tomroyal.com

.. or is there something really, horribly wrong with the first three paragraphs of this news story? Reproduced below in case it (hopefully) gets changed:

Just to be clear: the lede's OK, if a slightly tacky sensationalist way to report a serious crime (rape is rape, no matter where, or in which fast-food chain, it occurred). The second para could really do with some further explanation (found further down in the story), but then there's the third, which starts "The 33-year-old who is an asylum seeker from an African country".

As far as I'm concerned, this is completely extraneous and should have been struck down with a red pen (or on screen, in this case) by the first editor that happened across it. Unless the writer is about to contend that the man's immigration status or continent of origin are somehow relevant information to the crime – and I'd love to know how that could be – it shouldn't be here.

Now, I hate complaining. Completely fucking hate it. Don't do it. But, in the hope that an editor might see the complaint, take a look at the article and update it accordingly, I made my first ever complaint to the BBC. Here it is, as formatted by the BBC's automatic email thingy:

{Feedback Type:} I would like to… Make a complaint

{Summary:} Identification of nationality and asylum seeker status is
unwarranted

{URL:} http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8350714.stm

{Complaint:} This is a story about an alleged rape. The third para
begins:

"The 33-year-old who is an asylum seeker from an African country"

This is utterly irrelevant to the story and has no place in the article,
let alone in such a prominent position.

And, credit where it's due, I got a reply. Sadly, though, it comprised of the following:

It is the only information we have about the identity of the suspect in this case; if it been said in court he was a candlestick maker from County Tyrone we would have reported that too.

So, here's the thing. These are the conclusions I've come to:

1) This story shouldn't have been published as-is. Leaving aside all other complaints for one second, the information given in the third para is unrelated and should be cut.

2) identifying the accused as "an asylum seeker from an African country" just barely skirts around clause ten of the NUJ's code of conduct:

A journalist shall only mention a person's age, race, colour, creed, illegitimacy, marital status (or lack of it), gender or sexual orientation if this information is strictly relevant. A journalist shall neither originate nor process material which encourages discrimination, ridicule, prejudice or hatred on any of the above-mentioned grounds.

.. and, code regardless, I'm amazed that any journalist or editor's sense of ethics would permit it.

3) The response I got from the BBC doesn't address the complaint, instead making an unrelated comparison – it's standard court reporting to print the gender, age and approximate location of the accused unless this is restricted in some way, but not to mention immigration status or a "continent of origin".

4) The story should be fixed or pulled.

Would welcome any comments on whether you agree or not.

The Easter-themed segment I filmed for the BBC last week went out this morning and repeats over this weekend. It's not yet on iPlayer, so here's a low resolution clip:

(Video)

And while on the subject of shameless self-promotion, here's the thing I did for ITN the other week:

Yesterday, as part of my continued escapades in media whoredom, I took a trip to BBC Television Centre in White City. I hadn't been there since 2002, and was surprised to see that an enormous shopping centre has landed opposite. Here's the Westfield centre in all its near-deserted, sterile glory:

It was quite an odd place – the guy above was asleep in his chair, the few sales staff looked bored witless and a giant inflatable Lindt bunny gazed over the central square like some huge chocolatey deity. I wandered around for half an hour then headed back to the BBC.

One odd thing, though: you're not, as I was later informed by a terribly polite security guard, allowed to take photos in the Westfield shopping centre. What's to hide?

From the BBC:

Answer: via a glass, for fuck's sake.

One of those odd experiences today: doing a BBC radio interview. We're currently running a campaign at work and so, given the opportunity to talk about consumer rights and the Distance Selling Regulations on BBC Radio Coventry and Warwickshire, I trotted up the road to the BBC's Western House.

The whole thing was pleasantly surreal. I was shown into a tiny studio, which looked rather like one would imagine: big clock, big mixing desk thing, three microphones with brightly coloured wind shields, three sets of headphones (three of everything, in fact, but one of me). After a bit the link came on, and after chatting briefly to the producer and listening to a bit of the Byrds, I was on air. Ten minutes or so of chatting about restocking fees and the like, and the whole thing was done.

On the way out I happened to spot the list of guests and noticed that the next studio was occupied by Tony Benn, presumably talking about something of great importance, then ran into Sarah Ferguson, presumably there to do nothing of the sort. All in all, though, an interesting experience.

(Picture of the studio by Russell Davies, used under Creative Commons license)

Flicking through TV channels aimlessly last night I came across one of those silent movie style caption cards, displaying only the words:

"Potty the pirate has a date with an accountant from Hungary who is taking him to a burlesque night"

That alone makes the license fee worthwhile. Programme info here, Potty the Pirate do be livin' here.

From this BBC article:

When Sainsbury's chief executive Justin King recently waved goodbye to his Maserati Quattroporte, he did so in favour of a relatively anonymous-looking limousine whose main claim to fame is fuel efficiency.

I should have thought of this when we last changed cars – in fact, at just over 1,000 words it could have covered 20% of the cost. Example:

When journalist Tom Royal recently waved goodbye to his dodgy Fiat Punto, he did so in favour of a relatively anonymous-looking Renault whose main advantages over the Fiat are not spontaneously overheating and actually starting in the morning.

Still, there are valuable insights packed away later in the article. I particularly like this one:

"I want to be as discreet as possible," Mr King says.

Discreet in this case meaning a vast limousine described in the same piece as "complete with a reclining leather massaging seat and bundles of electronic gadgets". If he really wants something anonymous. Mr King and I should arrange some sort of a swap.

In other news, today's newspapers are packed with an alarming number of abuses of the hideous phrase "shout-out".