Dealing with the devil

It may just have been one of those coincidences but just after the Leveson Inquiry heard from Kate and Gerry McCann I was listening to the Media Show on BBC Radio 4, including an interview with former News of the World Features Editor Jules Stenson who was bemoaning what was happening.

His argument was that witnesses at the inquiry had made statements which had gone unchallenged. Tabloid newspapers, he said, had been 'smeared' with 'no right of reply'. Having heard the two hour testimony of the McCanns it was hard not to laugh but there is a more serious point here. Journalists - and as Stenson rightly pointed out only 16 of the NoW's staff of more than 200 are the subject of the police investigation into hacking - are concerned that when Lord Leveson's job is done they will face an over-restrictive regulatory regime. That is a legitimate concern but it must not be allowed to cloud the central issue - something has to be done to curb media excesses.

This whole thing was triggered by revelations about 'phone hacking but it isn't that activity, which is illegal in any case, that we need to focus on. The law can deal with anyone found guilty of hacking but regulation needs to be tightened to deal with all the other instances in which some newspapers and some of their journalists act in unacceptable ways.

Kate and Gerry McCann gave us an insight into what it's like being at the centre of a media storm.
Yes, they needed publicity to help in the search for their daughter; yes media attention on Madeleine's disappearance was legitimate but none of that justifies what followed - the invasion of every aspect of the McCann's life.

During my 'media expert' appearance in ITV Central's report on the McCanns' evidence one of the men in a vox pop recorded in their village said the couple had been given more publicity over Maddy's disappearance than other families in the same position. His view was that they'd been treated pretty fairly. I can't sympathise with that view anymore than I can spare a tear for those poor old smeared tabloid hacks in Jules Stenson's view of events.

In his evidence Steve Coogan said he had never entered 'a Faustian pact' with the media as some celebrities choose to do. The McCann's were given no choice about 'having a relationship' with the media but they must have felt very much as if they were dealing with the devil.

NoW - miss you more than you could know

Found myself on BBC WM shortly before James Murdoch's latest appearance before the House of Commons Culture Media and Sport committee. So as he prepared for another session of questions about what he did or didn't know about phone hacking I was being asked if I missed the News of the World.

It was a question to which I hadn't given much (if any) thought since the paper closed until WM called to set up the interview. That lack of consideration might immediately suggest the NoW's passing had left me unmoved but on reflection  - go on, ask yourself the same question - I was left with the inescapable feeling that without it around something important was missing.

I don't mean there was a gap next to the Sunday morning marmalade pot, largely because I can't remember the last time I bought the News of the World (no, not even 'just for the football') but on two levels the hole left by its demise has not been filled. First there's the matter of sales. The Mail on Sunday may have just reported an increase in circulation and the other tabloids - Sunday Mirror, People, and Daily Star on Sunday - may also have seen some benefit in the short term but overall there are fewer people reading Sunday papers. For the missing million - for that's about what the number is - nothing has replaced the 'Screws'.

More importantly, I think, is the investigative reporting deficit. I know much of it was tacky - I don't much care in what language Max Mosley likes his bottom spanked - but it did have a track record of exposing wrongdoing that needed to be exposed. You need look no further than the case of the Pakistani cricketers fixing case to see that. None of this excuses what seems to have been a culture of overstepping the bounds of acceptable behaviour but it does raise an important issue as Lord Leveson sets out on his inquiry into the role of the police and the press in 'hackgate'.

What he finds and whatever shape the regulation of the press takes in the future it is imperative that nothing is done to further hamper journalists' legitimate pursuit of stories that are genuinely in the public interest. Maybe there's nothing to worry about but in The Times today Lord Neuberger, the Master of the Rolls, reflects on the decrease in cases in which someone is seeking a privacy order to prevent publication of a story. "Possibly it is because newspapers, post phone hacking, have been rather careful in not engaging in controversial stories," he says. Of course there are other reasons but we don't need an over-cautions press. We especially don't need it when elsewhere today Lord Patten is reported in the Guardian as saying' the BBC is unable to conduct investigations into some of the most important stories of the day – including phone hacking – if they could be construed as having a political bias.'

I think I might be missing the NoW just a little more today.

Living la vida local

While staff at BBC Local Radio stations wait anxiously to learn just who'll escape the axe and for whom the ominous whistle of its approach will become the sickening thud of its impact, the BBC is calling in a consultant to advise it on the task.

Don't get me wrong. I have some sympathy with an approach that looks for help in deciding the best way to make savings given that savings must be made. It's just that the timing seems off, to say the least, and in staff relations and PR terms the decision is inexplicable. I am reminded of former Deputy Director General Alan Protheroe, who told a meeting of news editors at one particularly troubled time for the Corporation that while Auntie had always had the ability to shoot herself in the foot her aim was creeping higher!

