³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I wanted to thank so many of you for your kind comments following Brian Barron's death a week ago - and to share this from Brian's daughter Fleur.
---
By Fleur Barron

"My dad's stories were excellent bed-time fodder for a five-year-old with an over-active imagination. Growing up, my favourites were his entertaining stories about his time in Kenya, which always had a comic flair and hint of the absurd.

I remember one account that never failed to send me into gales of laughter - the story of the farting elephant. Dad would recount his interview with a famous Italian sculptor, who was making a plaster-cast of an anesthetised elephant. Miming the action with exaggerated gestures, dad demonstrated how the sculptor had lifted the elephant's tail to pat the plaster down over its rear, when it emitted a loud raspberry that propelled the unfortunate man several meters through the air. For me, the best parts of the story were always dad's raucous sound effects and giant leap backwards at the climax.

As I got older, I continued to live vicariously through my dad's accounts of his adventures and exploits on the job - I often asked if I could accompany him, offering my services (free of charge, naturally) as the boom-holder for the mic. Occasionally, if the assignment wasn't too dangerous and my mum was able to accompany us, I was invited to come along. Once it was to North Korea as he investigated reports of famine in a totalitarian state closed to the outside world.

Watching him in action, I think I always saw him as a modern 007 - he had the cool, the composure, the authority, and the taste for dapper suits. Armani, of course. But beyond this, I was also struck by his gritty determination and professionalism - he never reneged on a commitment, and he was incredibly resourceful in finding a way to make his angle work, no matter what.

In high school and university, when I had my own research assignments on some of the grislier events and topics he had covered in his career, like the Vietnam War or the genocide in Rwanda, I used to push him to reveal details of what he had seen and experienced in these places. He rarely indulged me, saying he didn't want to discuss things he had so effectively compartmentalised years ago. For a while, I never understood why he chose to continuously put himself in situations that would strain the emotional and mental limits of most people. But gradually, I realised that his passion for this kind of work lay in his gift of clarity and awareness in crisis situations, and above all, his desire to discover and reveal the underlying truth of a matter to a mass audience.

At the end of the day, what I admire most about my dad was his essential optimism and joie de vivre. People who knew him well would be surprised if a long day's work was finished without a vintage wine and a good meal. At home in New York, there was nothing better he liked to do than to stroll through Central Park - en famille - to the local movie theatre or take a brisk walk down Broadway to catch the latest opera instalment at the Met. Dad certainly knew what it meant to enjoy life and although his own has been cut short, he has lived more fully and wholeheartedly than anyone I know."

The north-eastern United States is the place to be this week if you're a world leader.

Heads of government from around the globe are gathering at their annual UN General Assembly meeting in New York to discuss climate change and efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

Then the leaders of the G20 nations go on to Pittsburgh for another summit on how to restore the global economy to health and prevent a repetition of last year's financial crisis.

The rapid emergence of - the world's 19 biggest economies plus the European Union - as the organisation making the key decisions on the global economy is really an acceleration of a shift in the global balance of power that has been taking place over the past decade.

The rapid economic growth of China - which is set to overtake Japan as the world's second largest economy - as well as India and Brazil, and the stabilisation of the Russian economy on the back of higher energy prices, means the relative power of these countries has increased at the expense of the established economic power houses of the United States and the European Union.

This shift was highlighted by an apparently amused Brazilian President, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who was quoted following the last G20 summit in London in April, saying "Don't you find it very chic that Brazil is lending to the IMF? I spent part of my youth carrying banners against the IMF in downtown Sao Paulo".

President Lula, a former trade union leader, was referring to the period a few decades ago when Brazil faced a debt crisis and was dependent on IMF loans. Now Brazil is contributing to the IMF to help stabilise the world economy.

In addition to the new central role of the G20, over the past few months we have also seen the US and Russia making up after their serious falling out over missile defence in Europe, the expansion of NATO and Russia's brief war with Georgia just over a year ago. What the Americans have called 'pressing the reset button'.

The question we're considering on the World Tonight this week is to what extent these dramatic changes are a direct result of the financial crisis and the deep recession that has struck the developed world and spread around the globe?

