in which a children's hospital in kyiv was badly damaged. the journalist oz katerji was nearby, and when he heard about what had happened, he went there and initially reported from the scene. but after doing that, he then decided to stop being a journalist for those moments and help. he told ros his story. so i'd heard, i could hear the strikes from my apartment, but i had an appointment that i had to keep, so i didn't go immediately there. it's only when i realised what had been hit that i cancelled what i was doing, and i went immediately down to okhmatdyt children's hospital. that's because i'd known the hospital, because i'd reported from there before at the beginning of the war. i was there withjohn sweeney, former bbc, one of your former colleagues. and that was for gmb. and we interviewed

the head of the hospital. so it was, you know, it was immediately, i knew exactly where that was. i went down there and, yeah, i was absolutely stunned. shocked by what i saw. it was... almost seemed inconceivable that the place that i'd been before looked like this now. it was, um... but there were already a lot of people there, that had made it there. and, you know, the first responders were really in full, full flow at that point. so, you know, it was, it was absolutely clear in my mind that it was a deliberate attack on a hospital. the one saving grace would have been that there were first responders everywhere that immediately kicked into action. so that hopefully might have, you know, helped rescue people that might not have made it otherwise. in those first moments after you arrived, oz, were you able to get very close to the hospital building? yeah, i mean, i was right there. i could, you know, go, you know, at the beginning,

the police and the, you know, local military hadn't sort of set up cordons to help the first responders. at that point, it was just kind of everyone was there. it was still the doctors were kind of, you know, still in a state of total shock. they'd begun the process of trying to dig people out, before the firefighters and so on had come on scene. by the time i'd arrived, the firefighters had already arrived. but, you know, again, it was everyone was pitching in, all of the, you know, some of the doctors had blood all over themselves as they were, like, helping to move some of the rubble away. you say everyone was pitching in. you arrived at that scene as a reporter, as you have arrived at many scenes during this conflict. at what point did you decide that, actually, the reporting needed to be secondary, that you needed to help? well, there were so many people on the scene, that there was no internet connection. so i had to go further away to get the internet connection

so i could send the file back to tvp world, the polish tv channel i was stringing for. so to do that, i had to go away. so i went away and i came back and i did a live broadcast. by then, there were, you know, it's difficult to count the crowd, but there were probably around 2,000 or more people on the scene, and it was like people were chain linking, supplies in and rubble away. and, you know, there was already, you know, photographers, videographers everywhere. i'd filed my broadcast and other than, you know, walking around and taking photos and putting on social media, i just thought it seems redundant when there are so many people here, you know, pitching in. so i don't want to give the impression that i was any way to do with the first responders who were, you know, professionals who were trying to pull people out of rubble. but there was lots of work

to be done, you know, sweeping the glass, moving all the big bags of rubble onto dump trucks. so there were loads of people pitching in, and ijust thought, maybe it's better just to do that than, erm, than take a few photos for social media. the story's already out there. and, you know, really, this...this seemed more important at the time. when you were taking the decision tojoin in with those helping, did you just take that decision in the moment or did you stop and think, "0k, "i'm doing something that is unusual for a journalist "who's reporting on an event?" um, i don't know. it just. .. at that moment, it seemed kind of redundant. the reporting, i'd filed an ltt for the afternoon. so ijust thought i could get stuck in and, you know, help people. so there were, you know, gloves and a mask being offered to anyone who wanted to. and, you know, as i said, there were, like, thousands of people there. it really felt like kyiv was responding to this in a way that, you know, i obviously wasn't around when the blitz happened, but you hear a lot about the blitz spirit and the kind of, you know,

the kind of, that thing united the nation in defiance against the nazi luftwaffe. this kind of felt like you were witnessing, you know, something from another, another century almost. it was, you know, a remarkable thing to behold and to report on and then, you know, to be able to do a small part, helping move some of the bags of rubble. when you had finished helping move those bags of rubble and doing whatever else you were doing to help, did you then revert to reporting, revert to capturing details from the scene that you wanted to pass on to the media outlets you work for? yeah, i mean, i had to go back to doing broadcasts later on in the evening. so, you know, i went home and i washed and then i went back out and carried on. this is the second time in my career i've done that because the first time was in greece, when i was reporting on the arrival, the migrant arrivals from boats coming from turkey. and, you know, you film

