we will have the headlines for you at the top of the hour. straight after this programme. in an age of social media echo chambers. what's the future of unbiased reporting? welcome to newswatch with me, samira ahmed. also coming up on the programme, was the 6:00 news unfair to borisjohnson when he appeared at the covid inquiry? and was it over the top to devote two and a half hours on the bbc news channel to shane macgowan�*s funeral? the covid inquiry has been hearing from politicians and senior government officials in london before it moves on to scotland,

wales and northern ireland in the new year. last week, borisjohnson, the prime minister at the time of the pandemic, arrived 3 hours early at the hearing just after seven am. here's how the 6:00 news began its coverage at six. boris johnson apologises for the way the government handled the pandemic. arriving at the covid inquiry under cover of darkness, the former prime minister admits he should have twigged much sooner the need for action. several viewers wrote in to newswatch to say they thought that was unfair. caroljefferson from loughborough protested. daphne turpin emailed from northampton. ken holden agreed.

we asked bbc news to respond to those complaints and they sent us this statement. the government's plans to send some migrants to rwanda if they arrive in the uk illegally has dominated the news in the past week when the new home secretary, james cleverly visited rwanda to sign a treaty. the bbc�*s political editor chris mason went along to report on the event. but one viewer who didn't leave his name thought chris should have stayed in the office. the home secretary arrived here in kigali, the rwandan capital, in the last couple of hours. he is the third home secretary to visit rwanda in around about 18 months. i don't know about putting life stage up.

you want to stop wasting money, send the people to rwanda this week just to say a few words. how much did that cost? to be fair to chris, he provided a lot more than a few words, but we asked bbc news for comment. a regular divisive issue on newswatch is how much coverage is given to famous people after their deaths. well, this month, shane macgowan of the pogues died just as his hands famous christmas song, the fairytale of new york, was getting its annual airing. his funeral was held in county tipperary last friday

and the bbc news channel broadcast it live for two and a half hours. we have marianne mccune with the madonna. because shane was also very dedicated to our lady, and he had a small statue of our lady on his hospital tray. many of you were not happy. kevin cooper wrote in. laura mckee asked:

mike wilmot from hereford said: ross quist said: we put those comments to bbc news who gave us this statement in reply. now this is our last programme of 2023, so we thought we'd take

stock of the year on newswatch. it's been striking how often viewers have emailed in with diametrically opposing accusations of bias after watching the same report on bbc news, especially if it's about the israel—gaza conflict or uk party politics. to discuss how people view impartiality in news, i'm joined by professorjane mortensen from the department ofjournalism at city university of london and a former media editor of the guardian. thank you for coming on newswatch. jane, can i ask what's going on that people can allege bias in opposite directions after viewing exactly the same coverage? i think in this increasingly fragmented media landscape that we're living in with so much on social media, different forms, different platforms, people are increasingly there's quite a lot of evidence from ofcom and others, increasingly listening and consuming news and opinions which blur and which often echo some of our own views and thoughts. so rather than having two sides, which is the basis of much sort of public service journalism, for example, there's much more in one

direction, which then becomes harder to stop and think about both sides. and what about some of the new terrestrial media and digital media? so there's things like the talk radio and tv channels like gb news. i wonder how far they're affecting audiences and perceptions of news impartiality. i think talktv and lbc, there have been some investigations, particularly the issue of serving politicians, acting as presenters, and we've had a couple of breaches of those requirements recently by ofcom. so i think the broadcast ecosystem is is definitely changing. i think the past year has presented huge challenges to the regulators in this country of particularly and there's a lot of debate in this country, ofcom particularly.

and there's a lot of debate about whether if we allow this shift towards more opinionated television and how we allow it, do we go the way of the us? is there a sense that ofcom is changing how it views due impartiality? is it now thinking if you watch gb news you're expecting something different and therefore the standards are different to the bbc? i think, i think that's going to be the really big challenge and i think ofcom is grappling with that as we speak now. we've had a lot of complaints this week on newswatch about gary lineker�*s latest social media remarks that were political and the new bbc chairman elect sameer shah. of course, a former bbc news executive himself told a parliamentary committee that he thought lineker had breached the brand new bbc guidelines with those latest tweets about conservative mps that maybe the guidelines need to be rewritten yet again. and i wonder, is it still realistic for the bbc to impose impartiality rules on its non—news bbc staff? i think, i think the bbc have got itself into a bit of a mess with this, partly because the bbc is absolutely on the front line of anyone criticising because of the politics of it, because it's paid