In a special edition of the programme on Wednesday broadcast from the prestigious American think-tank, , Ritula Shah will be asking a panel of experts from the council to what extent the convulsions in the world economy have caused the shift in the balance of power and whether the change is permanent.

Alistair Burnett is the editor of The World Tonight.

What is citizen journalism? More to the point, what makes "good" citizen journalism? And what makes a good citizen journalist? Do the same principles of "conventional" journalism apply to its citizen counterpart? Or are there different rules?

Ever since 2005, when coined the phrase "we don't own the news any more", the democratisation of news has been unstoppable, with people claiming their right to tell their story the way they want to.

From bloggers or eyewitnesses to social networkers or community website hosts, the range and the experience of citizen journalists are both vast.

Many have picked up the principles of good conventional journalism and applied them to their work. Others have not had that opportunity.

The principles of "good journalism" are well established - they affect both how a journalist gathers his story as well how he reports it.

Journalists and editors working for mainstream media across the globe understand them - even if they don't always live up to them.

But what about the principles of good citizen journalism? What would a good citizen journalist do if she came across someone receiving medical treatment in the middle of Trafalgar Square? Would she start filming them? What would she do if she were asked to stop?

Should a community website publish images of 10-year-old children - who could clearly be identified - causing criminal damage on a local housing estate?

Is it okay for a blogger to reveal that his local MP is having an affair because it's "common knowledge", or claim that a local car firm is shifting stolen cars because he's got a friend in the police, who's involved in the investigation?

All ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ journalists should know the answers to these questions - or at least the issues involved in reaching the answers. Can the same be said for citizen journalists? The answers may not be the same for both, but are they equally aware of the issues involved?

And with the right to tell their own stories come responsibilities and accountability. If a conventional journalist gets it wrong, they are accountable to both their editor and their audience. Is the citizen journalist accountable to anyone other than himself?

The ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ has been working with citizen journalists for some time - there has been a team of journalists based in the heart of the newsroom working with user-generated content since 2005. So we are well aware of the power and importance of citizen journalism.

But there's precious little authoritative advice around on good practice for citizen journalists, so to try to help find the appropriate answers to these and many other questions, we're developing a publicly available resource.

Our intention isn't to tell people what to do or what not to do. Nor will it be an attempt to tell potential contributors what we want them to send us.

But we will be setting out how we - the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ - see some of these issues and what we think is good practice, even if others disagree.

Most importantly, though, we want to hear what you - the citizen journalist - think are the key questions and issues and what your answers are to the key questions, because that will form an important part of the resource.

Update 28 September: I talked about this issue on the World Service's Over to You programme on 26 September. (Apologies - this paragraph originally read "October" where it should have been "September".)

Matthew Eltringham is the assistant editor of Interactivity

Brian Barron was the quintessential foreign correspondent - suave, impossibly handsome and brave.

Long before satellite technology made it routine, he took ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ audiences to far away places, and explained the biggest stories of our times - first on radio, then television.

He was comfortable and composed in the most dangerous places - covering wars across five decades, from Aden in 1967 to Iraq in 2003.

Brian joined the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ External Service - the World Service - as a producer in 1965. He had made his name in newspapers in the West of England.

Two years later, he became the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's Aden correspondent, reporting the end of over 130 years of imperial control.

Of the half-dozen or so end-of-empire sagas that he witnessed, he later described it as the saddest, and most abject.

After Aden came Cairo, and then his appointment as South East Asia correspondent, where he would make his name, reporting nightly on the twists and turns of the Vietnam War.

In 1975, he watched with his friend and long-time cameraman, Eric Thirer as the last helicopter left the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon and was there as the North Vietnamese claimed victory - ignoring the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's order to leave.

Brian delighted in telling the story of how he'd known the end was near when plaster began falling off the ceiling of the broadcasting studio at Saigon Radio.

Brian had gone there to talk to London because there were no reliable phone lines. As the building shook, the microphone suspended from the ceiling swung above his head - a renegade squadron of strike planes, which had defected to the communist North, was bombing the presidential palace just up the road.

It was at that moment that the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Governors in London decided he should evacuate - the order to board the nearest helicopter crackled through the earphones in the dust-filled studio. He ignored the instruction - as Brian put it "what foreign correspondent would walk away from his biggest story yet?"

