporters, to witness its ground, great, military parade. This was a

show of strength. This was a signal to the world, of course, about the

state of advancement of its missile technology. This was, if you like, a

message of defiance, that North Korea had carefully calibrated, that

it wanted to send to one particular audience, of course, in president

Donald Trump. It wanted the world's media, to amplify and broadcast that

message on its behalf. We are being used, to some extent, another word

of caution, about these trips. Standing alongside that parade,

watching the crowds, trying to judge for ourselves whether the

extraordinary emotion on display is real or manufactured. Again, all of

that is useful. There have been instances where foreign reporters

have found themselves in a tricky situation, as a result of the regime

taking issue with their reporting. I think, on the round, it's fair to

conclude because North Korea has invited the foreign media, because

they want us to project a certain message on their behalf, but they

also understand that, with that, comes a certain nuisance and

annoyance. For me on the ground, my job is to work out how far I can

push being a nuisance and an annoyance without crossing a line

getting me or my team into difficulty. We need to afford the

people we are dealing with inside North Korea, at least that due

respect. As long as we do that I think we are on pretty safe ground.

Thank you very much. Finally, coverage of the gun attack that

killed a policeman on the Champs-Elysees in Paris on Thursday

evening raised again the thorny issue for journalists. Outlined here

by Jeff Richmond from Worcestershire. You'll be really

good if BBC News script writers and editors could share with us how they

define the word, terrorism, when reporting incidents.

Thank you to all of you who got in touch with us this week. If you want

to share your opinions, or even appear on the programme, you can

call us. Or e-mail News watch. You can find us on twitter. Do have a

look at previous discussions on the website. That is all from us. We'll

be back to hear your thoughts about BBC News coverage again next week.

Goodbye. In the sport, a first chance for

fans and players to pay their respects to the former