Edition 525

Morning, it’s Monday 16th February.

Housekeeping from last week. 
The votes are in for what you’d all do in this situation…

“A journalist from a national newspaper has asked for an interview on a topic I know well. I’ve read their coverage and the framing often feels selective, sometimes sensational, and never aligned with how I’d explain the issue. That said, the paper reaches people I rarely get access to.”

I’ve told a version of this story in a previous Briefing, but it’s relevant to the choice that I would make in that situation…


Monday: Covid-19 inquiry: Module 10 hearings begin


Tuesday: UK Labour Market Statistics

Wednesday: California social media addiction lawsuit: trial continues; Mark Zuckerberg testimony possible


Thursday: Global Summit on Artificial Intelligence: India hosts heads of state summit

Trump-led Board of Peace – inaugural meeting


Friday: Paramount hostile bid for Warner Bros. Discovery – latest shareholders deadline


Sunday: The BAFTAS

You The Editor

Go back to last Monday. Imagine you’re the editor of the BBC 6.

The news the King will “stand ready to support” the police over allegations regarding his brother breaks just before you go to air. All day there has been a febrile atmosphere in Westminster – at midday Anas Sarwar called on the PM to go.

An entertaining profile of the BBC’s Jeremy Bowen in this weekend’s FT:

I loved the section on Bowen’s disastrous stint as presenter on BBC Breakfast, which he hated doing. Writer Henry Mance quotes a reviewer at the time who likened his style to “an absent-minded badger who’s eaten his earpiece.” 
Killer line.

A reader takes me to task following last week’s Bezos rant:

I was very surprised by your coverage of the Washington Post layoffs.

The fact of the matter is that that newspaper has been burning money for years, and as far as I can tell, literally no one in the editorial team (800 staff? my goodness, what have they been doing?) proposed a plan to reform their coverage to actually serve what their readers want. It seems to me that they were just a bunch of petulant and entitled children who wanted the rich guy to keep giving them money to write increasingly irrelevant nonsense.

Bezos shouldn’t be criticised for belatedly trying to align the newspaper to a plausible theory of what customers want. He should be thanked by the “editorial staff” for burning hundreds of millions of dollars to keep them highly paid for many years, even if that money is now ending. The guy who belatedly tells the truth that customers weren’t paying for their newspaper isn’t the bad guy, the bad guy here are the editorial leaders who failed to even try to turn the ship around from the world’s most obvious shipwreck.

Final thoughts anyone before we put this one to bed?

Footnotes: 

DG Tim Davie says the BBC World Service will run out of funding in just seven weeks with no future deal with the government currently in place.

On This Day: Ministry of Defence assistant secretary Clive Ponting resigned from his post over the Belgrano affair on this day in 1985. (Scandals felt more gentle in those days.)

We’re in Milton Keynes and London this week.

The Mutt Photo: 

Be part of the MMB. Thoughts on this week’s content, or interviews you’ve seen, heard, or (best of all) done, please let us know.

Back next Monday. Have a super week.

All at Inside Edge

Edition 524

Last week Will Lewis sacked 300 of the 800 editorial staff of the Washington Post.


Yesterday he announced he was off too, saying, “difficult decisions have been taken to ensure the sustainable future of the Post.” 

I would respectfully point out Jeff Bezos purchased the paper in 2013 and since then his personal net income has risen by $224 billion.

“We’re witnessing a murder.”
Ashley Parker, a staff writer for The Atlantic and former star reporter at the Post

“This ranks among the darkest days in the history of one of the world’s greatest news organizations.”

Marty Baron, former executive editor

A very rich man content to destroy a great newspaper to appease a flawed President he hopes will make him even richer.

Shame on you Bezos.

Sorry for the rant. Morning, it’s Monday 9th February.


Monday: Jimmy Lai sentenced in Hong Kong over national security conviction.

Ghislaine Maxwell scheduled to be deposed in US congressional investigation.


Tuesday: Archbishop of Canterbury address to Church of England General Synod.

Wednesday: NASA’s SpaceX Crew 12 launch (tbc).


Thursday: UK GDP for Q4 2025.


Friday: Munich Security Conference begins.


Saturday: UK Athletics Indoor Championships.

On Mandelson and the Media…

Mic Wright’s writing regularly challenges my instinct to defend the media status quo.

On Mandelson he is laser-sharp.