Other big stories were to follow. In the seventies, he reported from Africa on the fall of Idi Amin in Uganda - later scooping the world, by tracking down the former dictator to a secret hideout in Saudi Arabia.

He saw the overthrow of Emperor Bokassa in the Central African Republic and covered the end of the war in Rhodesia. For a brief time, he returned to the UK and worked in Belfast as Ireland correspondent at the height of the Troubles. But he was soon back where he felt most at home - on the road, as a foreign correspondent. In the eighties, he covered the Falklands War from Chile, and then helped lead the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's coverage of the first Gulf War in 1991.

More than a decade later - even after his official retirement from the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ - he went back for the Iraq War of 2003, based in the Gulf. It was Brian, who, on the opening night of the war, reported from the deck of the USS Mobile on the first missile fired by US Forces against Saddam Hussein.

Brian Barron served as the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's man in some of the world's greatest cities - Cairo, Hong Kong, Washington, New York, and Rome. Along the way, he was the RTS Reporter of the Year and won the International Reporting Prize for his coverage of Latin America.

In 2000, Brian retired to New York, the place that had become his home but he remained as hungry for the story as ever. Two years ago, in what would be his final report for the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ, Brian returned to Aden, 40 years after Britain's ignominious retreat.

He told the story of how he had watched as the Union Flag was lowered, as a British Military Band played "Things Ain't What They Used to Be". It was vintage Brian - funny, poignant, but with a message.

Brian was part of the greatest generation of ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ reporters and cameramen - a brave bunch who roamed the world and covered the most important stories of the time. Not for them the ease of satellite or digital technology - instead, they'd wait hours, sometimes days, to even place a phone call. But the story still got through.

Brian Barron was among the greatest of that great generation. He died this morning aged 69 - his wife and daughter were at his bedside.

Jon Williams is the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ World News Editor.

The news that at some stage has set off a keen debate in the newspapers and among politicians. Of course, Mr Griffin has been on many other ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ programmes, including during the summer - so why is an appearance on Question Time front-page news?

It's true there is something different. For a start, panellists, whether they are party politicians or not, are being given a platform to share their views with the audience on a broad range of subjects. That's not quite the same as, say, an interview on Today or Newsnight, where an interviewer pursues a particular line of questioning, usually on a specific issue.

But that is not to say that politicians, when they appear on Question Time, or other debating programmes such as Any Questions on Radio 4, are not being subjected to the tough level of scrutiny which is central to ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ journalism. Ask any cabinet minister - a Conservative in the mid-90s, one from Labour more recently - and they'll tell you that it's often there, with an engaged and passionate audience, where you find out just how well thought through are your policies and views.

Sitting on a panel is also different because it usually involves more interaction with other politicians - and this is where the newspaper stories are particularly interesting. It's said that . All the other parties are having to come to terms with the fact that , giving them representation at a national level for the first time.

For the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ, it's quite straightforward. "Due impartiality" means we have to take account of the political context when we're making editorial judgements, day in day out. There isn't one single formula which applies in all circumstances. So how do we decide what are appropriate levels of airtime for the different political parties? Our starting point for that judgement - though not the only factor - is how real people vote in real elections.

Measuring impartiality is less about mathematics and more about good judgement - but let's just look at the maths for a moment. In the recent European election, the BNP won more than 6% of the vote across Britain - approaching a million people. In some regions it was close to 10%. Like the Greens, they now have two MEPs - far fewer than UKIP - but they also have over 50 local councillors - fewer than the Greens, many more than UKIP.

Ever since UKIP and the Greens won representation at a national level, they have appeared from time to time on Question Time. Inviting the BNP onto the panel would be a continuation of the approach which recognises that the level of electoral support is a relevant factor in making these judgements.

The ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ could not apply different standards to different parties because of their particular policies. That would be a breach of our charter, challengeable in the courts.

But it's not fear of the lawyers or lobbying from the BNP themselves which would prompt an invitation to Nick Griffin. Impartiality is at the core of the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's journalism and this is a normal part of the process of constantly asking ourselves how we should be defining that impartiality in a changing political environment.

Ric Bailey is the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's chief political adviser and was executive editor of Question Time from 2000 to 2006.

