Forum

David C

Paul Reynolds emailed Keith:

"I have replied to Davids Ewards and Cromwell who wrote in similar fashion and no doubt this will appear online in due course. BTW in future it would be courteous to state in advance that you are a ML correspondent. I have no problem with engaging in debate but I identify myself and think that others should as well. "

(Posted on the messageboard on October 26, 2010, 6:08 pm; time-limited URL: http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1288112927.html)

From: David Cromwell
Sent: 27 October 2010 06:25
To: Paul Reynolds-INTERNET
Cc: 'David Edwards'
Subject: RE: Iraq death toll and the Wikileaks war logs: misleading BBC journalism

Can you explain precisely +why+ you would want someone to identify themselves as an “ML correspondent”?

David

---

From: Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Sent: 27 October 2010 08:13
To: David Cromwell
Subject: RE: Iraq death toll and the Wikileaks war logs: misleading BBC journalism

Rather obviously because then you would know that their email to you is going to be published before you have a chance to reply! Er...

---

From: David Cromwell
Sent: 27 October 2010 08:46
To: 'Paul Reynolds-INTERNET'
Subject: RE: Iraq death toll and the Wikileaks war logs: misleading BBC journalism

Thanks Paul,

But why should that be a problem, especially since you are given the right of a published reply; a courtesy that is not routinely granted by mainstream media to members of the public? What’s wrong with people making their media enquiries and challenges publicly available? We hear a lot about media “openness” and “transparency” but when journalists are in the spotlight it’s somehow a problem.

David Edwards had a related exchange with a columnist at the Independent: http://www.medialens.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3022

Do you disagree with the arguments? If so, please can you explain why? We feel these are important issues, rarely discussed.

David

---

From: Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Sent: 27 October 2010 09:00
To: David Cromwell
Subject: RE: Iraq death toll and the Wikileaks war logs: misleading BBC journalism

I have no problem with published correspondence, so long as both parties know in advance. Openness and transparency should be your watchwords, too.

---

From: David Cromwell
Sent: 27 October 2010 09:50
To: 'Paul Reynolds-INTERNET'
Subject: RE: Iraq death toll and the Wikileaks war logs: misleading BBC journalism

Thanks Paul,

I understand your case; I might well be more careful and precise in an email knowing it would potentially be read by thousands of anonymous people, rather than by just one anonymous emailer. But perhaps you can also understand why the rules on etiquette might be bent slightly when we’re dealing with a near-totalitarian media system that promotes and facilitates brutal state power while deceptively proclaiming its supposed credentials of “openness” and “transparency”. Please read ‘Newspeak’ and tell us where you think we’ve got it wrong; in particular, the chapters on the BBC. Our publisher sent all BBC managers, editors and journalists a copy thanks to the generosity of one of our readers – so you should have the book too – and not a single BBC employee seems able or willing to engage with the arguments we made there.

David