there was to the agreement was much debated. was the bbc and the media in general too quick to accept a white house narrative claiming a triumphant success? one twitter user thought so, posting this. can the bbc stopped saying the meeting is historic. it is not. any us president could have had the meeting. north korea has been gagging for this. trump has given away everything before even starting the meeting. and the bbc should make this very clear. but others thought the bbc was too critical and carping in its reporting of the summit. and then another handshake to seal the deal. but who was this a better deal for? no details, no mention of whether this denuclearisation process will be verifiable or irreversible one might wonder what actually been achieved at this summit. john gray was watching that bulletin and wondered why was it so negative. it gave the impression that little had been achieved. the document that they signed

was vague and there would be months of problems ahead. what do you expect from the first real handshaking meeting between these two countries in 60 years? i think what has happened today is huge. a great pity the bbc doesn't see it that way and chooses instead to distort events. jay oatman agreed. all the news organisations, with their pundits and left—wing views such as the bbc have been proved utterly wrong. that does the bbc applaud the results of the summit? no of course not. you stick to your nit—picking hatred of president trumps methods. well the bbc‘s seoul correspondent laura bicker was in singapore for the summit on tuesday. she's now at base in south korea. laura what was it like covering this summit? a bit surreal because you're watching the president of the united states meet a north korean leader, and all the hype surrounding it, not only that you had

the north koreans arrived in singapore. this kind of heart of capitalism. and as they paraded through the streets, you could see crowds just forming, trying to get a glimpse of the north korean leader because this is a man who has hardly been out of his country since he took power in 2011. i think for me as well it was an enormous privilege to spend the morning with south koreans in singapore who are watching the summit. they were incredibly emotional. they told me their hearts were in their mouths, there were people calling their mothers were in north korea, and that, to me, tells me what this is all about. a number of diplomats said the optics were good, the handshake, the signing ceremony but there was little of substance. did the bbc get sucked into trump's showbiz narrative on this? there is always that fear that the spectacle in itself, the staging in itself upstages the actualjournalism but i think in this occasion especially with regards to the bbc we had enough expertise on the ground to see through any of that. i think it's also worth pointing out that the staging

was a huge part of that. to see the flag of north korea, the dprk flag right next to the flag of the us, is a sign that kim jong—un and donald trump were being treated as equals here and that was part of the story. that is something in itself. and then of course you have that moment where kim jong—un went on his walkabout, he was waving to crowds. he was at the top of the marina bay sands in singapore. you look over this enormous singapore skyline, the capitalist skyline, and the people back in north korea were shown this. and to see that, yes it was staged, yes it was part of the choreography of the summit but people in north korea were shown this and that in itself tells you something. it tells you kim jong—un is different from his father and grandfather. he is willing to either take this risk and also show people in north korea the kind of skyline

that capitalism can build. that is a risk to take for them. and it shows that perhaps, just perhaps, this is paving the way for something biggerfor north korea. we also get complaints from the opposite point of view, from those who thought it was historic and the bbc had qualified and quibbled far too much about what had been achieved. if well i think when it comes to the agreement, one of the first words out of my mouth to radio 4 was, this is vague and lacking in detail, because it was. and part of the problem we had as journalists was the build—up, especially from the united states, was that they would only accept complete irreversible verifiable denuclearisation. that's an important qualification. those were the steps that they said that they wanted to get. and to them even the day before, the us secretary of state mike pompeo said they would accept nothing less. and sanctions would stay in place until then. and that donald trump, if he didn't

get a deal he would walk away. to say all that and then on the day of the summit not get that on paper, yes there is the word complete denuclearisation there but the two keywords, verifiable and irreversible, are not there. there is no sign that weapons inspectors will be allowed in. it doesn't detract from the fact that this is historic. the two sides meeting is a start in itself. but i think as journalists it is ourjob to look at the detail and fine print of what was signed. do you think yourjob reporting on north korea is going to be easier now? i would like to think so, i would like to hope so. i don't see that changing any time soon. north korea is very selective about the media it lets in. even when it blew up its nuclear test site which is in... they invited select pricing and the bbc was not one of them. i, as a reporter, would

love to go and report independently from north korea. we have had reporters go in in the past. it does make it difficult because we have to rely on information that we are either given to state—run media or information that comes from my colleagues, we have colleagues from afp and eight people are based in pyongyang. so when it comes to getting information it would be much better if we could get into north korea and report for ourselves. i don't see that changing any time soon. i would love it if it did but i don't see it changing any time soon. laura bicker, thank you. tuesday's debate in the house of commons on the rural mps will play if they don't like the brexit do a lot has been negotiated or if no deal has been reached had been hotly anticipated as a major challenge to the government. in the end this is how the news at ten reported the event. now here the government has avoided what would have been a major defeat in the commons over its brexit bill

a concession to potential rebels. the nature of those concessions was much discussed in the days that followed. but it was the way the result of the vote was reported that annoyed peter furno among others. he wrote, disappointing, but not an expected to hear on bbc news that the government had avoided defeat on the key brexit vote. actually the government won the vote. such a shame that not really surprising that the supposedly neutral bbc chose to report the victory in such a negative way. shame on you, bbc. special programmes, reports and live coverage this week marked one year since the grenfell tower fire, and on thursday night the anniversary was marked by the bbc one bulletins the 72 people who died in the fire. i hear your voice... and i see your face. but you are not there.

