« Previous | Main | Next »

Ask Us A Question

Post categories:

Nick Reynolds Nick Reynolds | 12:27 UK time, Thursday, 6 December 2007

In a week's time we'll be recording our very first podcast (or perhaps more accurately, download of an interview in audio) for this blog.

rory_cellan_jones.pngRory Cellan-Jones (technology correspondent, BBC News) has very kindly agreed to act as interrogator.

And sitting around the microphones will be Matthew Cashmore and Ian Forrester of BBC Backstage, James Cridland of BBC Audio&Music Interactive, Giles Wilson (editor, BBC News blogs) and last, and very much least, myself.

The discussion will be about how the BBC is using blogs to try and talk to licence fee payers, ("blogs as accountability", if you like), rather than the technical or broader editorial questions about the BBC's blogs, which have been covered by Robin Hamman here and here.

But I suspect and hope the conversation will range far and wide. So if you have any questions you would like Rory to ask, please do leave a comment on this post.

The results will be published before Christmas.

Nick Reynolds is editor, BBC Internet Blog


  1. At 01:37 PM on 06 Dec 2007, Ian Forrester wrote:

    I'm really looking forward to some of the challenging questions we will get asked.

  2. At 10:40 PM on 06 Dec 2007, Mallee wrote:

    Ok try this:
    Why have all the references to the discussion concerning the 9/11 murders been taken off the "Being Discussed Now" column?
    I suggest that the BBC has been shown to have been deceitfull with its Feburay 07 Conspircay File program (Ref: complaint by John Blacker and Ors) and is being embarrsased by the unanswerable logic and argument put forward by those who know it was an inside job. Any doubts? Ask Faranscesco Cossiga (past President Italy) reported in Corriere della Sera last week. Learn Italian, be informed!!!

  3. At 04:54 AM on 07 Dec 2007, Ben Metcalfe wrote:

    Hello Nick.

    BBC output is generally known to be fact-orientated than opinion-orientated; indeed that's one of the key ways the BBC strives to avoid bias in it's content. However, as the BBC moves into conversational formats what is being done to ensure that the conversation continues to be fact, rather than opinion orientated. I'm particularly thinking about content areas away from News output, where those involved may not have a professional editorial background.

    I'm mindful that the BBC's classic "here's a topic, tell us what you think" is not really 'conversation', and so as a wider question, to what extent do you guys think that conversation can occur without opinion, and at what point does the "conversation with your audience" approach begin to become at odds with the BBC's neutral values?

  4. At 11:07 AM on 07 Dec 2007, Nick Reynolds (editor) wrote:


    The links to 9/11 discussions on the Editors Blog have not been "removed". It's simply that when people don't comment on a particular post after a period of time they are automatically replaced by posts which are getting comments.

    NB This post is not about 9/11 and I will not post general comments about it which are off topic.

  5. At 07:34 PM on 07 Dec 2007, Jack Hughes wrote:

    Hi Nick,

    I used to be a regular on the BBC R4 Today message boards.

    In the old days, posters could start threads about any topic - and boy they did.

    Then someone at the BBC decided to change all that - now we can only talk about subjects that "teacher" has chosen.

    This seems contrary to the idea of getting the public more involved. What are your thoughts ?

  6. At 08:12 PM on 07 Dec 2007, Antony Watts wrote:

    Let's get the ball rolling about when and how the BBC can deliver current TV programs and all its archive material on-line, world wide. What are the issues preventing this - Copyrights? Technology? Conflicting interests in the corporation (DVD sales vs Streaming)? etc

    For example you say you have 900000 items in your database, and are adding 1000's/day. If you were to put these on iTunes and charge £1 each, just how much money do you think you could make? Lots and lots and lots, billions probably.

  7. At 08:02 PM on 12 Dec 2007, Antony Watts wrote:

    What I feel is needed is a double step process for using listener/viewer inputs.

    Basically it is an editorial process. Gather all the inputs, categorise them, tabulate the various points of view, and put in numbers who feel each way, then contribute an editorial summarising objectively people's inputs.

    Is this the way to go? What resources does it needs? How frequent should a "build-up" be made? How to get the input (Have your say?)? Where to file the output (BBC web site, audio or video broadcast)?

  8. At 12:43 PM on 17 Dec 2007, Simon Kenworthy-Dell wrote:

    This is a welcome change that the BBC is offering a 'conversation' at last. Too frequently interviews and articles have been written, published and read by us viewers with no way of commenting or questioning the author.

    But I would re-iterate this point: with freedom of dialogue like this, comes opinion, bias and controversy.

    Does the BBC want to remain impartial, or is this a new dawn for the BBC to now have a strong opinion on matters?

This post is closed to new comments.

More from this blog...

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.