Last week’s dilemma:

“At 6pm on a Saturday, a TV producer calls. There’s a developing story and they want me live via Zoom at 9pm. No fee is offered. I’m at home. The topic is relevant. But it’s also my weekend, and this isn’t the first time unpaid requests have landed out of hours. I’m thinking about precedent but also personal boundaries.”

This one divided the group. I don’t have particularly strong views, except to ask for a payment which I would definitely advise doing.

 Your verdict:

Perspectives. First up from Elaine: 

”I went for decline politely but that is going to be a personal choice. As a parent of two young children, without any family members nearby, it just wouldn’t be possible for me to drop everything for a media request at a weekend. Perhaps someone without young children, or someone with available childcare might be annoyed to do it at a weekend but would do it anyway to be part of the conversation.”

And from Ellis:

”I selected decline politely, weekends are off limits… I literally wouldn’t care if I lost my job if it tried to come between time with my family and if the producer was not understanding of that (which let’s face it they probably wouldn’t be) then I wouldn’t want to work with them anyway.”

This week’s dilemma: 

“A journalist from a national newspaper has asked for an interview on a topic I know well. I’ve read their coverage and the framing often feels selective, sometimes sensational, and never aligned with how I’d explain the issue. That said, the paper reaches people I rarely get access to. The journalist has promised to quote me accurately.”

Results next week. And as ever, email us with the reason for your choice.

A super long read in The Guardian detailing how a team of journalists covered the outbreak of the Iraq War.


(It’s impossible not to read this and contrast with Bezos’ behaviour over the last week.)

Accounts about (and by) photographer Sean Smith and embedded reporter Audrey Gillan are particularly vivid.

Footnotes: 

UK newspaper cover prices are up 10.2% since January 2025 according to Press Gazette.

I post this without comment…

Bitter-sweet viewing given the events of the last week, but the story of Woodward/Bernstein’s Watergate triumph All The President’s Men is one heck of a film. 

In the mood for a reminder of better days at the Washington Post? 

It’s available to rent from …Amazon Prime. I give up.

Finally, the Mutt Photo: In contrast to Theo’s elegance in last week’s Briefing, Stan and Leo are back, and inelegant in every way imaginable…

Be part of the MMB. Thoughts on this week’s content, or interviews you’ve seen, heard, or (best of all) done, please let us know.

Back next Monday. Have a fantastic week.

All at Inside Edge

Edition 523

“A towering voice of journalism…his connect with India and the people of our nation was reflected in his works.”
Narendra Modi 

Mark Tully, the BBC’s voice of India died last week. A broadcasting legend. 

Internally he’ll always be respected for taking on John Birt, accusing him of “turning the BBC into a secretive monolith with poor ratings and a demoralised staff”. 
Loved the man for that sentence alone. 

Pick of the (no paywall) obits here and here.

Morning, it’s Monday 2nd February. You made it through January.

FW De Klerk lifted the 30-year ban on the ANC in South Africa on this day in…?

(answer in the footnotes)

Last week’s dilemma:

“I prepared for a one-to-one interview and was explicitly told this would be the format. 10 minutes before going on air I was informed it is now a panel, including someone with strong, opposing views.” What do I do?

Your verdict:

I applaud the spirit of the 59%, but disagree. Especially when there’s “someone with strong, opposing views”, this one is a red line for me. Even well-produced and nuanced discussions require a different preparation process (as well as a different mindset) to a 1-1 interview, and I think it’s questionable whether that can be done in under 10 minutes. 

Here’s another…

“At 6pm on a Saturday, a TV producer calls. There’s a developing story and they want me live via Zoom at 9pm. No fee is offered. I’m at home. The topic is relevant. But it’s also my weekend, and this isn’t the first time unpaid requests have landed out of hours. I’m thinking about precedent but also personal boundaries.”

Results next week. And as ever, email us with the reason for your choice.

Here’s the news diary for the week ahead…


Monday: ‘Suffolk Strangler’ goes on trial charged with murdering Victoria Hall in 1999.

Groundhog Day.


Tuesday: MPs hold first debate on two-child limit removal bill.

Wednesday: Ryan Routh sentenced over Trump assassination attempt.


Thursday: Bank of England interest rate decision.


Friday: Planned launch of Artemis II mission the the Moon.

Winter Olympics begin in Milan.


Saturday: Labour Party local government conference.


Sunday: Superbowl LX.

A Great Red Thread…

Two articles on language caught my eye this week. First up reflections from Davos:

This nonsense sounds like you’re the member of a club the audience aren’t allowed access to. (And nobody hangs around for that.)