These days my only connection with the BBC is as a licence payer so it is in that capacity that I'm left wondering why you bring in John Myers after you've announced what Delivering Quality First will mean to local output rather than enlisting his experience earlier in the process? To be fair again (old Beeb habits die hard) David Holdsworth, Controller of English Regions and the man at the top of the BBC Local Radio tree, makes the point that unlike other services there is little or no room for overhead cuts in local radio because it has to maintain 40-odd station premises. The upshot of that is that the true impact of the budget cut is greater for staff and output.

On Radio 4's Feedback, said Controller found himself being questioned by a listener. It cannot have been coincidence that the listener was from Shropshire, where Holdworth's BBC career began. David spoke with sincerity about how proud he was that the station was highly valued by its audience but there was at this point a chasm between his view of the service and that of the listener. David referred (more than once from memory) to BBC Local Radio's important journalism. The listener made the point thast the station was about so much more.

Like David I am proud of having been a founding part of that station (and to have made some contribution to others) but I return to the point of my previous blog that the BBC management long ago lost sight of what made its stations special. The standardisation of the last few years opened the way for the cuts now taking place.

I couldn't help but smile to learn that my former Shropshire colleague is turning to Myers, who was cutting his radio teeth at BBC Carlisle in my early reporting days there. He's come a long way since then but I know he hasn't forgotten Lamb Bank - the epitome of local broadcasting - and the listeners' reaction when it didn't appear. Perhaps it's too much to hope that that early lesson might prompt him to urge a loosening of the central straitjacket when he delivers his findings.

Too much BBC not enough 'local'

Thirty-odd years ago, as a newcomer  to BBC Local Radio my first station manager told me that during a dull moment in a meeting with colleagues from round the country he had tried to work out what they all had in common. In the end the only thing he could come up with was that they were all ugly!

He told me, too, of his surprise that having been appointed to run the station – BBC Radio Carlisle - nobody told him what he was expected to do. He was simply left to get on with it. 

Those stories have come to mind in the last week following the news of cuts to local output as part of the Delivering Quality First exercise.  I know friends and former colleagues at BBC stations have been hurt by the announcement but looking back to my old boss’s comments, I’m left with a feeling that the service whose loss is being lamented now had already been sold down the river.

Before I’m accused of wallowing in rose tinted nostalgia, let me be clear that I am well aware that changes had to be made and that ‘just getting on with it’ was no way to manage anything and certainly not a service paid for by licence payers’ money.  I don’t want to be seen, either, as unsympathetic to those facing the cuts. The five stations in the West Midlands region, for example, will lose more than 40 staff between them. Some people will opt for voluntary redundancy but while managers grapple with the job of deciding who’ll go and who’ll stay those stations won’t be pleasant places to work.

The fact is, though, that the scrapping of  locally produced and presented output at non-peak listening times is the inevitable next step in a story which has seen a steady dilution of the localness that made stations unique and won them a place in the lives of the people they served, especially in non-metropolitan England.

Once, each station had its own distinct characteristics. From the ‘Lamb Bank’ service for Cumbrian farmers to presenters whose huge followings were a mystery to listeners from forty miles away the accent (and some of those were ultra-local, too) was on what worked where the station was. As the number of stations grew with expansion through the 1980s that idea of lots of small, different versions of the BBC clearly made London-based executives uncomfortable.

The distinctive logos – Stoke’s radio wave shaped as a potteries bottle kiln, Norfolk’s wherry and Lincolnshire’s tulip – disappeared and were replaced with a corporate look for the Local Radio brand. There was Operation Bullseye to identify the target listener.  Knowing who’s listening so you can give them what they want makes sense if you are creating a countrywide brand but individual stations rooted in their communities, meeting and listening to their audience do the job just as well if you want the emphasis to be on ‘Local’ rather than ‘BBC’.  Stations were also obliged to play their part in campaigns and segments of programming which ran across the network. Yes, there was freedom to produce local material as part of these strands but the pass had been sold and the principle of unique local output was lost.

Through all this one strength of BBC Local Radio has remained unchanged, and it’s here that cuts to its output may yet cause the Corporation to rue its decision in the future. Over the years stations have found and nurtured people who have gone on to make their names in many areas of the BBC’s activity, including into senior management. Let’s hope that DQF hasn’t cut off an important source of talent and a route to the top for anyone aspiring to it – whether or not they’re ugly.

The Times they are a whingeing

I was given a free copy of The Times on my train journey from Hereford to Birmingham City University this morning. I'd decided not to buy my usual daily copy in a rather futile protest against the continuing employment of Rebekah Brooks (I suspect she's getting her own back by not reading this).
I am glad, though, that I did take one because it allowed me to read the rather self-serving leader piece about the role of illegal activity in journalism. "News International," says The Times, "is paying a high price for its hacking scandal. There will now be broader questions about journalistic techniques."

