In the case of Erik's post that you mention all we are actually doing is
cross posting to it on the Internet blog. So the editor of the About The
BBC blog has editorial responsibility for it because it was published
first there. 

What happens in practice in general is;

- sometimes we (i.e. Paul and I) have an idea for a blog post and we ask
someone to write it - we might help them by suggesting bullet points but
we don't write it for them

- the communications team also sometimes send us ideas for posts and in
some cases finished posts - I assume they similarly help people write
posts

But I would certainly not write a finished post for someone like Erik.
Senior executives have different attitudes - Anthony Rose for example
writes all his posts in his own individual style. Others need or like
more of a steer.

All this is in a context where we have editorial control and can ask for
a post to be changed and even have the right to refuse it - although I
can only recall one occasion where we have.

Again I disagree that I've been fed misleading information (and I'd like
to know in what way) - I suspect that this is again about interpretation
of information, which is another thing entirely.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts
Sent: 14 July 2010 11:34
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:15, Nick Reynolds-FM&T
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't write other people's posts on the blog I only write my own.

Okay, just so we're clear (and as a minor educational exercise in
behind-the-scenes-on-the-Internet-Blog) - a post from, say, Erik Huggers
(like the one today) - was that written by Erik, and then sent over to
you (or Paul) for tidying up/formatting/etc., or do you guys write the
bulk of it based upon information Erik sends over? One can never quite
be sure how much a byline implies.

> I have to accept what my colleagues write in good faith, although if I
think there are inaccuracies or things which are unclear then I will
obviously ask for clarification. The blog is striving to be accurate and
impartial. That's particularly difficult to do when you are talking
about yourself but that's the aim.
>
> I have to be pragmatic. There may be things which people cannot talk
about for good reason (e.g. confidentiality, or damaging a relationship
with a partner). My aim is to get them to say something. If they say
something, even if its not perfect, then that may spark a useful
conversation and the next time they speak, it may be an improvement on
what was said previously.

This is a given - as I said, I don't doubt your intentions at all. I
think you've been fed misleading information, and you're not in a
position to either necessarily *know* that it's misleading, nor in some
circumstances do anything about it (especially when some of the posts
come from well above the paygrades of anybody here :)

And, it's part of your job to defend the BBC in these circles unless you
have a bloody good reason to think they're in the wrong. Indeed, I think
most people here would defend the BBC to the hilt in general terms,
myself included.

However, in this case, the BBC - the organisation, and the message it
conveyed - was misleading to the public. I don't think that's your
fault, and I don't think you could have necessarily done anything about
it, nor even known it to be the case. I *do* think the corporation,
again collectively, could have handled things a lot better and ensured
this didn't arise, but they didn't. That's the reason for my
disappointment, and nothing I've seen since has swayed me from this view
(and, as it goes, I might be stubborn, but I'm stubborn based on
available evidence - I know when I a gut feeling is just that).

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Reply via email to