Making the headlines
You may be surprised to read this, but the Mail on Sunday carried a shock-horror story about the BBC at the weekend based on an interview I gave - and I can refreshingly report that my words weren't twisted, my quotes weren't taken out of context, and, apart from the slightly over-dramatic writing, the story was basically correct.
"BBC bans Doherty from children's TV" was the newspaper's revelation, after I mentioned on the BBC's Newswatch programme (which you can watch here) that Newsround didn't think Pete Doherty was a suitable role model for children, and that we have an "informal agreement" not to cover stories about him.
It's not a blanket ban forever (we might even report on him and Kate getting married, if it's ever confirmed). But at the moment, yes, you won't catch Pete on Newsround, because he is known mostly for his drug-taking and crime - and, as I also said on Newswatch, his music is not exactly something that many nine-year-olds are listening to or interested in.
Some of you may think this is "censorship". Others may feel that he isn't a suitable role model, and I'd be very interested in your views.
But this also got me thinking about the BBC's slightly unusual relationship with some of the press - and wondering whether I should worry that my contribution has led to this story.
I previously worked on a project called iCan, now Action Network, which is all about helping people to take part in local democracy and take action on issues they care about. Before launch, we were concerned that the site could be interpreted as the BBC encouraging people to attack the government (in other words, undermining our commitment to political impartiality). I spent many hours with our editorial policy teams devising ways of making the BBC's impartiality clear - all in an attempt to avoid a much-feared tabloid expose.
I was then rather surprised when, after one of our pre-launch briefings, a senior BBC News manager told me that actually the best - not worst - thing that could happen to the site would be "revelations in the Daily Mail". It would show that the site was rattling cages (what it was designed to do) - and it would get it publicity.
In the end, iCan was never featured in any tabloid newspaper, probably to its cost. This taught me that headlines in the newspapers aren’t always a bad thing - particularly when they’ve got the story spot-on.