a lawyer says a man jailed for the murder of milly dowler has admitted killing lin russell and her daughter, megan, in 1996. paul bacon says a statement from levi bellfield includes details of how he claims to have carried out the attack in kent. the business secretary urges tory mps to give the prime minister "time and space", as a former conservative leader says boris johnson faces a "very difficult task" to win back the public�*s trust. the chairman of tesco has told the bbc "the worst is yet to come" on food prices for consumers. john allan also said it was "wrong" for the governor of the bank of england to call for pay restraint, as part of efforts to keep inflation under control. and india begins two days of mourning, as one of the country's most famous singers, lata mungeshker, dies aged 92.

ok, now on bbc news, it's time for the media show. hello, i'm ros atkins. welcome to this week's media show. we're going to talk about bbc three because it's back as a linear television channel, six years after the bbc decided it shouldn't be one of those. and we'll talk about spotify and joe rogan. he's in the middle of a storm over covid misinformation that may have been on his podcast, and some people are saying, "should spotify really be funding content like that?" we will get into all of the issues that raises. let me introduce you to our guests. we have elizabeth dwoskin, silicon valley correspondent at the washington post, jake kanter, media correspondent at the times, rosanna pound—woods, who's a producer of the catch up on bbc three, and batya ungar—sargon, deputy opinion editor on newsweek.

and, batya, i wonder — you commission lots of opinion pieces. will you be commissioning something onjoe rogan? yeah, absolutely. so at newsweek, we really try to represent the full breadth of opinion relevant to americans. and so we're going to have pieces on rogan from an independent media point of view, we're going to have pieces from that sort of disinformation point of view, we have pieces talking about how this story is about the culture wars, about the class wars, about the race wars, so really trying to get at that story from all points of view. we'll return to spotify and joe rogan in a moment, but let's, first of all, spend a bit of time closer to home because bbc three is back as a traditional tv channel. and its controller fiona campbell has been explaining why. so a channel is an additional signal.

it's a really loud noise on which we can place our most successful shows and launch new talent from, it's the place from which we can shout and say, "this is the place for you." in one switch, you switch it on. you can relax and see your world and your struggles reflected. there is obviously evidence as well in the industry. enders have done some research, and nielsen in america have done some research, that shows that tv is still used for watching cable and free—to—air services. it is still a real moment. the bbc has gathered 5 million people to watch green planet live on bbc one. the apprentice is still a really big live viewing experience for young audiences. tv provides a moment for people to be together and to drive conversation, where people want to share things together at a specific moment in time. just look at strictly. jake kanter, media correspondent at the times, are you convinced? good afternoon. well, i think much like eating with my ex, which was a key show on relaunch night yesterday, there are some people who are quite happy to see an old flame and others who are less thrilled, i think. i think the first thing

to say is that its return is an acknowledgement from the bbc that taking it off air in 2016 was a huge mistake, and i'm not sure that bringing it back now will necessarily right that wrong for various reasons, because other services such as netflix have caught up and overtaken the bbc in some areas. but given the arguments that fiona campbell was making, if we accept that they are persuasive, why weren't they persuasive six years ago, when other people were making just the same arguments for not getting rid of it in the first place? well, i think what's changed between now and then is the bbc's realised that it's got an existential crisis in terms of young audiences, and this is its big play to try and win them back in some respects. now, you can talk about the mechanics of that and whether it will work or not. fiona herself — fiona campbell, the controller of bbc three — has talked about it enhancing the sort of content discovery ecosystem.

in other words, that means another screen through which young people can engage with bbc content and then hopefully that then points them back to iplayer, where there are recommended other shows that they may enjoy. but i think one of the big criticisms i've heard of this decision is that bbc three is coming back with a lower budget than when it went dark, and that, to some, is quite unpalatable. it shows for the people who believe in this that the bbc is not as committed to young audiences as it should be, and if it was committed to young audiences, it would restore the budget and increase it with inflation. elizabeth, let's bring you in here because you're the silicon valley correspondent for the washington post. i wonder what your thoughts are as you listen to jake and i discuss the bbc bringing back a linear tv channel. presumably, there would be some people in silicon valley who might raise an eyebrow at that. well, ithink, you know, i