people coming off boats, but you can only get so much footage of people coming off boats. eventually you're like, there's people that need help here. so you put your camera down and you go and help people, and i don't think that's unusual injournalism, really. i think we're all humans at the end of the day. i don't want to make it sound like i did anything that most of you wouldn't do in that same situation, because we alljust want to help each other, i think, really. and, oz, i'm sure there are many people listening to you very much empathising with the decisions that you took. and i saw on social media, people reacting to some of the posts that you put on x, very much supportive of the decision that you took. has anyone raised any ethical concerns with you saying, "no, this isn't for a journalist to both report on "a story and help people caught up in a story"? 0h, ros, i'm sure people could argue about my ethical decisions for much longer

than ten minutes on this show. you know. i'll leave it at that. i try my best to do objective reporting, but i don't make any apologies for caring about the people that i report on at all. and finally, oz, when you were reporting from that scene, were you able to get information from the ukrainian authorities, or were they so focused on helping everyone caught up in this, the briefing the press on their actions, their recovery actions and their ability to help those caught up in this, were they able to brief you? so, look, it must be said that the kind of media operation the government has here is really, you know, open, almost open sourced. everyone has their own telegram channels, and they publish their statements immediately on those telegram channels, and they're picked up immediately by the wires. so the process between that statement being released and it being out there for journalists is almost instantaneous. so, really, the government has learned, through the course of the war, how to do this.

and it's, you know, it's never a problem hearing directly from the officials themselves. oz, thank you very much indeed for talking to us. i should say that russia denies targeting the hospitals, saying it had been hit by fragments of a ukrainian air defence missile. ukraine says it had found remnants of a russian cruise missile. and timothy wright, military expert and analyst, told bbc verify that... that was oz katerji talking about his experiences in kyiv. now we're going to turn with elections going on across the world, to the uk elections, because ros and i were both involved on election night. and ros, well, he was involved in one of the big stories of the night because he was in the constituency of the former prime minister, liz truss, and he told us all about it. i was in norfolk, in kings lynn, to be precise,

in a leisure centre where the counts for north west norfolk and south west norfolk were going on, and i was struck that i could stand very close to where the votes were being counted. actually, we were on a series of badminton courts and they said the journalists can't go across this line, which i think was part of a badminton or a basketball court, but we were a couple of metres back from the counting agents who, on behalf of the parties, stand right next to the tables and jot down the counts, the votes, as they're being counted because sometimes people will ask us both during the night and afterwards, "well, when you're going on air and saying, �*we feel like it's going in �*this direction�*, how do you know?" and the answer is almost always that you've spoken to some of the counting agents and you can't quote them directly, but they'll give you an indication of what they're tallying up on their clipboards, which, of course, is not 100% accurate, and they don't claim it is, but it does give you a direction of travel that is worth paying attention to. it absolutely does. you watch these people making these notes. they're standing, looking at the counters and then making notes of every vote that's coming in.

the thing we could see in south west norfolk was that reform was getting a lot of votes. we didn't know how significant that would be. we didn't know it would mean reform would win. but it was clear that that was going to be a factor in whether liz truss was going to be able to hold on to her seat. and of course, that... you did really, you were one of the stories of the night, weren't you? right. well, it ended up, it came along quite late. but, yeah, liz truss lost by not very many votes, just over 600 votes, and we didn't find that out until well into the morning, well after 6.00, but even close to when it was announced, we didn't know which way it was going to go. i was kind of moving between the leisure centre, the hall where the camp was going on, and outside to see if liz truss had arrived and, you know, you'd go out at i think it wasjust after 6.00, and to one side was the monster raving loony party's candidate having a cigarette. lord elvis, was he called? yeah. earl elvis. earl elvis, sorry. earl elvis of east anglia. and then just a few metres away was terryjermy, who was the labour party candidate. and he was looking at a bit of paper and i was thinking,

