:00:00. > :00:24.This is very new and quite exciting, you are probably used to it because
:00:25. > :00:27.it is the fourth night, but it is new to as!
:00:28. > :00:30.Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be
:00:31. > :00:33.With me are the broadcaster Anna Raeburn and the contributing
:00:34. > :00:34.editor at Esquire Magazine, Andrew Harrison.
:00:35. > :00:40.We have your chair is very low, very low tonight. Let's make a start.
:00:41. > :00:42.The Independent leads with the sentencing of the former
:00:43. > :00:43.Bosnian Serbs Leader, Radovan Karadzic.
:00:44. > :00:47.Genocidal butcher of Srebrenica is sentenced to 40 years, it says.
:00:48. > :00:50.Justice catches up with Karadzic, reports the Guardian.
:00:51. > :00:55.The UK was not told about bomb fears, says the Telegraph,
:00:56. > :00:57.referring to warnings over one of the Brussels bombers that Belgium
:00:58. > :01:10.On the same story, The Times says the brothers suspected of suicide
:01:11. > :01:12.strikes on Brussels Airport may have been planning to build
:01:13. > :01:16.Donald Trump fronts the cover of the Daily Express.
:01:17. > :01:18.He's predicting a Brexit off the back of dismay
:01:19. > :01:26.Animals says the son of the former Sunderland player Adam Johnson who
:01:27. > :01:32.has been jailed for six years the sexual activity with a schoolgirl.
:01:33. > :01:34.New Day also leads with the sentencing of the disgraced
:01:35. > :01:41.And the Daily Mail says foreign workers are being recruited
:01:42. > :01:43.by the NHS are undercutting British staff.
:01:44. > :01:49.We begin with a guardian, and the story of Radovan Karadzic finally
:01:50. > :01:54.hearing his verdict and sentence after many years on the run and in
:01:55. > :01:59.court. Here it is, justice catches up with Karadzic. During his five
:02:00. > :02:04.years coming you chose to represent himself, which might have slowed
:02:05. > :02:10.things down a bit? I think so, but he loves the sound of his own voice,
:02:11. > :02:15.and nobody else does. This story is too little, too late for the people
:02:16. > :02:20.who lost their loved ones, and one of the greatest defences in Europe
:02:21. > :02:25.after the Second World War. There is a terminology here which is missing,
:02:26. > :02:27.I think everybody wanted to hear him condemned to life imprisonment, they
:02:28. > :02:33.didn't want to hear that he was condemned for 40 years. It does seem
:02:34. > :02:38.to have baffled people, a sentence which given his age he probably
:02:39. > :02:41.isn't going to come out, but it is the message it sends. It is the
:02:42. > :02:46.symbolism, and follow-up stories inside the Guardian, relatives of
:02:47. > :02:50.the and the communities affected saying, is the commission not
:02:51. > :02:55.ashamed? If he can't be sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison
:02:56. > :03:01.for this, what can you be imprisoned for? It is a strangely arbitrary
:03:02. > :03:10.figure, as well. May lead to cancer genocide would do it instead of one?
:03:11. > :03:17.Without being flippant,. -- maybe two counts of genocide would do it?
:03:18. > :03:21.Without being flippant, this is the worst atrocity since the Second
:03:22. > :03:27.World War, so I think there is a surprise to it, and clearly people
:03:28. > :03:30.will find that this is not the full justice they were looking for. Not
:03:31. > :03:35.only has he spun it out, which is the only victory he can have at this
:03:36. > :03:38.stage of his life, but he has been handed down a sentence which...
:03:39. > :03:43.There can be no adequate sentence for this, but the symbolism was
:03:44. > :03:46.inadequate. And it was such a long wait for them, but it is very fresh
:03:47. > :03:52.in so many minds, when you see those pictures replayed in the reports
:03:53. > :03:58.after the sentencing, it was only in the 1990s, and it was so close to
:03:59. > :04:04.hear, part of Europe. And yet there was no understanding that, if you
:04:05. > :04:11.did this, you forfeited your rights to be treated as a human being, and
:04:12. > :04:14.he has been treated as a human being in the best justice system that we
:04:15. > :04:18.could devise, and it would have been nice if they had just said,
:04:19. > :04:24.finished, no, end, for the rest of his natural life. It is on the front
:04:25. > :04:29.of the Independent as well, this story. We were speaking to a
:04:30. > :04:34.journalist earlier, Andrew, who said he had done an interview with
:04:35. > :04:37.Karadzic early in the week, and he said, they will never find me
:04:38. > :04:44.guilty. Even right up to now he was saying that. His defence was the old
:04:45. > :04:48.defence of, the leader of the genocidal Government, which is, I
:04:49. > :04:50.didn't know what was going on. This was the individual actions of
:04:51. > :04:57.individual local army commanders and so on. The commission has found
:04:58. > :05:01.otherwise, that he did know what was going on and is ultimately
:05:02. > :05:07.responsible for it. When you reach the very rarefied legal heights of
:05:08. > :05:09.what the leader of the country is doing and can they be held
:05:10. > :05:14.responsible for what is happening on the ground, the president of these
:05:15. > :05:17.things is an Nuremberg, they are the biggest Oracle moments, and this is
:05:18. > :05:22.a big historical moment like that, it is closure. I don't think the
:05:23. > :05:26.verdict is a surprise to anyone apart from Karadzic himself, it does
:05:27. > :05:34.close the book. Letters just turn our attention to the times. --
:05:35. > :05:39.Times. It says Brussels was plotting a radioactive bomb attack. Tell us
:05:40. > :05:45.about this, it seems a nuclear industry official was being filmed.