in silicon valley right now, there's just an enormous . amount of experimentation on different content models. and certainly, you know, - we have traditional media still very much suffering being in the wake of streaming services _ and the proliferation i of streaming services. but also, you know, - the bbc is a huge brand. and when you're an enormous brand, a powerful brand, then _ you have the freedom to experiment. now, these powerful brands don't | always do so, and then they getl usurped and they end up following the startups. l but, you know, when you're i a powerful brand, you already have a huge audience, _ a built—in audience that may follow you to your next developments, i and you should capitalise on that. now, the bbc is no doubt a powerful brand, jake, but it's got less money and it's supposed to be saving money and closing services. we've heard from tim davie, the director—general, that some services will have to go. how does he square that declaration with bringing a service like this back? well, i don't think he does, really.

i think this is really awkwardly timed for the bbc. and that's not necessarily a problem of its own making, but, yes, you're completely right. the bbc hasjust had its licence fee frozen for the next two years, which will equate to a funding shortfall of around {1.4 billion over the next six years or so. and while doing that, it's saying that channels are going to come under threat, and it's doing that at the same time as launching a channel. so i think the timing is definitely awkward. but for the bbc's sake, i think supporters of the bbc have to keep in mind that the success of the organisation will rely on it attracting new audiences and therefore new generations of licence fee payers. and that's why this bbc three play is important to the future of the bbc. well, part of that play for younger audiences, jake, as you'll know,

is a new programme called the catch up on bbc three. it's a three—to—four—minute round up of the news. here's some of the first edition. next up, several conservative mps have told the bbc they're unsure whether or not to back the pm. it's after sue gray's initial report came out yesterday. you can see her here. she says that during the pandemic, there were failures of leadership and judgment and excessive drinking at number 10 and the cabinet office — that's where the pm's top team works. her full report will be released at a later stage. well, lead producer of the catch up is rosanna pound—woods, who's with us on the media show. now, rosanna, i know that before you even started putting a programme together, you did a lot of research about what younger people want from the news. i wonder what you found. yeah, we did. so we've got a really good team in the audiences section of the bbc who put together several focus groups for us. so they found real people from across the uk, and kind

of most importantly in that 16—to—21i—year—old age group, outside of london, outside of the sort of metropolitan elite bubble that i think is kind of, you know... that's what we're all seeing on our timelines, is a very certain type of person. they found us some real people and they did a lot of research and found that they wanted things explained to them in a slightly more...not a patronising way, but a slightly more simplified way and less assumption that they've been following ongoing stories and kind of, you know, more sense of content that's specifically for them. one quote that stood out was somebody saying that every time they tuned in to the normal news or, you know, the kind of typical news, they felt like they'd missed a million episodes since they last tuned in. and are there particular stories that they were saying they wanted you to cover, or to put it another way, subject areas they didn't want to hear about? so what was the most interesting, ifound, during the research is you would imagine that

a really easy way to attract young audiences would be, "let's put in lots of celebrity stories, let's put in lots of entertainment stories," and a lot of the feedback overwhelmingly was, "well, we've already heard about that on our social media." so if we've heard about that 12 hours ago, the bbc is not telling us anything new. we're not getting any extra value from a bulletin there." so if there's a reason to do an entertainment story — because it'sjust broken — great. but if it's old, why would we bother? whereas actually, a lot of young people are interested in hearing more about politics, international stories, a lot of hunger for more information on something like ukraine — the idea being that if you know about the news and you feel informed, you can feel kind of confident to explain to your friend or to a colleague and feel smarter. but here's my question, rosanna. if all of that is true and the bbc were to shape its news for this particular age group, as you've described, why would you then make a tv programme? why would you not make digital content that's placed exactly where we know people of that age are spending a lot of time?