"is he practising a speech?" because we'd had no confirmation of the result. it turned out he was practising a speech, but we didn't know at the time. but you're basically standing in an empty car park with a couple of the candidates and a couple of other officials thinking, this is all quite low—key at the moment. but, of course, we're in the middle of this massive political moment. and when did you find out about the result? because you broke what you thought was happening on bbc news. so we'd been given indications it was tight by a number of the parties all through the night, but we didn't know which way it was going, and then one of the election officials, so not from a party, one of the officials spoke to a colleague of ours, chris gibson, who i was working with, and said, "no, she's definitely lost." and chris said, "well, you know, can we go on air "and say that?" and he showed chris a message that he'd sent his wife, which said, "turn on the tv, the story of the night "is about to happen." nobody lies to their wife, let's face it. well, we didn't go on air and say liz truss had definitely lost. we went on air and said, "there's a strong indication that liz truss had lost." we don't know the result. this is not confirmed,

but we have received a strong indication that liz truss has lost. so i was toing and froing between the hall and outside and was outside when liz truss arrived and i asked a couple of questions and she declined to answer them. so i said, "would it be possible to speak "to you after the declaration?" and she said, "yes, i'd be absolutely happy to do that." and i was walking just behind her and her colleagues. we went into the hall, she walked up onto the stage, took her place alongside the candidates. the result was announced. there was a speech from the labour candidate who won and then liz truss came off the stage, said to me, "i need to go and speak to a couple of people quickly" and then good to her word came back and spoke to me and answered questions for a minute or so. do you take responsibility for what's happened to the conservatives this evening because of what happened when you were prime minister? i think the issue we faced as conservatives is we haven't delivered sufficiently... and i really wanted to know whether she had a message to voters or to the tory party or to the country. and so as she departed the hall, i walked alongside

her asking variations on that, on that question. but she declined to answer that one. it definitely made for good television. so there we were talking about uk politics. next, we're going to hear about french politics, because the second round of the french parliamentary elections delivered a major shock. lots of people had been anticipating a victory for the far—right national rally. but no, the overall winner was a left—wing alliance, and this has given the french media, and media across europe, many, many questions to answer. victor goury—laffont from politico joined us to explain how the media and many other analysts missed the story coming. i think it's a lot of different factors. obviously, the first one is that this result was completely in contradiction with the polling we had received during the week between the first and the second round, which means that if you look at the projections that were being made every day from, you know, the sunday of

the first round to the sunday of the second round, what they were showing was that the national rally was maybe losing a little bit of ground, but they were still clearly positioned to at least be first in the national assembly, if not hold an absolute majority. um, so obviously that was probably the first sort of factor, which led to how surprising this was, just the fact that, uh, polling was a little bit off. the second thing is that obviously the national rally has been on a trend. you know, has had a lot of upward momentum for the past few years, and it sort of felt like this was maybe a bit of a culminating point. there was a lot of confusion about why emmanuel macron had decided to call snap elections, even within his own rank, because there was this widespread expectation, not only in media but even in french society, even within the political class, that a far—right victory was going to happen in some form or the other. was it going to be a complete triumph with an absolute majority and a stable government, or would it be more of a plurality and then maybe some debate about if other lawmakers should be working

with the national rally. that was another question, but there was definitely an expectation that they would win. i wonder how you would explain to us the different approaches to media that the different parties in france take. absolutely. i think it all depends on also what media you're talking about. the media landscape in france is quite fragmented. we here at politico, we choose more of a nonpartisan approach. so we obviously have talks, discussions, attempt to better understand the strategies of all three major political forces in france. so the left, the centre, and the far—right. we have a large part of our media landscape which is more, more clearly, um, in line with one side or the other. so obviously that impacts how each camp decides to interact with the different media organisations. but overall, what has been kind of outstanding for a few years

now is that the national rally has tried to appear as being more credible, more professional, more ready to govern, sort of chasing their old image as a hateful party and unprofessional party. and that has also included a strategy to, you know, appear more professional in their media appearances, you know, with things including like just wearing suits, being very clearly spoken, putting forward maybe only a few of their leaders. it's just to avoid having any sort of communication misstep. so it definitely has been very important for them to try to focus their media strategy. and i wonder, victor, we've heard about the change in the political strategies between the first round and the second round. could you see a shift in how french media were approaching this, as the possibility of a far right victory came into view? i think obviously it's been a, you know, like a decades—long question. the first time that the far—right actually made

the runoff was in 2002, 22 years ago. it was marine le pen's father at the time, jean—marie le pen, who was humongously controversial. and at that time, a lot of media had a policy which was to, you know, never invite any representative of the far—right, never give them any kind of interview, sort of, you know, constantly present them as this very hateful, very racist force. with the far—right making gains and essentially forming a group in parliament, becoming sort of a, just a force to reckon with, even in terms of lawmaking, in terms of material reality and the fact that they have not only an important influence in the population, they're the party which has received the most vote in the past two elections. but even in the lawmaking process and the fact that they control certain local administrations. so media have kind of had to adapt to that reality and to a certain extent treat them as, you know, just one of the three big blocks that we have in the current french political landscape. but as i was saying, you also need to take into account that we have part

