McAlpine, Newsnight and All That ...

[Stillhomewardbound]

My greatest fear is that at the highest echelons of the broadcast media tree, we have a generation of editors and producers that is, apparently, inured to notions of what is right, or what is fit to publish or promulgate in any given story.

There is clearly a moral vacuity at play here that sees a once garlanded and admired current affairs programme (Newsnight) turn its back on one of its own investigations, apparently, for a lack of credible evidence, and yet, which can name and shame a blameless individual on the basis of social media hearsay.

Something is very wrong in the state of Denmark. That's for sure, but of even greater concern is the damage that is done to the kind of broadcasting that we desperately rely on in these times to pin down those who would not otherwise be held to account. Discuss.

[Pabmusic]

My greatest fear is that at the highest echelons of the broadcast media tree, we have a generation of editors and producers that is, apparently, inured to notions of what is right, or what is fit to publish or promulgate in any given story.

There is clearly a moral vacuity at play here that sees a once garlanded and admired current affairs programme (Newsnight) turn its back on one of its own investigations, apparently, for a lack of credible evidence, and yet, which can name and shame a blameless individual on the basis of social media hearsay.

Something is very wrong in the state of Denmark. That's for sure, but of even greater concern is the damage that is done to the kind of broadcasting that we desperately rely on in these times to pin down those who would not otherwise be held to account. Discuss.

Yes, I quite agree. We used to be very cautious about such 'news'. Anonymity was acceptable and generally thought right.

The problem is (and you have alluded to it in your first sentence) these things are not inbred - they are learnt, and the reason for them has to be learnt, too. But we have developed a society in the UK in which previous ways of behaving are viewed with cynicism, and 'new ways' are needed for a 'new world', so that not only are things not learnt, they are sometimes actively rejected. Social mores can last only a couple of generations without this, and our children find themselves in a society in which yesterday's unthinkable can happen all too easily.

[Nick Armstrong]

Something is very wrong. I have never seen such a surreal piece of TV as this evening's Newsnight, eating its own entrails in public view, with the extraordinary heroic performance of Eddie Mair, forced to front it... The way he said lines like

"How would you characterise this latest Newsnight fiasco?"

"Obviously, we wanted to ask questions of the BBC, but no-one was available for interview...." (followed by the most unbelievable pause and look to camera)

"Trust in the BBC is down the toilet..."

"Newsnight will be back on Monday ....probably"

was... well, folk should watch it on iPlayer...

Reviewed here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...ss+%28Media%29

[mercia]

I think Mr Mair may be a frustrated comedian.

Just at the moment I care more about the victims of abuse than the demise of a particular TV programme. I hope the pendulum won't now swing the other way such that abuse victims will be automatically disbelieved if they name well-known names. Ultimately it's the police's job to get to the bottom of what went on at the Wrexham home, not Newsnight's. In my opinion this is where things are going wrong. Mr Messham should be giving his evidence to the police, not the media. It bothers me that we seem to rely on newspapers and TV to do the investigative work that is the police's job.

[Bax-of-Delights]

Something is very wrong. I have never seen such a surreal piece of TV as this evening's Newsnight, eating its own entrails in public view, with the extraordinary heroic performance of Eddie Mair, forced to front it... The way he said lines like

"How would you characterise this latest Newsnight fiasco?"

"Obviously, we wanted to ask questions of the BBC, but no-one was available for interview...." (followed by the most unbelievable pause and look to camera)

"Trust in the BBC is down the toilet..."

"Newsnight will be back on Monday ....probably"

was... well, folk should watch it on iPlayer...

Reviewed here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...ss+%28Media%29

Agreed, Caliban.
It was, as they say in younger circles, totally weird.
However, I have noticed in recent months that Newsnight has taken on a more and more adversarial role towards the present government with the likes of Paul Mason, its economic correspondent, presenting "insight" and "opinion" without reference to or acknowledgement of his own leftist views. As we have seen in reference to R3 programming and culture there is, apparently, a stance within the BBC that defiantly stands its ground with the motto "we are right and you are wrong" and brings with it a swaggering fanfaronade that infects the whole institution.
The present debacle would appear, as one of the correspondents on the programme stated, to be an attempt by the BBC to divert attention away from itself over the Savile scandal and smear the government. If it was, it has just shot both of its feet off and will soon topple from our screens.
At the least I suspect Paxman will now seriously be considering moving elswhere.

[scottycelt]

Yes, I quite agree. We used to be very cautious about such 'news'. Anonymity was acceptable and generally thought right.

The problem is (and you have alluded to it in your first sentence) these things are not inbred - they are learnt, and the reason for them has to be learnt, too. But we have developed a society in the UK in which previous ways of behaving are viewed with cynicism, and 'new ways' are needed for a 'new world', so that not only are things not learnt, they are sometimes actively rejected. Social mores can last only a couple of generations without this, and our children find themselves in a society in which yesterday's unthinkable can happen all too easily.

[kernelbogey]

My greatest fear is that at the highest echelons of the broadcast media tree, we have a generation of editors and producers that is, apparently, inured to notions of what is right, or what is fit to publish or promulgate in any given story.

Can you really mean 'inured' - accustom (someone) to something, esp. something unpleasant?

[kernelbogey]

I hope the pendulum won't now swing the other way such that abuse victims will be automatically disbelieved if they name well-known names.