so i think it comes into what you were saying before about the need for a linear channel and the audiences that that linear channel is helping to snag. and again, the research has found that there is an appetite out there for linear tv and sort of appointment to view tv. you know, people want to tune in every week for drag race or normal people or, you know, the latest fleabag episode. and actually, if you stick a four—minute bulletin in, just after that orjust before that, you're more likely to get people who wouldn't seek out news online. jake kanter, as you're listening to this, are you convinced? or do you think perhaps the news audience has moved away from tv while bbc three wasn't there? i find the arguments on the news bulletin absolutely fascinating, and i think... well, there's some evidence from last night to show that the research is correct, because if you look at drag race, which premiered last night — it's drag race vs the world — it did really well. it beat e4, which is a rival channel also targeted at young audiences, and 34%

of the viewers were 16—to—34. and when drag race was on bbc one, it was... well, it was on iplayer originally, but bbc one showed it as part of the strategy. only 2% of its audience were 16—to—34. so you can see right there that bbc three, a channel, a destination for young audiences, is immediately attracting more young audiences by its very nature, and therefore you would hope that they stumble across a news bulletin. and, of course, the work goes on, rosanna. when you finish speaking to us now, you're going straight back to producing this evening's bulletin. i wonder what's going to be in it. so some attempt to explain what levelling up means, perhaps without using the words "levelling up" or kind of sneaking them in there. but, you know, what's the money going to mean for different parts of england, mostly? and i think we're going to be taking a look at what's been happening

at raith rovers over the last 2a hours. we've sort of in the middle of the africa cup of nations semifinals. so we have to think very carefully about our audience on any given night, so that kind of plays into it heavily on story choices. well, thanks for speaking to us during a very busy week. we appreciate it. that's rosanna... thank you. ..pound—woods from the catch up, which you can see later on bbc three on the tv, which is somewhere it's not been for the last six years. well, that's the relaunch of bbc three as a linear tv channel, but let's turn now to what is definitely the biggest media squabble of the week. and surely this is the first time on the media show we've had a story with neil young, joni mitchell and one of the world's most popular podcast hosts, joe rogan. elizabeth dwoskin from the washington post, help me out on this. for people coming to the story fresh, what's happened in the last few days concerning those different characters? well, you have one of- the most popular podcasters in the united states — - i think he has an audience of 11 million — joe rogan. he leans conservative _ and to the right, and he has some controversial guests who are - very much out of mainstream thinking

and have said some very offensive lthings as well and also promotedl misinformation about covid. we can talk about what they've said, things like, guests have said... - ..a prominent anti—vaxxer who said that americans have been - "hypnotised" into wearing masks and are duped into— taking the vaccine. he himself has questioned - whether young people even need to take the vaccine and has said, "you don't need to take it..." . he doesn't think you need to take it if you've already had covid, - iwhich is not what medical expertsl said, and on and on and on and on. there's been tonnes i of offensive material... and he has put out a statement, which we'll hear in a minute. he's also insisted he's not anti—vax, butjust explain to us why concerns aboutjoe rogan and covid — which aren't new, they've been around for some time — why have they escalated in the last few days? well, they started escalating. actually a couple of weeks ago, when there was a letter from 250

concerned scientists, _ worried about rogan's comments. but then it really - took off when neil young, who has a history of standing up against large institutions - in the music industry, he said, "i'm going to pull my music. . "it's going to be me orjoe rogan." and then joni mitchell. followed him yesterday. the artist india.arie followed him. also a popular podcaster, - brene brown, said she would be no longer contributing episodes, so it really ballooned. _ and then internally as well, spotify's employee base, i which has long been in crisis over rogan, they're actually— having a town hall- right now over this issue. ok, and when neil young offered the option to spotify of "young or rogan" — as he put it — so far, spotify has chosen rogan. this is a man who's become a podcasting phenomenon. there are millions of downloads for every single podcast. he has millions of followers on social media, and let me give you an idea of what his podcasts are like.

sometimes the conversations can be very long, over three hours. here's a little of one with elon musk last year, which eventually drifted onto the question of the human race beyond earth. could you colonise the galaxy in a million years? absolutely. the entire galaxy. so you would start with mars, build bases on mars, then you'd use mars to jump off to all these other planets, set up places there, and over thousands of years, easily...? yeah. kind of like, you know, from one solar system to the next. and...yeah. that's something for us to consider. jake kanter, let's bring you in here, media correspondent at the times. can you explain to us why spotify, a business initially based around music streaming, would move so heavily into podcasting with an exclusive deal withjoe rogan? well, first and foremost, podcasting is absolutely booming at the moment. and joe rogan is perhaps spotify's biggest bet in this area. they've spent a reported $100 million tying him down