The leader writer goes on to explain that 'some of the greatest journalistic exposes in history were achieved using methods that could now be, and sometimes at the time were, challenged by the police ot taken to court.' The article's examples are the leaking of the Pentagon Papers, the Washington Post's Watergate investigation, Clive Ponting's whistle blowing over the sinking of the Argentine ship the Belgrano, the Daily Telegraph's revelations about MPs' expenses and the Guardian's publication of the Wikileaks diplomatic cables which led to US soldier Bradley Manning facing criminal charges.

All these did involve newsgathering techniques that might be seen on one level as questionable but in each case there is a clear public interest in the publication of the material that was gained. The same cannot be said of much of the information collected by hacking the 'phones of the Dowler family, or the families of service personnel killed in Afghanistan. Each revelation in the scandal in which the Murdoch empire is now mired seems to plumb new depths. What possible public interest could there be in revealing details of Gordon Brown's son's illness?

The Times piece rightly says, "Embarking on an investigation, journalists need to ensure that the methods they use can be justified by the motivation and the outome." It might have added that in circumstances where journalists are tempted to stray, editors must show stong leadership and be ready to take responsibility. Today's leader doesn't say that so it's a shame that Rebekah is more likely to read The Times than this.

On the seventh day...

This is my fourth time in India so probably my seventh or eighth Sunday here and I still can't get used to the fact that it's only a tiny, tiny bit less frantically busy than the other six days. My plan is to bottle the idea of the weekend and to market it here!

I suppose it's because it is a truly multi-cultural country. In Bangalore on Friday I saw people gathering at Mosques for Friday prayers and today, on the way from Chennai airport to the Taj Connemara, I saw a large crowd flooding out of an Evangelical Christian Church. In fact, in  a few hundred yards there were three Christian churches on one side of the road, at least two Hindu Temples and a Mosque on the other.

The lack of a weekend - or any form of it that would seem familiar to someone from the UK - further underlines the sense that this is a country in a hurry with no time for a day, let alone two, off. Its rushing economically, new infrastructure is bursting from the soil like poppies in a cornfield and you get the sense that if you were to gaze too long at an open space a building would appear on it before your eyes. I have no doubt some better informed observers would say all this is happening against a backdrop of unchanging, timeless India. That may be true - certainly you wouldn't see a cow strolling across a busy (for 'busy' read 'insane') road junction in Birmingham - but the overall feeling from the big metro cities, which are just about my only experience of the country, is that India is going places - lots of places - at break neck speed.

Seeing full frontal capitalism at work is a bit like being a rabbit caught stock still in the headlights of an oncoming juggernaut. All credit, though, to the profit-seeking the genius who came up with my favourite advertising slogan of the millions I've seen here on hoardings, shop fronts and daubed on walls. 'Water', it said, 'now with H2O'. 

Musings from Mumbai

Day four of my Indian adventure and the Broadcast News Production workshops at the British Council offices in Delhi and Mumbai are going well. There were more than a dozen at Monday's session in Delhi, including two fearsomely bright high school girls and a couple of working TV journalists. It was very much an interactive session with questions covering news priorities, the use of real people rather than ‘official voices’ in news pieces and some important areas of journalistic ethics.

In Mumbai there were 29 students - all from media-related courses - at the morning session. Judging by their questions, contributions and responses they were fully engaged with the workshop and the feedback they've given to British Council staff bears that out. Again the workshop covered a number of elements but each of these could have been the subject of longer discussions given the intelligent points raised by those attending. It would be a pleasure to teach any one of them back at Birmingham City University.

The afternoon session was made up mostly of professional journalists - newspapers, radio, TV, web TV and online media were all represented. I'm not sure how much they got out of the experience but I learnt a lot. Journalists in India face a range of challenges that don't arise in the UK, judging by the issues that were thrown up during our discussions. They ranged from commercial pressures on editorial staff, editors' partiality, the way competition between channels is distorting news priorities and the over use of the ‘Breaking News’ or ‘Just In’ screamers on news channels. One participant was strongly of the view that this practice devalues genuine breaking stories. For what it’s worth I completely agree with her. We also looked at another over used storytelling device – the piece to camera – and the tendency for reporters to spring up like Jacks in the box (should that be on the box?) when letting the pictures and the interviewees speak for themselves among a well-crafted script would be much better.

I ended the afternoon with the clear feeling that Indian journalists – many of them still very - young are meeting all these challenges in a fast moving environment but on without the luxury of having been built on a heritage of TV news practice and conventions. All that seems to make high quality journalism education even more important. 

