harry evans fell out spectacularly with rupert murdoch, but not before in 13 years at the sunday times, he redefined journalism itself. a master craftsman, he pioneered a form of brave, investigative, campaigning journalism, famously winning compensation for the survivors of thalidomide, a drug given to pregnant women who gave birth to children with serious birth defects. it was a landmark victory. it's a most importantjudgement, not only for the freedom of the press, but for the citizens‘ right to know in england. and most distinguished group ofjudges have told the british government, before the laws, they have got to do it now. david mason was the parent who first interested evans in the story. his daughter louise was one of those affected as a baby. she died two years ago after many years of poor health. i went along to the offices of the sunday times and harry evans got up from the far end of the table

and walked down, all the board were in there. he said, david, i want to pledge the support of the sunday times and all the power we can muster to take these people on and get the due compensation to which the victims are entitled. he was invaluable, he really was invaluable and i will miss him greatly. evans moved to america with his wife, thejournalist tina brown, shifting from a golden era in newspapers to one in magazines. now in a new york power couple, he was a long way from his north of england roots, but remained forever a news man at heart. he excelled at everything journalism required. he was a fine writer, had a greateye for layout and design and typefaces, he had an instinct for a story and he believed in investigative journalism. and he took all that and he used it to create the modern sunday times. the embodiment of a humble hack, taking on mighty forces

with nothing but the truth, harry evans putjournalism itself in a debt to him that will never be serviced. sir harold evans, who's died at the age of 92. the singer—songwriter michael kiwanuka has won this year's mercury prize for his self—titled third album. he beat the likes of dua lipa and stormzy to win the £25,000 prize. the 33—year—old's victory was revealed live on the bbc‘s the one show after covid—19 restrictions made the annual award ceremony impossible. 0ur arts editor, will gompertz has more. # don't hesitate... it was a case of third time lucky for the 33—year—old london—born musician, winning the prestigious award for his third album, which had earned him his third nomination. it was a happy ending to a prolonged period of self—doubt for the singer—songwriter. i've always been kind of worried about, um, my place in the musical landscape,

where i fit in, all those kind of questions. and with this one, ijust kind of made the decision that i wanted to not really worry about those things and create my own lane, you know? # one of their own to lead # shine your light over me... the album has a song cycle approach, blending one track into another as the singer explores themes of identity, migration, civil rights and police shootings. they're not protest songs, exactly, but his music definitely has something to say. i want to see black violin players, black conductors, notjust in the boxes that we're used to seeing ourselves in music, you know. we can be anything. these are things we're going to have to struggle with for a long time and music's a great, i guess, home for that kind of fight.

# am i a hero? # am i a hero now? kiwanuka is at times upbeat and funky, at other times introspective and soulful. there are hints ofjimi hendrix—inspired psychedelic guitar, of bill withers‘ sunny optimism and of bob dylan's poetic lyrics. a lot with an album, you'll love it and then there might be a song that just feels a bit subpar compared to the rest. there is no dud moment in this album, it is a complete body of work that is consistent throughout. it is a musically adventurous, meticulously produced album by a royal academy of music dropout turned mercury prize—winning artist. will gompertz, bbc news. that's it. now on bbc one, time for the news where you are. have a very good night.

welcome to bbc news. hello to viewers in the uk joining those around the world. it's now time for us to take a first look at the national and international front pages in the papers. hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me are the home affairs editor of evening standard, martin bentham and deputy political editor at the press association, harriet line. tomorrow's front pages, starting with. ..

the telegraph looks at the announcement of the uk's newjob support scheme by the chancellor, rishi sunak, which replaces furlough due to end on the 31st of october. the front page of the financial times, also focuses on the new scheme which sees the treasury subsidise people who work at least a third of their usual hours. a winter of rising unemployment. the guardian writes of rishi sunak‘s warning as he unveiled the job support scheme. "now it's time to live without fear." a different angle from the daily mail which says the chancellor has upstaged the prime minister with a new battle cry. away from the uk, the japan times reports that china is continuing to expand its detention camps for the uighur ethnic minority living in xinjiang according to australian researchers. meanwhile, the international financial times focusses on donald trump's refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power ifjoe biden wins november's election as some republican‘s

condemn the president's comments. and finally, the metro shows the prime minister's partner carrie symonds enjoying a boat ride with their son wilfred on lake como with friends. so let's begin... as always, good of you to join us today. all of the uk front pages as you would expect focusing on this newjob scheme. job security scheme. which is replacing the furlough scheme and we are going to start with the daily telegraph. which said regardless of this new scheme, the chancellor saying the uk, the country is going to have to face up to ha rd country is going to have to face up to hard choices. job cuts, job