:05:46. > :05:48.It is one of those things, it doesn't appear to be worrying until
:05:49. > :05:58.you have something to worry about, and then it is very worrying indeed.
:05:59. > :06:03.Ibrahim and Khalid el-Bakraoui, the suspects in the Brussels bombings,
:06:04. > :06:08.were believed to be involved in an Islamic state plot to scatter
:06:09. > :06:15.radioactive material over a large area. A senior Belgian nuclear
:06:16. > :06:18.official was secretly filmed, according to the authorities, and
:06:19. > :06:23.why did they know about this last year, yesterday the brothers were in
:06:24. > :06:26.the surveillance, they were linked. It is suggested that they were
:06:27. > :06:31.trying to get hold of radioactive material. The concept of a dirty
:06:32. > :06:37.bomb terrorist attack isn't a new one, it is slightly Tom Clancy, but
:06:38. > :06:41.we have to think in those terms now. The Times is definitely spinning at
:06:42. > :06:45.the evidence as far as it will go, but I think that is the way security
:06:46. > :06:50.authorities have to think now, what are the indications of what is going
:06:51. > :06:53.on? Why would they have a nuclear industry official under
:06:54. > :06:56.surveillance, so it is deeply worrying, and it is something they
:06:57. > :07:02.have to factor into future security plans. And they are now guarding
:07:03. > :07:08.Belgian's two Tomic plants with a lot of soldiers, as you might
:07:09. > :07:11.suspect. Staying on this story with a different tack, the Daily
:07:12. > :07:14.Telegraph says the UK was not told about bomb fears, the suggestion
:07:15. > :07:19.that there is a failure somewhere in how Europe shares intelligence. It
:07:20. > :07:27.is the Telegraph, so there is a Brexit cast over this. Saying
:07:28. > :07:34.Britain will be safe outside the EU because we won't there is an
:07:35. > :07:36.argument that we will not be able to share intelligence, but they are
:07:37. > :07:41.saying that in this case it wasn't happening. Anna, you were talking
:07:42. > :07:46.about the very unusual security communications situation in
:07:47. > :07:51.Brussels. I was fascinated, because I knew it is very easy, it seems to
:07:52. > :07:55.me, after the event, the people who are specialists in is available is
:07:56. > :08:00.for the gathering of intelligence, to point fingers and say, Belgium
:08:01. > :08:02.wasn't doing this, they weren't thorough, but the situation in
:08:03. > :08:07.Brussels is quite different from the situation we have here. There are
:08:08. > :08:13.several local police forces, they have to share information and get on
:08:14. > :08:16.with each other, and there is a federal force over the top, and the
:08:17. > :08:21.structure of how information is passed is incredibly clumsy, and
:08:22. > :08:27.that would slow it and distort it as fast as it came. So the issue is not
:08:28. > :08:33.that Europe is sharing it of Asian with written, it is that there is --
:08:34. > :08:36.not that Europe isn't sharing information with Britain, it is the
:08:37. > :08:41.fact that there is a difficulty with intelligence within Belgium. I have
:08:42. > :08:44.heard on two news agencies tonight that six arrests have been made in
:08:45. > :08:50.Brussels as part of a police operation following those attacks,
:08:51. > :08:53.that is coming from Reuters and the AFP News Agency, so another line
:08:54. > :09:05.coming out there. We are going to look now at Day,... Which camera? We
:09:06. > :09:09.are all over the place! It is because of how they have laid it
:09:10. > :09:14.out. This is a story of Adam Johnson being sentenced to six years in
:09:15. > :09:18.prison for sexual activity of a schoolgirl of 15. We were talking
:09:19. > :09:22.outside about how they have laid this out, and having your view,
:09:23. > :09:27.Andrew, it doesn't work? They are trying to carve out a new identity
:09:28. > :09:32.for themselves is a different newspaper, possibly doing news in
:09:33. > :09:35.less aggressive manner, targeted towards the female reader trying to
:09:36. > :09:40.find a new way of doing it, but this doesn't work, because what this is
:09:41. > :09:45.really, this is what we would call a side bar, not a front page. It is
:09:46. > :09:49.one of those fact boxes that you see in a corner of a feature with a
:09:50. > :09:55.bunch of statistics, the number of football fans who look up to him,
:09:56. > :09:59.the weekly salary, it is statistics, not a front page, and I imagine
:10:00. > :10:03.myself at a newsagent, you can't read that, it is not a bold