into an exclusive deal. and i think what it does is it speaks to the growing streaming wars in audio. ultimately, spotify has determined that exclusivity over rogan is more valuable than the music of neil young, and it's similar to what we've seen in television. television companies like netflix and disney are spending billions of dollars on original programming, exclusive shows that are going to bring audiences to their platform and make sure that they subscribe. we're seeing the same phenomenon in audio. and that's whyjoe rogan is so important to spotify, because he's like a beacon. he's a huge figure in this area. and is part of this as well, elizabeth, that despite the fact spotify is one of the most popular music streaming services in the world, it still struggles

to make money off streaming music? exactly, and as it's been said, the revenues... i spotify went public in 2018 and essentially is trying. to transform itself from a music - streaming company into a publisher. they're a media company. it's the same way when the - washington post produces a podcast. you know, we edit the content, i we have control over the content because it's associated with our brand. - it's our podcast. so this is a big transition, - basically from being a platform to being a straight up media . company, and with that comes lots of responsibilities. also, there is revenue there. right now, advertising revenue is a really small portion - of spotify's revenue. they make only about 15%. they make much more from subscriptions. - but when you look at the kind of ad prices that ads in an exclusive - podcast can generate, _ you start to understand also why they're going into it, i not just differentiation, because streaming... any artist can stream i in ten different places,

so there's no differentiation in streaming — why it's - hard to make money. so you make these exclusive deals with these really popular— podcasters who are only going to host their- content on your service. and because of that, you can command really high ad prices, _ and they're staking their future on all of that. _ so you get the money in return. but as you say, with that comes responsibilities. let's speak about that with marianna spring, bbc news's disinformation reporter, because, marianna, joe rogan has been accused of a range of things when it comes to covid misinformation. just guide us through some of the areas he's got involved in. i think one of the biggest concerns when it comes to... sorry, i've got a very croaky throat. one of the biggest concerns when it comes to rogan's podcast has actually been the fringe guests that he has featuring on the programmes, and that they in many ways become a gateway into more extreme ways of thinking and more conspiratorial mentalities. most recently, he had quite

a prominent anti—vax influencer who has promoted a number of false claims about the vaccine, essentially suggesting people shouldn't have it or that it's causing harm. and one worry is that people tuning into rogan's podcast — which is conversational, like you say, which is chatty, which they might find more accessible and more interesting than a lot of the accurate and slightly more boring information from scientists and trusted experts — they'll listen to it, and then they'll go and follow up. they'll google this anti—vax influencer, and so they quickly find themselves brought into more extreme worldviews. it's been the same when it's come to all kinds of different topics from kind of far—right influencers, so to speak, or those who have promoted incel—like beliefs as well about women and so on. and rogan's approach to this is, "i'm just asking questions, i just want to understand what different people think," but it risks pushing people towards these extremes that they otherwise wouldn't have been aware of. and i guess that taps in,

doesn't it, to the fact there are two interesting questions here? one is, should these people even be on his podcast in the first place? but the second is, if they're going to be there, how does he handle what they say? now, batya from newsweek, i definitely want to ask you about that. before we do, though, here's a little of a post that joe rogan put on instagram a few days into this story. one of the things that spotify wants to do that i agree with is that, at the beginning of these controversial podcasts, like specifically ones about covid, is to put a disclaimer and say that you should speak with your physician and that these people and the opinions that they express are contrary to the opinions of the consensus of experts, which i think is very important. sure, have that on there. i'm very happy with that. also, i think if there's anything that i've done that i could do better is have more experts with differing opinions right after i have the controversial ones.

i would most certainly be open to doing that. batya ungar—sargon from newsweek, is that good enough for you? well, ijust have to correct a little bit of the disinformation that we've just heard. joe rogan is not a conservative, he's a liberal. he voted for bernie sanders and supports legalisation of marijuana. so i don't know what kind of conservative that is, but he's to the left of the majority of the american people. also, he's never, to my knowledge, had an incel on his show. a lot of the people he has on are actually people who were very respected in the medical field until they fell afoul of the reigning orthodoxy about covid. and what you have on the mainstream media is things like people who are redefining what science is and what the scientific method is, to mean that you can't change when they themselves are changing their minds from week to week. but hold on... let me just give you one example, ok? people who said that cloth masks don't work two years ago had their accounts removed from social media.