losses, still really on the table. exactly. we had quite a stark message i think from the chancel today when he addressed mps and then again ata today when he addressed mps and then again at a press conference in downing street. we have known for sometime the furlough scheme was going to come to an end at the end of next month. the chancellor has under a lot of pressure to extend that, or to do something and there has been a lot of discussion about what that something should be and today that was finally revealed. the main packages support for people who can go back to work some of the time. so if you could work for a third of your normal hours the government will then pay a third, the company will pay a third so you will earn about 77% of your normal salary for doing one third of your errors. which goes a long way for people who might not be able to go back to work full—time in the idea is for people to stop being laid off where there is still a need for them

to do at least some work. but there still some criticism this perhaps doesn't go far enough and there are a number of jobs unviable doesn't go far enough and there are a number ofjobs unviable in the governments view over the next six months and those people really not very much help for them. before we get to this understanding of what viable and isn't viable when it comes to a job as because it was quite difficult to fully understand what that kind ofjob looks like, martin, explained to us because the working out, the maths is complicated with this because it is talking about paying 33% of the work but some of the mathematician say the companies will be required to pay staff 55% of their way just to do 33% of the work and even tonight i spoke to someone who said it is just, the maths don't add up. it's easier to get rid of somebody and employ somebody else. thank you for handing me that hand grenade. i think it is true, the problem with

this is it will work for some employers but for others it's been pointed out by the resolution foundation for example it would be cheaper to employ one person full—time rather than two people part—time and two people have time in effect because of the way the mathematical calculations you have just alluded to. so that clearly is a problem and i think it's not the same, the bill beforehand was similar in that it isn't so similar to the scheme which would be close to the scheme which would be close to what i have just said where it would be potentially economic, economically sensible to keep two people working for half—time rather than one person full—time, so that will be a disincentive for employers and certainly the experts in this field the iss, are all saying there will be significant job losses as a result and that while the cbi has welcomed this of course and while it will help some employers clearly for others the incentive to keep people oi'i

others the incentive to keep people on clearly not as generous as the furlough scheme which may be a could not be but probably not sufficient to keep as many people on as some people would hope. so people in that position have not having theirjob is retained as a result. exactly on that, when it comes to harriet the guardian picking up on the same line asa guardian picking up on the same line as a telegraph, despite this wrecked rescue plan, this idea that quoting the chancellor he cannot save every job, no chancellor could. going back to that idea of what is a viable job? at the moment something that is potentially viable working in hospitality industry, at the moment, is possible, a nightclub, in the future it could be so what we understand? the chancellor suggested we would now see notjust a short sharp shock to the economy but it may be could have been in march but this was actually a much longer term shift in how the economy functions and while that's probably true for

somejobs, for and while that's probably true for some jobs, for example people and while that's probably true for somejobs, for example people who are now going to switch to working from home on a permanent basis, that will have implications for city coffee shops are cleaners who come into offices or people who businesses is real estate of offices than might be a long—term shift there. hopefully things like theatre and live music and nightclubs will come back at some stage. but the suggestion from the chancellor today is that those are not viable job now and quite possibly won't be for the next six months and it's almost as though those people need to think about reskilling and moving to another sector which is not necessarily possible and for some of those jobs, they are already very highly skilled, so they do not really have too many places to turn. and of course in a very difficult economic situation where there are not going to be jobs aplenty. indeed. we're looking at the daily which martin netflix like rishi sunak the paper is suggesting in a

way of staging the prime minister. remember when the furlough scheme was introduced was lots of, he was lauded for it and now it looks like he is telling us all to live without fear. to get us a new battle cry is how the paper phrases it. we should do but on the other hand it's contradicted by what the government is doing and i think that's the problem. there is lots of rhetoric around at the moment, but the reality is if you say live without fear but then you say we have got new restrictions that are going to la st new restrictions that are going to last potentially six months you seem to people instead of going back the office which is what they were saying, don't go back to the office. in essence because it's too risky to do so, and myriad other restrictions being brought in or indeed talked about matt hancock saying mr might not be able to come back and

christmas. all of those things are not necessarily stealing fear but they are in some people and certainly instilling alarm at the situation is very serious and of course maybe it is but you cannot haveit course maybe it is but you cannot have it both ways. i think the truth is we have to live with the virus because the hopes of an early vaccine, we may get one in reasonable time but not months away, it's going to be sometime after that almost certainly, therefore for the economic good and the well—being of the country, and all sorts of other factors like mental health and so on, people do need to be able to get oi'i on, people do need to be able to get on and live a life more normally so the government, his rhetoric for about living without fear makes sense in many ways, but at the same time it doesn't correspond with what the government is saying. telling people to wear masks in more and more situations i don't think that means it's safer it's that's why you should not live without you but it's counterintuitive to say that and everyone is walking around as if they are walking disease and then to

say