at that moment we felt like our hearts had broken. steve carter from president had this response. there can be no question that the grenfell fire was a terrible tragedy. but to end the news with a tribute was a piece of cheap dramatised marginal journalism. it would have been more appropriate to just allow viewers just to watch and listen to the tributes about the sombre background music which was more appropriate for a hollywood weepy film. and donna ward made this wider point about the weak‘s coverage. this is not news but maudlin, over intrusive reporting. do we need and on the spot reporter? do we need to ask a 13—year—old girl if she misses her uncle? there is an ongoing inquiry which has to give evidence, the bbc should not use its weight to emotionally influence this. the constant marking of anniversaries is not helpful or even of public interest. finally if you think we've forgotten about a certain large—scale sporting occasion that

began on thursday that not something you could accuse the bbc off including its news output. no matter where they are harold, the start of a world cup retains the power to excite and you might like little else in sport. —— matter where — — matter where they —— matter where they are held. and here today it was no different. we plan to explore in the next week or two how bbc news is handling the world cup but in the meantime here's an observation from tim hewitt from smethwick made on tuesday while looking at the programme schedules for later in the week. i cannot understand how the game lasting 90 minutes suddenly becomes a massive schedule busting three—hour programme with particularly devastating impacts on bbc one's regional news. for example on friday bbc one's hour—long domination of national and regional news at 6pm is slashed to a mere 20 minutes for a game which doesn't even kick off until 7pm. on monday disciplines

is butchered to just 15 minutes a game for a match not commencing until 7pm. the answer of course lies in what the bbc does best at every major sporting event, talking. why not put the waffle on the red button for those who really wanted and reduce the disruption to the rest of the tv schedule, particularly news? thank you for all your comments this week. if you want to share your opinions on bbc news and current affairs or even appear on the programme you can call us on 0370, 0106676 or e—mail newswatch. find us on twitter @newswatchbbc and do have a look at our website, the address is bbc.co.uk/newswatch. that's all from us. we'll be back to view your thoughts about bbc news coverage again next week. goodbye. good evening, it has been a day of contrast across the country, but not as extreme as yesterday. now, you

can see some of these showers were heavy, and it made for a cool and disappointing day at times. if you saw the cloud break—up, some sunnis both came through, as we have had in eastbourne early on. temperatures responded into the low 20s. that and the weather front bringing these showers will continue to move in from the west, and as we go towards the weekend, it will be a cooler, showery saturday, leading into a quieter but a cloudy sunday. this is the story for the next few hours, the story for the next few hours, the weather front being it these ends from scotland, another one waiting in the wings on saturday. because it are day with the south—westerly wind driving in a little bit more cloud, and if you showers along west facing coast. with all that cloud around, temperatures will not fall too low, it will be a mild night, overnight close of nine... not as windy as those they, but a noticeable wind and some of that rain heavy with

rumbles of thunder as it makes its way into northern ireland and scotla nd way into northern ireland and scotland through the day. as the weather front continues to push its way steadily eastwards, it weakens off, and there will be a level of uncertainty of how much rain will see across wales, the midlands and sgppy see across wales, the midlands and sappy cinnamon. not enough for the gardens that i could do getting desperate. the cloud, the breeze and the rain will mean that the temperatures will be down to compared to late. 1a degrees at the best. it does look like that front will clear away as we go through saturday. ridge of high pressure quietening things & a. although there is another area of... again, not bring too much in a way of rain. sunday looks likely to be director of the two days, and there will be a lot of cloud around, i suspect, that south—westerly breeze producing some drizzle. but head inland, you should get some break and some sunshine, and temperatures around 20 or 21

degrees. as we look ahead, conditions across central and southern areas might warm up a little, with high pressure in the driving seat, but rain continues in the northwest. this is bbc news. i'm julian worricker. the headlines at eight. a bill to make upskirting, the act of secretly taking photos under a skirt, a sexual offence has been blocked by a single conservative mp. only a recent poll this morning said showed 90% of the people in this country are behind this change in the lot and then the one person can block the whole thing. it seems to frustrating and wrong. donald trump announces the us will be putting a 25% trade tariff on more than 800 goods from china. two teenage moped riders are jailed for life after they stabbed and killed a charity youth worker during a violent robbery spree. a damning report says

the government's flagship benefits scheme, universal credit, may end up costing more than the system it replaced. also tonight tributes to the eastenders star leslie grantham who's died at the age of 71.