[ahinton]

Mr Mair can usually be relied on for some comedy one-liners, he's turned that Radio 4 5pm news programme into a comedy show [does he usually present Newsnight? I never watch it.] At the moment I care more about the victims of abuse than the demise of a particular TV programme.

I hope the pendulum won't now swing the other way such that abuse victims will be automatically disbelieved if they name well-known names. Ultimately it's the police's job to get to the bottom of what went on at the Wrexham home, not Newsnight's. In my opinion this is where things are going wrong. Mr Messham should be giving his evidence to the police, not the media.

Mr Mair has been presenting Newsnight on occasion recently but I don't think that he's been fronting the programme for all that long. Whilst I share your hope (as otherwise we'll all be straight back into the way things have largely been up until recently), the flaw in your otherwise understandable argument is revealed in your use of the word "should", in that there would appear to be little point in seeking to argue that the police "should" do certain things that they have signally omitted and/or failed to do or even in some cases deliberately turned blind eyes to doing over decades and, in such circumstances, one can well sympathise with the plight of Mr Messham (while at the same time challenging the extent to which his particular expressions have misled, as he himself admits and for which he has duly apologised), because what "should" ultimately happen is the he and those in similar positions "should" give their evidence to those who will listen and put it before the public if anyone is to do anything about what has happened to them. Haven't such people had already to endure years of the police taking little or no notice and then inadequate inquiries and careful cover-ups even when they have taken a little notice? It's a messy (no pun intended, of course) way in which to go about it, admittedly, but needs must and all that; it's rather like the feeling of being forced by circumstance to go to the media as a last resort when all other efforts to seek a perfectly reasonable change in the law have led to refusal on the parts of those charged with that responsibility to it on board or indeed take any notice.

[scottycelt]

I hope the pendulum won't now swing the other way such that abuse victims will be automatically disbelieved if they name well-known names.

Certainly, but I also hope they won't automatically be believed and then an innocent person (however well-known) wrongly accused of an abominable crime like child abuse.

There shouldn't be a 'pendulum'. All accusations should be treated with the utmost seriousness by the police and any charges brought through proper and thorough investigation of the available evidence.

[Pabmusic]

Certainly, but I also hope they won't automatically be believed and then an innocent person (however well-known) wrongly accused of an abominable crime like child abuse...

I am with Mercia on this, but I can't help but remember a similar hoo-ha about rape several years ago, when it was seriously mooted that the rules of evidence should be altered to make it easier to convict someone of rape (because more victims would report rapes if they there was a greater likelihood of the accused being convicted). Of course that wasn't done, but the very fact that it could be suggested demonstrates how easy it is to enter the realms of fantasy to court public opinion. And sometimes the fantasy becomes reality.

[Nick Armstrong]

I think Mr Mair may be a frustrated comedian.

Just at the moment I care more about the victims of abuse than the demise of a particular TV programme. I hope the pendulum won't now swing the other way such that abuse victims will be automatically disbelieved if they name well-known names. Ultimately it's the police's job to get to the bottom of what went on at the Wrexham home, not Newsnight's. In my opinion this is where things are going wrong. Mr Messham should be giving his evidence to the police, not the media. It bothers me that we seem to rely on newspapers and TV to do the investigative work that is the police's job.

Wise words all, mercs!

[mercia]

Wise words

...... but rather off-topic

poor Mr Entwistle got a roasting on Radio 4 this morning

[Mary Chambers]

It's pure Peter Grimes.

"Now is gossip put on trial,
Now the rumours either fail
Or are shouted in the wind,
Sweeping furious through the land".

Etc. No doubt there will soon be a production where the people of the Borough are all on Twitter.

[aeolium]

However, I have noticed in recent months that Newsnight has taken on a more and more adversarial role towards the present government with the likes of Paul Mason, its economic correspondent, presenting "insight" and "opinion" without reference to or acknowledgement of his own leftist views. As we have seen in reference to R3 programming and culture there is, apparently, a stance within the BBC that defiantly stands its ground with the motto "we are right and you are wrong" and brings with it a swaggering fanfaronade that infects the whole institution.

I just don't think this is true at all. The BBC is if anything over-cautious and desperately trying to provide balance, particularly on economic and political views (which is not unreasonable for a public service broadcaster). With Paul Mason, I am certain that the BBC are quite aware of his sympathies and his reports are usually followed by a panel discussion reflecting quite a spectrum of opinion. I have not noticed in these discussions that there has been particular dissent from the content of his reports (especially the European ones) and they have been praised and quoted by far-from-leftist commentators such as Ambrose Evans-Pritchard who writes in the Telegraph.

The BBC cannot win on political bias - it will always attract criticism from those on the right who suspect a leftist agenda and those on the left who are impatient with its seeming conservatism and caution. Even on these Newsnight failings, it seems that those people who criticised the BBC for not running a programme containing allegations against a public figure of sexual abuse of children are attacking it now for running such a programme: the BBC has been too cautious on the one hand and not cautious enough on the other. I am not saying that the criticism is not justified, only that these are sometimes more difficult decisions than hindsight allows.

As to the suggestion that the matters should be passed to the police and not the media, the problem (as ahinton mentioned) is that the police/authorities were alerted and failed to act - in the Savile affair, police did not prosecute on allegations by four people in 2009, in the North Wales children's home case complaints to the police and local authority got nowhere. Presumably those who have suffered abuse feel that the media is the only refuge.