Today we're launching several weeks of coverage across radio, television and online to coincide with the one-year anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the largest financial bankruptcy in US history.

The sudden and shocking collapse of one of the most well-known financial institutions in the world marked a seminal moment and triggered a dramatic meltdown in global finance which has left the world a different place from the one it was 12 months ago. Its aftershocks have had implications for all of us.

After Lehman's, the global economy ceased to expand for the first time in 60 years with poor countries severely hit by the fall in commodity prices and remittances. The crisis is estimated to have thrown an additional 100 million people into absolute poverty (earning less than a dollar a day).

In the UK household, wealth has fallen by around £1.1 trillion - or around £40,000 per household. Government debt is expected to reach £1 trillion in a few years, an increase of £600 billion, and unemployment is expected to top three million, or 10% of the workforce. The crisis has also led to unprecedented international co-operation at the G20 summit in London and later this month in Pittsburgh, which could lead to stronger regulation of the world's financial markets, including bankers' bonuses.

So what are we hoping to achieve in our coverage over the next few days and weeks? Firstly, with the perspective of a little time, we will ask what caused the crash and whether it's possible to design a system to prevent a future repeat. We will look at the current state of the global economy, at whether the crisis has fundamentally altered the power balance within that economy away from the US. And we'll also ask whether we are now in a recovery and what that recovery will look like.

will aggregate all the best of the journalism we are creating. There will be opportunities for you to participate in the discussion and debates, and you'll hear from our most authoritative voices including business editor Robert Peston and economics editor Stephanie Flanders, who will be speaking to all the main players from the world of business and finance. There may be no easy answers but we will do our best to ask the difficult questions.

It all happened in the Radio 1 and 1Xtra boardroom. A space more used to heated debates about which pre-release tracks will make the all-important station playlists. But yesterday , not music, getting people passionate.

There was some early banter from the prime minister while he had his mic fitted, sensible to woo the trainees. He and his entourage would have been all too aware of the dangers of sending a low-poll rating PM into a potentially angry crowd in a very public setting.

It was hosted by our 1Xtra News presenter, Tina Daheley. One of the early questions was from Remy, 21, a Man United-supporting MC from Manchester. The prime minister doesn't usually get greeted like this:

"You alright, Gordon?"

Remy wanted to know whether there'd be more help for freed prisoners to find work.

"You have got to have a society where there is punishment if people commit crimes," the prime minister said.

"But equally if someone has served their sentence, we should help them get into work."

Next up, plucky 19-year-old "Cheekz" complained about what she was taught at school.

"Henry VIII's wives and how many heads he chopped off have no relevance in my life now because I don't know how to fill in a housing form and I don't know what I pay taxes for," she said.

The prime minister admitted he thought history teaching was "more up to date" than that, before reeling off examples of how "citizenship studies" will help people like Cheekz.

There were more questions and the prime minister heard some powerful personal stories. Ash from Manchester has lost two friends to gun crime. Darren has been "floating about" in Brixton and can't find a decent place to stay. And Fliss from Bristol told the premier that she's homeless and has to live in a car.

This is all part of the U Takeover joint project from 1Xtra and ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Blast. It's a three-month training scheme for 22 young people from Manchester, Bristol and London. The 18-24 year-olds are all out of work and not in full-time education. Their training culminates in producing a day of radio on 1Xtra on Saturday 26 September.

Vince, 20, from Bristol told Gordon Brown he considered some MPs "criminal" for abusing their allowances. The PM didn't agree but said the system was being sorted. Then a question from "Solja" - a 21-year-old football fanatic from Manchester, whose parents both lost their jobs recently.

"Would you jeopardise less on your yearly salary to help the recession?" he asked.

"We've frozen our pay," said the PM, before presenter Tina sought some clarity, "Would you take a pay cut though?" she asked.

"I'd be prepared to take a pay cut," Gordon Brown replied. Cue Tina's next question - how much?

The prime minister refused to tell us. But the news story was already there. The PM is prepared to cut his pay to help out in the recession.

Later - texters to Newsbeat on 1Xtra's sister station, Radio 1, were inclined not to believe he'd actually do it - or that after the next election he'd actually be in a position to make the decision. But that's another story.