Baby Peter and anonymity5:00pm on 13 Aug 2009Thanks for your comments. Jon112uk: I think you have a point about the case for restraint in the mainstream media – there is indeed a balance to be struck. Deamon138: the rationale for releasing the names was for the judicial authorities to determine. Once they had decided to release them, it would be hard to imagine them going unreported given the wide interest in the case – surely people will want the media to tell them if the information is publicly available. hackerjack – yes, true - so it is a question of reinforcing that principle in the context of online information. Dennis Junior: this article outlines the reasons they were kept secret; SHLA2UK explains it well above and you may also be interested in this week's edition of The Media Show in which my colleague Fran Unsworth discusses these issues.
On the wider issue of being able to choose access to the UK/international front pages, we're continuing to look into possible options to address the concerns that so many of you have expressed.
Social media in Iran2:41pm on 17 Jun 2009forensix: I reject the suggestion that the BBC is taking sides in the protests because it is paying attention to what is happening on Twitter. We have adopted a similar approach for stories based in the UK - this was our live reporting on the G20 event and protests in London. I just thought this example - the volume of exchanges on Twitter and its importance to the wider story, was worthy of comment, and I wanted to explain the approach we have taken to this.