:10:04. > :10:08.statement, front-page headline, and I didn't understand it. Is there a
:10:09. > :10:12.different agenda, would women find this easier to read? They might if
:10:13. > :10:15.it were on a magazine front, but I don't think it works, I didn't know
:10:16. > :10:20.any of that it was fascinated to listen to it, you both know more
:10:21. > :10:27.about this than I do, but that isn't a magazine cover, and it won't work,
:10:28. > :10:31.it is a newspaper. But more worrying still is that if this is aimed at
:10:32. > :10:35.women, the bulk readership of the women of this country read the Daily
:10:36. > :10:39.Mail, and this is about as far from the Daily Mail as you can get. I
:10:40. > :10:45.like the colours, if that makes any difference! Let's look at the
:10:46. > :10:49.picture on the Independent of, I thought this was a statue, it is
:10:50. > :10:57.Barack Obama have in impromptu state dinner with a woman who has draped
:10:58. > :11:02.herself over him. It is the tango, they are in Buenos Aires. Body
:11:03. > :11:08.language! You very rarely see Barack Obama look awkward, because he is
:11:09. > :11:13.graceful, but the feet and the way he is holding her is suggested that
:11:14. > :11:16.this girl was told to drape herself over the president, and the cameras
:11:17. > :11:22.would line up, and he looks uncomfortable. He wishes she would
:11:23. > :11:26.go away and sit down! It looks like a stunned, and the one on the front
:11:27. > :11:31.of the times is even more odd, he looks like a statue in his own back
:11:32. > :11:35.garden there. She has flung herself on top of him, and I think you can
:11:36. > :11:43.read from his facial expression that he wants this to end. It is a great
:11:44. > :11:49.front-page picture, and surely old -- old-fashioned picture editor on
:11:50. > :11:55.the front page, this is part of the formula, but you can feel him dying
:11:56. > :11:59.a little inside. You can. And look at the hand, it is hardly on her.
:12:00. > :12:02.The handset is, I have to put my hand here because otherwise it will
:12:03. > :12:09.look wrong, but I don't want to get involved in this. Michele Knight
:12:10. > :12:13.have something to say. She would look prettier in that frock. It is
:12:14. > :12:19.not nice to have things sprung on you, as I know! Finally, artificial
:12:20. > :12:26.intelligence fails to beat real stupidity. This is a chat robot, an
:12:27. > :12:30.artificial Twitter account, supposed to have created its own personality,
:12:31. > :12:38.and what happened, Andrew? They designed this baying to in valve and
:12:39. > :12:46.learn. That is not the story! Hold on. Here we go. Artificial
:12:47. > :12:52.intelligence fails to beat real stupidity. They programmed this
:12:53. > :12:57.thing, chat robot, to act like people on Twitter. It is supposed to
:12:58. > :13:04.be like a young woman, using slang, being impersonal. And within hours
:13:05. > :13:07.it had evolved to be sexist, misanthropic, racist, and very
:13:08. > :13:12.sexually explicit in a way that we can't describe on the BBC. It became
:13:13. > :13:17.the lowest common denominator almost instantly, and the times describes
:13:18. > :13:21.it, Microsoft's new chat bot does indeed sound like a human, but not
:13:22. > :13:27.someone you want to follow in a hurry! You would run away from it.
:13:28. > :13:34.It hasn't really worked. Finally, it seems it has got harder to win the
:13:35. > :13:38.Lottery. We always knew it was hard, 440 million chances you have of ever
:13:39. > :13:44.winning, but this is such a cruel story. You have to get your five
:13:45. > :13:51.numbers, you match five numbers on the ?25 million national lottery
:13:52. > :14:01.draw, only one of the jackpot, but they earned just ?15. Barely worth a
:14:02. > :14:08.trip to the shop! It isn't worth the bother, is it? I wouldn't be
:14:09. > :14:10.changed. You would still turn up and do the papers for us.
:14:11. > :14:18.It is a bit of trial and error, this then. We will get used to it, won't
:14:19. > :14:20.we? Don't forget all the front pages
:14:21. > :14:23.are online on the BBC News website where you can read a detailed
:14:24. > :14:26.review of the papers. It's all there for you seven days
:14:27. > :14:28.a week at bbc.co.uk/papers. And you can see us there, too,
:14:29. > :14:31.with each night's edition of The Papers being posted
:14:32. > :14:33.on the page shortly What a triumph to see you through to
:14:34. > :14:40.the following day! Now it's time for the weather
:14:41. > :14:44.with Sarah Keith-Lucas.