of the press which has been taken over by, you know, certain people who have a very, very much conservative or, you know, hard right political leanings who will speak to the far—right. that is really useful. let mejump in there. you've given us a brilliant introduction, but we have another guest that we'd like to bring in to our discussion. yes, because we've got dr ayala panievsky here. she's the presidential fellow in the journalism department at the city university of london, and, ayala, you also study the media strategies of populist politicians. just let's get some definitions here. what does the term populist mean to you? i'm so glad you're asking, i because this has been such a hyped term for many yearsl now, but everybody's using it meaning very different things. so we keep talking over each other about, uh, l very different political creatures, basically. i and actually over the years, . even researchers weren't sure what populism should mean and what's the right definition. - some approached it as -

charismatic politicians or any charismatic politician - was considered populist. others thought about people who have just simplistic- arguments or left—wing economic policy. - but actually, over the past few years, a political scientist- called cas mudde made this definition that has become i quite a consensus about - what populism really means. so it's very simple. it's about politicians, _ parties or movements that look at society and divide i society into two groups and two groups only. so we are not a collection, a mixed collection of- individuals and communities who have different l interests and wants. but there are two groups. one is the real people, the authentic people, i and the other is the - enemies of the people. and they are labelled . as corrupt elites who are undermining, they are anti patriots, i they are traitors, all that. and these are the two only options and... i interesting. and obviously, that enemies of the people thing

is something that rings true here in britain, or resonant of the past, but in terms of how those populist parties approach the media, are they hostile to them? how do they use the media? so that's the thing. the journalists end up - being in the second group more often than not, and the language for it - might be different. the content might be different based on the context - in which the populist party operates. - so you have a term . like the liberal media that we are all familiar with, which is used in the us. - and sometimes here you have| presstitutes, which is the term that is being used in india, in the philippines. - you have the lying pressl in germany, but basically the idea is the same. the structure of the argument is the same, and the elites i changed based on whether they support or criticise _ the populists. so how does the press, how can the press then report, for example, misinformation without amplifying it? so that's extremely difficult, because forjournalists - covering someone who calls you, your colleagues, - your profession, your workplace

enemies of the people, - and not only that, but also| in many cases, trying to do so impartially is i extremely difficult. and whether you choose to cover it and amplify the actual - anti—media campaign is a big i question, because many people you talk to actually hear - the worst messages they've heard aboutjournalists in the media. - so there is a big question of do you cover it. - when you cover it, if you cover i it critically, are you actually. proving the point? are you actually showing that you are the enemy. of the populist by criticising these politicians? - and what i've found in my- research, which is concerning, i think, is that many- journalists who are wedded to the concept of objectivity. and impartiality and are taking journalistic norms seriously, end up applying all sorts - of strategies when they are under populist attack. - trying to prove them wrong, trying to show that if i am i accused of being a leftie - traitor, i'll do whatever i can to show that i'm not

a leftie traitor. - now, how do you do that? that's a great question in itself, right? - and then people end up notl inviting certain interviewees, maybe not covering certain topics, maybe expressing i different kinds of criticisms. so this is, and you've already used this, an analysis that relies on phrases. you've been talking about populism and giving us definitions, but there are other phrases used in the analysis of how the media intersects with certain parts of the political spectrum. let's bring roger mosey in, former senior executive at bbc news. and, roger, how helpful or unhelpful do you think it is to have particular phrases like populist or far—right or radical left, and there are others, too, for the media to use to help describe the different political parties they may be covering? well, as we've just heard very clearly, it's difficult. and in this programme we've used far—right for the national rally in france,

we haven't used far—left for the new popular front because actually there are moderates in that. but equally there are communists and people who are definitely of the far—left. so i think you need to try to be consistent. and i also, if you look in the british context, you have to somehow describe the bnp, who i would say are extreme far—right, reform, who are probably populist, radical right, people in the conservative party like suella braverman who are right, orare they populist right? so i think the best thing you can do is be very careful about labelling and try to identify people by their policies and what they're arguing for, rather thanjust bung a label on, which can sometimes be a barrier to understanding. and those challenges that roger is describing, dr panievsky, do you think it would be helpful if the media could agree on phrases that it is going to use? do you think that's even realistic? is that a naive suggestion? well, i think it's importantl that we talk about content. so not using labels asjustl ways to discredit someone, but actually to refer