On a less stuffy note it was good to have the session with the professionals Tweeted live from the room and to have to respond to questions posted by followers. The British Council also filmed both Mumbai sessions and edited highlights will appear soon on their YouTube pages so more people can get a flavour of the event - so watch this space. 

Next stop Bangalore! 

POSTCARD FROM DELHI

I'm in Delhi and about to head off to the Brirish Council offices here for the first of a series of workshops I'm leading on Broadcast News Production. Today's Hindustan Times has a story about almost 2,000 applicants sitting the journalism entrance examinastion at Delhi University which is some indication of the interest in journalism education in this country. (Whether that carries through to my workshops we'll have to wait and see).

Sadly I'm in this rather beautiful city for only a little over 24 hours so exploration time is limited but I did get to the Gateway to India - actually a large memorial to Indian soldiers killed in the First World War - and walked along the broad avenue to the Parliament buidling. Not the kind of 'research' on which to build any firm conclusions but it did underline the importance of 'the media' here. An area close to the Parliament building looked a bit like a used car lot for broadcasters' satellite trucks. There were more than a dozen there, most unstaffed late yesterday afternoon but all obviously on standby to beam news around the country.

Then, just a few yards away, a crew was shooting a Bollywood movie (it's called 'The Wedding Gift' if the clapperboard is to be believed). As the crew, swathed in scarves to protect themselves from the sun, set up in the road other members of the team patiently ushered curious passers-by, including me, out of shot. That included, at one point, stepping bravely into the traffic to stop cars going about their normal life.

Meanwhile the extensive grassy area stretching beside the broad avenue bore testament to another constant in Indian life - cricket. There were perhap half a dozen improptu matches each with sizeable numbers of players. Nobody seemed at all moved when the odd straight drive or sweep - depending on which side of the avenue - saw the ball hurtle through the short hedging and into the road.

Next stop Mumbai!




'

Trial by Twitter

Interesting piece in The Times on Monday about some jurors using Facebook to run polls on whether the accused in trials they are hearing are guilty or not. Rather puts a new spin on 'throwing the book' at someone. In a letter the next day Frances Quinn, author of the excellent 'Law for Journalists' pointed out that this was worrying evidence that jurors are making up their minds before hearing all the evidence. She went on to say that judges needed to ensure jurors understood clearly the nature of their duty, especuially as Contempt of Court carries the possibility of a prison sentence.

I'd like to add a couple of thoughts. First, the day the Quinn letter appeared I was in court with my latest batch of postgrad broadcast journalism students. Many of them opted to sit in on a murder trial, assuming it would be exciting. What they heard was lots of police evidence (and some cross examination) about pictures of the scene of the alleged crime. In the end even the judge ventured to suggest the jury had probably had enough and must be wondering if they were taking part in some kind of 'spot the difference' competition. To their credit the jury members stayed awake throughout - though I'm not sure I could say the same about the students! It underlined how much the system demands of jurors but God forbid we ever reach a stage where we believe it would be better to do without them.

Secondly, the whole business of Facebook polls, jurors doing online research and even Tweeting about ongoing cases, serves as further evidence that in the area of Contempt in particular the law is now well outpaced by social media. We saw it over super injunctions and we see it here. Judges have always adopted the view that juries are smart enough to put from their minds anything they might have read or heard about an offence - or even an alleged offender - in the pre-trial period. What weight, though, does that have in the light of the latest revelations about what some of the twelve good people and true might be up to?

If Tweeters and now jurors are flouting the law on Contempt how much longer can we justify the mainstream media being bound by it. I'm happy to stick to reporting restrictions whiledoing so ensures a fair trial on - and only on - the evidence heard by the jury. If they're not taking the job seriously we may as well have a free for all. Back in 2006, in another Times piece, Magnus Linklater suggested that the Contempt of Court Act was 'The law that was abolishing itself'. Who'd argue with that view now?

Go east young man

Well maybe not so young but I am going East, flying out on Saturday for my fourth trip to India in the last 13 months. I'll be running some broadcast news production workshops in Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore and Chennai. I'm really looking forward to it, largely because India is such an interesting place in terms of media and journalism.....as well as all the other things that make it such a fascinating country.

It's a nation where the print media is strong and papers like The Hindu  have added extra editions in the last year. There are countless television stations and lots of speculation that the Government will allow radio stations to carry news. Mobile 'phone penetration is good but growth in PC ownership is slow. All that means India has the opportunity to 'manage' the growth of electronic media in a way that didn't happen in the west where the explosion online swept away circulation. How the future pans out in India will be well worth watching even if it may be too late for us to mlearn from it!

The other delight is the way young journalists and journalism students at places like the Asian College of Journalism, Anna University (Chennai) and Christ University (Bangalore) see their  role in the world's biggest democracy.

I'm looking forward to working with more of them in the next week or so