for by the licence fee, because the government can, as they did when they, as they appointed or rather recommended sameer shah as bbc chair. at the same time they reneged on a funding agreement that they'd made several years before. you know, they've made it's been a very harsh political climate for the bbc in the past 13 years, really. so i think they are in a particularly difficult place in terms of they are seen, they are held up for sort of greater scrutiny, notjust because of the licence fee, but because they are seen as the sort of arbiter of really public service broadcasting. really, the bbc sets that tone or should do by then going to that extra step and saying everyone who is a sort of core bbc presenter and notjust news providers, notjustjournalists, should stick by impartiality. i think that's very difficult. bbc however, we set the guidelines so recently that the idea that they can go back and do it

all again is really difficult. i mean, you know, it's interesting that somebody some show it's quite right that actually gary lineker did breach those guidelines by saying what he did about the government and refugees. it's quite correct. he has to run on his contract. that's going to be really fascinating. we've got a really, really interesting year over the next year, but impartiality and the bbc and broadcasters. yeah, well, one other issue i want to mention is the question of how effective the bbc is, as at reporting on itself when it becomes a news story, as it often seems to, you know, whether it's over lineker or, for example, over the ongoing revelations about how the bbc handled the martin bashir investigation over the many years mirror what i've always felt over the many years mirror what i've always felt about the bbc and it happens as time and time again is that they do not report on this for quite a long time. and then when it becomes apparent that there is a big. they report on it to the nth degree.

we have had that notjust from gary lineker but martin bashir, which of course lots of people knew about martin bashir. it was never reported on. and then suddenly it was in the papers and then the bbc sort of. there's no, the whole of newsnight devoted at one point to martin bashir. we had a slightly similar thing with hugh edwards, i think. and so i do think, unlike actually many newspapers, the bbc really does take reporting on itself and holding itself to account quite seriously. whether it always does that at the right time and to the right degree, i think is very much up to the question. jane mortensen, thank you so much for coming on newswatch. thank you for all your comments this week. if you want to share your opinions about what you see or hear on bbc news, on tv, radio, online and social media email newswatch at bbc.co.uk or you can find us on ecs, formerly known as twitter at newswatch bbc. you can call us on 0370106676 and do have a look at our website

for previous interviews. bbc.co.uk slash newswatch. that's all from us for 2023. thank you forjoining us. do you think about getting in touch and perhaps even coming on the programme? we'll be back on the 5th of january to hear more of your thoughts about how the bbc covers the news. until then, merry christmas and a happy new year.

for many of us ordering something online and waiting for it to be dropped on our doorstep as a convenience we don't even think about. but for those in brazil's favelas, the densely populated, low income communities that lie on the outskirts of cities like rio and sao paulo, that convenience simply isn't an option. but that could be about to change. as angelica mari has been finding out, favelas can be like giant as angelica mari has been finding out. favelas can be like giant labyrinths built deep into peripheries across brazil, visible, but often overlooked. and there are millions of brazilians living in unofficial towns

like this one, generating billions of dollars in economic activity every year. still, many delivery companies refuse to work here, leaving residents without a way to get parcels right at home to address the issue, brazilian startup laporta set out to do exactly what it says in its name, getting packages delivered right to the doorsteps of people living in the favelas. when it comes to favelas, the access is a little bit trickier because they are considered restrict areas. this is catalina's company co—founder nate potter. which in brazilian portuguese means at the doorstep. one of our founders were born and raised inside of favela, so he had trouble trying to receive their products at home. so whenever he orders something, he buys something online. he has to go to an agency or sometimes to reach the zip code. the presence of gangs in the favelas narrow, unpaved streets have made deliveries complicated here,

but a lack of official street addresses may be the biggest hurdle. we say that they are excluded from the map of e—commerce. they are excluded from the digital world. but this is where laporta believes they have developed a solution, thanks in part to a tool from google. code plus codes, plus codes and digital addresses created are digital addresses created by dividing the world over and over into ever smaller boxes. with each division, a number or letter is added to a sequence creating a unique location code. so we work with them to map these regions, create routes, create street, create addresses to these people in order them to receive not only their packages, but vital services, such as calling an ambulance or asking for the police. those plus codes have been printed on placards and hung throughout some favelas across brazil. that's helped put people on the map. but still, traditional companies refuse to come.

getting lost in this area, that can be very risky.