to the essence. - so not to call populist parties that you don't like, _ but actually look at what it - means and to make sure we have content in these words. otherwise it is pretty useless. what i think is that - if you look at the bigger picture, we have systemic. changes in the media system in the uk and elsewhere, some of which is driven l by the populist campaign - against the media and how it changes the whole - infrastructure for news. and the incentives and - different news outlets have different responses to these attacks. i and what we see with populist politicians and parties, - especially when they are in - power, but oftentimes it starts even before that, is - that they divide the media the same way they divide i society, into these loyalist media outlets that are with us and they are the real people, i they are democracy, and i everyone else who criticises the populist parties, | and they are not part of the people. well, as ever, elections always throw up many questions,

notjust for the political parties, but also for the media to answer. and we will continue to do that, of course, but i'm afraid that is all we have time for this week. thank you so much forjoining us. from me and from ros, goodbye. and if you'd like to hear a longer version of today's show, search bbc the media show wherever you get your bbc podcasts. hello. if you like cool weather with lots of clouds, then the weekend may be perfect for you but be careful what you wish for — it may end up being a little too chilly with the rain and the wind off the north sea. and, for many of us, actually, the weekend is looking quite mixed. at the moment on the satellite picture, we've clouds circling the uk. this cloud here is responsible for the damp weather and you can see the outbreaks of rain there across many eastern parts of the country. but earlier on in the night, we will have had some clear spells out towards the west. and 7am temperatures around 11—13 degrees with lower values earlier on in the night.

so, a lot of cloud to start the day wherever you are but soon, sunny spells will be developing out towards the west and in some central areas. showers will develop, too, across wales, southern england, some in northern ireland. but here, along the north sea coast, layers of cloud, outbreaks of rain. there's a weather front there and it's going to feel quite chilly. look at that — iii in aberdeen, iii in newcastle, no higher than about 15 in hull and out towards the west, perhaps temperatures not even making 20 celsius, even where the sun does come out. now, here's sunday. we still have that low pressure circling in the north sea here with that breeze out of the north. outbreaks of rain from time to time but i think, for many of us, actually, sunday is going to be a drier, brighter day and, as a result, the temperatures will be a little bit higher. a good day, i think, overall, for wimbledon on sunday and it's looking hot and sunny in germany, as well, for that football match. now, let's have a look

at the forecast, then, for sunday evening if you're planning to spend it outdoors, perhaps in your garden, looking mostly dry across most of the uk. here's a look at the forecast for monday now. surprise, surprise — a weather front sweeps in from the southwest. it'll bring outbreaks of rain, potentially heavy showers at times, even some thunderstorms possible, but this time, i think eastern areas should hang on to the better weather and because there's going to be a bit of a change in the wind direction — so, coming in from the south — the temperatures will be typically in the low 20s. how about the outlook? well, next week, again, a mixed bag in the north of the country but further south, there are hints — tentative hints — that things are going to be turning a little bit warmer. that's it. bye— bye.

live from london, this is bbc news. hollywood actor alec baldwin's manslaughter case for the fatal shooting on the film set of rust is dismissed over hidden evidence. a suspect�*s been named in connection to the human remains of two men found in suitcases in bristol, as more human remains are discovered. four more years! crowds cheered at biden�*s defiant speech in michigan, vowing to run for re—election despite the growing list of democrats urging him to step down.

and it's the final countdown as fans gather in berlin ahead of england's final against spain. hello, and welcome to bbc news. i'm lukwesa burak. a judge has dismissed the manslaughter case against the hollywood actor alec baldwin over a fatal shooting on the set of the film rust. the judge ruled that the state withheld a key piece of evidence about the live ammunition that killed the cinematographer halyna hutchins in 2021. the actor wept when the judge threw the case out, meaning he cannot be tried again. emma vardy reports from santa fe, new mexico. well, a real day of courtroom drama here as events took a completely unexpected twist. a new piece of evidence emerged about a box of bullets in which

live ammunition was