[Media-watch] Fw: Riddoch Programme

Thu Nov 11 11:15:29 GMT 2004

Message
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Philip Wells-GW 
To: Yvonne & Ian Brotherhood 
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:58 AM
Subject: RE: Riddoch Programme

Hello Ian, 

Thanks for your reply, you make a number of very interesting points. 
I am pretty sure we have asked Eric Joyce why he still supports a war which to so many people seem to think is going so badly wrong. There may be other explanations but the one he -and people who share his stance - come out with is that they still think it was the right thing to do. As you say we have to take that explanation at face value. If the evidence seems to contradict that (no WMDs, No security, increased terrorist threat etc), the listener will make up their own mind about the solidity of the argument.  

It is always useful to get a reminder of the view point from outside the 'gold fish bowl', and I genuinely appreciate your interest and opinions. I can assure you that any attempts to influence the editorial line of the programme by political parties are vociferously rejected. 

Thanks for the information on Media Watch, you are right David Miller is a regular and valued contributor to the programme. 

Yours Sincerely 
Phil Wells

PS: When you mention "Lesley and her ferocious listeners" maybe you mean the other way round?

From: Yvonne & Ian Brotherhood [mailto:brotherhoods at stevenston4.fsnet.co.uk] 
Sent: 11 November 2004 10:11
To: Philip Wells-GW
Cc: media-watch at lists.stir.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Riddoch Programme

  Mr Philip Wells-GW,

  Thanks for your speedy reply - interesting and informative. 

  Can I clarify something ? I make no assumptions about your politics, or your editorial policy, but your message appears to suggest that you have made several assumptions about my motivation in requesting the information that I did. 

  I did not suggest in my letters that the Riddoch Proggramme shows bias one way or the other, and that was not my reason for enquiring as to archice access. I did not question Lesley's professionalism, nor that of anyone involved in the production of the programme, and I certainly did not imply that the programme seeks to further any political agenda. Frankly, I could not care less about conspiracy theories relating to BBC editorial policy - they are crude and unhelpful and, by their very nature, a waste of time. Like most listeners, I am happy to take what is said by guests at 'face value', to accept that they are being sincere. And that is where my curioisty is aroused - it is interesting that you bemoaned the lack of government reps prepared to accept your invitations to appear on the programme. That, in itself, speaks volumes, but we must do with what we are given, and so are forced to concentrate on the utterings of those few brave souls who are prepared to face Lesley and her fearsome listeners. 

  The regular appearance of Joyce, Wylie, Foulkes, Capitanchik and others on your programme is not, for me, something to complain about - every time they open their mouths they underscore the vacuity of their arguments. What interests me is the persistence of these people in trying to flog propaganda which grows more feeble with every passing day, and seeing how far they will go before conceding that they were wrong.

  At some point, somewhere in the BBC's output, a presenter will challenge one of these people to explain why they keep going. It may be Humphries, or Paxman, or Sebastian, or it may well be Lesley, but someone will, eventually, ask Eric Joyce why he's doing what he's doing. Joyce has become a well-known face on the back of his unwavering support for the 'war', and he will be long-remembered for his stance. The 'stance' itself has become so weak that, in due course, nothing will remain of it and it is the man's motivation which will remain as the prime subject of interest. This is a classic Emperor's New Clothes scenario, where it will become impossible to avoid pointing out the obvious.

  Perhaps, inside the broadcasting world, it is difficult to appreciate how others outside the 'goldfish bowl' view what is happening i.e. what the common perception is of the coverage/debates being produced, but please consider the simple fact that the BBC, since well before the Hutton Inquiry, since before the leak of Sambrook's memo to Regional News Editors, and for many years previously, has always been 'part of the story' - you will, I'm sure, be aware of the academic work (much of it pioneered by the Glasgow University Media Group) which has, for more than twenty years, been scrutinising mass-media coverage of war, political disputes etc. That work is ongoing, and the output currently being produced by the BBC will be subject to the same forensic treatment in due course. Until then, perhaps, the issue of political pressure on/bias in the BBC will remain a matter for academic speculation (aside from what we can glean from the statements from 'discredited' ex-BBC employees like Gilligan, Dyke etc).

  In the meantime, I remain a keen listener, and look forward to hearing much more from the 'usual suspects' - the more the better.

  Regards,

  Ian Brotherhood

  P.S. Media-watch is an online project which was started by David Miller of Strathclyde University and concentrates on mass-media coverage of this 'war'. It can be found online, search for stir.ac.uk  I believe Mr Miller has been a guest on the Riddoch Programme.