now that is the consensus of experts, because that is how science works. you float ideas, you question them, you try them, and then you change your mind about them. that is literally the definition of the scientific method. and that is what has been, under the definition of disinformation, literally, science has been sort of legislated out of social media. but isn't the point that there is information being shared via joe rogan's podcast, which he doesn't label or challenge in any way as not being backed up by the current evidence that's available? and that's not helpful, is it? what does that even mean? he's an entertainer. he's there, giving an alternative point of view, and the entire mainstream liberal media is giving the same view that gets disproven week after week. so that's interesting. so you're comfortable with the idea of him as an entertainer, talking with a doctor who's completely out of sync with current scientific evidence, and if they're saying things which are not backed up by evidence, that's fine? but a lot of them have been proven to be right over time.

that's what i feel like nobody is acknowledging, is the fact that all of these things that we were told are true are no longer true. that is a real problem because science, as we know, develops. now, i would just say, i don't think that this is about politics or science, i think this is about class. it's about the fact that the liberal mainstream media is catering, like the democratic party, increasingly to the pyjama set, the people who have white collar jobs who can work from home, and joe rogan is producing content for people who want to see their own scepticism reflected in what he's saying. they're not going to him for medical advice, they're going to him to hear how other people think. now there are two separate points there, though. there'sjoe rogan speaking very effectively to a section of americans that you don't feel is catered to by other sections of the media. but then there's the other issue of, "well, how does he handle people coming onto his podcast and saying things that are not rooted in available scientific evidence?" marianna spring, let's bring you... how come nobody's asking cnn that? well, believe me, we do ask them those questions. but, marianna, i'm interested to know, how do we assess...? how do you assess when something can

be stated as being categorically wrong or where something is stated as being unknown? often, what we find is that comments can be made that are misleading, for example, or something that is in part true will be misused to then propagate something that's false. so, for instance, there have been a number of false claims about fertility — the suggestion that the vaccine will somehow make you infertile when there's just a total lack of scientific evidence. and, actually, all kinds of doctors and experts on this topic would say they don't even understand by what biological mechanism that could happen. so what we often find is that there is a lack of evidence to back up some claims and that something that is true in isolation will be used to push false claims about the vaccine, for example. and we often see that in discussions like on podcasts, where people will go back and forth, they will be trying to understand someone else�*s perspective, and it spirals and spirals.

and briefly, elizabeth, finally, do you think that technology companies, which is what they were initially, like spotify, are geared up to handle these editorial challenges? of course they should be. spotify isn't just a technology i company, it's a media company. and, yes, that's what its actual employees have been asking. since the minute that they signed the deal with rogan in 2020. - its entire employee base said, "well, let'sjust develop somej editorial control now that - we're in the podcast business, just the way any other company — like the bbc or the washington i post — that's in the podcast business does it." - i've got to exert a little bit of controljust on this programme — because we're completely out of time. it's been fascinating talking with all of you. thank you very much, elizabeth dwoskin, jake kanter, batya ungar—sargon, marianna spring and, earlier, rosanna pound—woods. and from me and all of the media show team, bye—bye.

hello. a quieter night ahead as most of the showers fade away, including the show showers which you been affecting parts of scotland in northern linn. the strong as winds will ease too. for many, clear skies —— northern england. not so culture must —— culture western areas. many was he temperatures at or below freezing, so it is a cold, frosty start to the new week, lots of sunshine, but it won't last long. this band of rain and drizzle will work for eastwards through the day was to the main areas of drizzle, northern and western areas, winds not as high as they have been, but still quite dusty in northern and western scotland. it will be a mild start today after that cold and frosty start, with temperature is up to around ten or ii celsius. and actually, for the week ahead, southern areas old onto those milder conditions, but things turned colder

in the north. chance of snow at times and scotland.

this is bbc news for viewers in the uk and around the world. i'm ben mundy. the headlines... the queen celebrates 70 years on the throne and marks the occasion by saying that when prince charles succeeds her, camilla should become queen consort. a lawyer says levi bellfield, who was jailed for murdering millie dowler, has now admitted carrying out a double murder another man was jailed for. india mourns the loss of lata mangeshkar, the legendary singer who made her name in bollywood. she's died at the age of 92. countdown to kick—off in cameroon — egypt take on senegal in the final of the africa cup of nations in underan hour. and is it the end for erinsborough? the future of the long—running australian soap neighbours

is in doubt after it's dropped by its uk tv channel.