I find myself referencing the PM’s communication problems a lot in media training sessions at the moment, and I’ll write something in the Briefing in the next week or so, with this concept as a starting point…

Both are excellent articles on the importance of language and tone.

The FT for business-speak, and The Guardian for the politics.

Footnotes: 


Another week, another Today programme update. I’m reliably informed the Bishop booked for Thought For The Day went awol last Monday, causing panic behind the scenes. He turned up safe and well, having got lost in Media City in Salford. (Welcome to the club, Bishop)


We’re in London and home in Brighton this week.

On this day: FW De Klerk lifted the 30-year ban on the ANC in South Africa on this day in……1990.


And finally, the Mutt Photo: Reader Jonny’s dog Theo makes his second appearance in the Briefing, looking every inch like he’s gracing the cover of Vogue with this pose.

Be part of the MMB. Thoughts on this week’s content, or interviews you’ve seen, heard, or (best of all) done, please let us know.

Back next Monday. Have a fantastic week.

All at Inside Edge

“Whether writing a quick quote story or investigating a complex technical issue, journalists must constantly decide whose knowledge is relevant, how much authority to grant it, and how to present it responsibly to the public.”

An excerpt from Norwegian journo Jon Kåre’s project on how experts fit into the new media landscape.

The full report is 116 pages long, so a bottle of Cava in 2nd post to anyone who reads the whole thing. To the rest of us, a summary.

Morning all, it’s Monday 26th January.

The number of people out of work in Britain rose above three million for the first time since the 1930s on this day in…?

(answer in the footnotes)

Last week’s dilemma:

“A short clip from an interview I gave to Sky News has been posted by the broadcaster on social media. It’s accurate but heavily cropped and without context, It doesn’t really reflect what I meant. Comments are piling in. I’m annoyed, but wary of overreacting.”


What do I do?

Your verdict:

It’s a tough call, but I’m inclined to pitch my tent in the “Ignore it, online cycles move fast” camp. I’d certainly get in touch without hesitation if the clip had been edited, but if it’s just cropped I think they’d be unlikely to take it down. 

And some top drawer feedback from you:

“Social posts are short by nature and are meant to be teasers. So long as this was accurate and the clip didn’t alter the meaning then it would be ok. But editing on social, as with anywhere has to be accurate and faithful in context.”

These scenarios are fun. Here’s another…

“I prepared for a one-to-one interview and was explicitly told this would be the format. 10 minutes before going on air I was informed it is now a panel, including someone with strong, opposing views. I’m wary, but confident in my subject and relatively experienced with the media. And this is an important platform.”

Results next week. And as ever, email us with the reason for your choice.

Here’s the news diary for the week ahead…

(Full disclosure: I’m writing this on Friday afternoon as I’m away this weekend, so by today we’ll know the timings for the PM’s Beijing trip. ATOW it’s thought to be 29-31st, with Japan following at the weekend.)

Monday: Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood publishes Policing White Paper.

Tuesday: BAFTA nominations announced.

Wednesday: Archbishop of Canterbury’s confirmation of election ceremony.

Thursday: Apple announces results.


Friday: UEFA Champions League knockout stage draw.


Saturday: Australian Open women’s final.


Sunday: The Grammy Awards.

If You Can’t Beat Em…

The BBC has announced that it will produce tailor-made content for Youtube…

“We’re building from a strong start and this takes us to the next level, with bold homegrown content in formats audiences want on YouTube and an unprecedented training programme to upskill the next generation of YouTube creators from across the UK.” Tim Davie, Outgoing BBC DG

Next month’s Winter Olympics coverage will set the tone.


The FT reports the BBC will be able to generate a profit from any partnership by advertising on programs shown outside of the U.K.

Read Variety’s write-up. 


Footnotes: 


Goalhanger, the company behind The Rest Is… podcasts and videos now have 250,000 paying subscribers. Press Gazette reckons that’s £15 million a year alone, before you even get to advertising revenue.

A footnote to last week’s minor rant at Today on Radio 4. Editor Owenna Griffiths has also announced she is leaving the programme.

We’re in London and Weymouth this week.

On this day: The number of people out of work in Britain rose above three million for the first time since the 1930s on this day in…1982.


And finally, the Mutt Photo: (Leo is always in charge of the remote…)

Be part of the MMB. Thoughts on this week’s content, or interviews you’ve seen, heard, or (best of all) done, please let us know.

Back next Monday. Have a fantastic week.

All at Inside Edge