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Philip Wells-GW 
    To: Yvonne & Ian Brotherhood 
    Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 4:39 PM
    Subject: RE: Riddoch Programme

    Hello Mr Brotherhood, 

    Thanks for your reply. You are right, we are legally required to keep copies of all our programmes for 42 days after they have been broadcast. We also keep copies of the guest lists for the same length of time. 

    We can answer specific requests about individual programmes, and that information is available to anyone who asks. The material is for their own personal use. A transcription service does not exist, as a programme team I'm afraid its impractical to answer general queries about our coverage of an issue over such a long period of time. I can refer a request of this nature onwards if necessary. 

    However, I would utterly reject any suggestion that our coverage of the Iraq war has been biaised in favour of a small number of pro-war interviewees. I have had exactly the same complaints from people who support the war. We are interested in making programmes that hear from all points of view - not in pushing any political agenda. 

    We are highly aware of our responsibilities as programme makers to ensure that all points of view are represented. The Lesley Riddoch Programme is discussion based, it promotes debate and that needs differing opinions. 
    In reference to this tuesday's programme 3 of the 5 guests opposed the attack on Falluja (David Pratt Foreign Editor of the Sunday Herald)
    Eric Herring (Senior Lecturer in Politics at Bristol University), and Omar Hassan (An Iraqi seeking asylum in the UK).  Eric Joyce MP was invited on the programme to represent the Government's viewpoint and as a former Soldier in the Black Watch. He could only be on the programme for half an hour, so we asked David Capitanchick from Aberdeen University to also be a guest on the programme. This allowed us so that we could still have a debate between differing points of view. At any point during the programme one pro war voice was opposed by three guests who opposed military action. This does not take into account the callers who -as you suggest- are generally anti-war.  

    Eric Joyce is one of our regular contributors. We are more frustrated than anyone that so few of his colleagues answer our repeated requests to appear on the programme to be questioned about Government policy. However, a quick look at our archives shows that Mr Joyce has been a guest on our programme 4 times in the last 10 months.

    I don't believe that a presenter with Lesley Riddoch's experience and capability allows anyone the chance to use the programme as a platform for their views. Their assertions are challenged both by Lesley and by the listeners who call in.

    Its arguable how many people in Scotland support the war in Iraq, but I don't believe it is such a small minority that their views should be completely unrepresented in an hour long programme. 

    If I can be of any help providing you with more information about specific programmes please let me know. 

    I hope you keep listening.
    Yours Sincerely

    PHIL WELLS 
    Editor, Lesley Riddoch Programme 
    Del: + 44 141 338 2331 
    e-mail: philip.wells at bbc.co.uk 

    PS: Finally just wondering if you could you pgive me a bit more information about media-watch?

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Yvonne & Ian Brotherhood [mailto:brotherhoods at stevenston4.fsnet.co.uk] 
    Sent: 10 November 2004 13:07
    To: Philip Wells-GW
    Subject: Riddoch Programme

      Mr Wells,

      Thank you for your message.

      I am not requesting access to tapes of the past two years programmes. I am enquiring about what procedures are in place for people who might wish such access - my understanding was that all broadcasters are required, for legal reasons, to retain full and unedited archives of all broadcast material for a minimum period. Is this still the case ? If so, do any procedures exist whereby members of the public, researchers, academics etc, can access the material before it is destroyed or becomes inaccessible ?

      You ask the reasons for my request :

      1. Simple curiosity - to check whether or not such access is possible, and if so, how it works (e.g. can such archive material be requested by individuals, institutions ? Is there a fee ? Can material of interest be copied, transcribed ? etc) 

      2. Want to check when certain guests were invited, and whether those invitations correlate to political developments.

      3. Want to check what proportion of guests were politicians, journalists, terrorism 'experts', members of anti-war groups, soldiers' family members, other concerned individuals etc.

      My interest is primarily academic, but I make no secret of the fact that I believe that several prominent pro-war voices have, for a long time, been using the Riddoch Programme as a platform for views which have become increasingly 'radical' as the war has dragged on - Jim Wylie, David Capitanchik and Eric Joyce represent a small minority view in Scotland - a fact which I'm sure is easily confirmed by scanning the reaction your programme receives whenever they appear. If a minority view on any other subject (e.g. abortion, euthanasia or similarly contentious matters) was given such a regular airing then I'm sure you would expect serious questions from listeners regarding editorial policy.

      I trust the above answers your questions, and I look forward to hearing from you again.

      Regards,

      Ian Brotherhood

      PS My previous letters were sent directly to the show - lesley at bbc.co.uk

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/

    This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
    personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
    stated.
    If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. 
    Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
    reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the
    BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. 
    Further communication will signify your consent to this. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. 
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the
BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. 
Further communication will signify your consent to this. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.stir.ac.uk/pipermail/media-watch/attachments/20041111/211dc157/attachment-0001.htm