well have more, after the break. this is bbc news. headlines and all the main stories for you top of the hour, straight after this programme stop. hello. if you really want to know how much power our newspapers have, you need to go to the top. and on today's media show we're with a man who's been at the heart of fleet street for decades. john witherow is one of the longest—serving national newspaper editors — first at the sunday times, and now the times. under him, those papers have exposed cash for honors, corruption of oxfam,

abused that brought at rotheram and much more. so at a time when the prime minister is fighting for his political life after a series of scoops that could still bring him down, what does the editor of the times make of it all and how does he explain the relationship towards the press and the people in power? and with first a new radio station, times radio and now an upcoming tv station, is the organisation he leads set on taking down the bbc? john witherow, welcome to the the media show — for the first time. and i'd like to get a sense from you, as we start about your media habits. what do you listen to in the morning? i imagine you were once fully a today programme person but now you are loyal to times radio? no, i listen to the today programme and times radio. because it's important to see what both are doing. and what about tv, your news channel choice? generally, the bbc but i admire itm as well. and do you still read physical newspapers or are you now an app devotee? i am a bit of both. i do read print at home, a few

newspapers in print but that i read the rest digitally. let's start, let's turn to how you ended up as one of the most seniorfigures in fleet street. you were born in south africa and moved to the uk as a child. what was it that drove you to become a journalist in the first place? well, when i was 19, i went to what was then southwest africa to work as a volunteer teacher. i was meant to go up to the border — angola but the authorities then were south africa, they governed southwest africa, now namibia. so i couldn't go up and teach there so i set up a library in the capital. while i was there one of the people i was working with got expelled by the south africans. and he was a stringer for the bbc world service and bbc africa service. hejust handed it to me. i knew nothing about journalism. the only thing i knew was what my father told me, dog bites man is not a story, man bites dogs is a story. i had to learn very

fast doing broad casts, i think i was terrible, they were really nice at the world service and they encouraged me and so i did a series of interviews and told them what was going on in southwest africa, which was a really interesting time. because as i say, it was apartheid on steroids. it had a large africana and german population who were very hard line. it was a very difficult time and the people i was working with, three of them got expelled, two of them were put under arrest in south africa. so we were seen as a kind of hot bed of anti—apartheid. but it was a really fast learning curve and that's when i really got the bug. and from the beginning of your career and then from there, you focused on foreign reporting. you covered the iranian embassy siege in your first week, i think. then the iran, iraq and falklands wars. is a foreign news really where your heart lies? no, it was then. by the way, i was a terrible war reporter. why? but i seemed to be sent

to all these wars. what made you a terrible war reporter? i tried to cover the wars in a kind of objective way, particularly the falklands. max hastings was there and he understood no, you had to do it in the way the british want to read about it. i was still applying old reuters rules which is nonsense. you had to cover it fairly. and max hastings outgunned all of us then. so it was a fantastic experience. then i did. i got better at it. but i wasn't a natural war reporter like anthony loyd, who we have now who is totally outstanding. or marie colvin, who of course, got killed a decade ago. a decade this month. but i liked foreign news because i did start out at reuters and worked in madrid for about a year. but once i came... i was on the foreign desk at the sunday times for quite a while but then i moved onto home news with all—news interests me but foreign is obviously very important. you're clearly a natural at being the editor, you've been the editor

for the sunday times from 1995 then the times in 2013, how would you describe your editor style? pretty direct. i hope that i give clear direction. i thought it was very important at the times that we had to take a much more constructive attitude towards news. one thing i've seen over the years is that you read the media, newspapers in particular and they portray a very negative image of what's going on in the world. so the people, i think there is one of the reasons is less trust because people look at their own lives and see generally things are getting better, and i mean a generalisation, things are getting better but that's not what they see in the media where everything looks like it's going to hell in a hand cart. i think it's important that the times starts doing more constructive news. journalists will often have a story that's 80% positive and 20% negative.

and the kneejerk reaction of a journalist, probably including me at one state is you go to the negative because it gives you a better headline. but in fact, the story is generally positive. we want to turn that around and make news reflect the world more accurately because the world is getting better. people are living longer, disease is in retreat, violence is down over the decades but people don't realise that. if you read the newspaper you think everything is getting worse, it's not. and we want to change our direction. and in terms of how far you would push yourjournalists to bring in stories, people told me that you rule by fear and they're afraid of you. well, they shouldn't... i've heard that i don't believe it. they shouldn't be, i don't think i'm a fearful person at all. i believe in being direct with people. is it your way of ensuring that yourjournalists bring in scoops, you need to put pressure on them. yeah, i think everybody needs scoops, exclusives are central to all publications.

without them, you're just reporting the mass out there. we have to differentiate ourselves. what we see on digital is that when you have exclusives, people really engage much more and admire the paper doing for that. we've had a string of real exclusives over the years and that's what people remember. they don't remember the day to day run—of—the—mill stuff. they admire the times if it covers something like covid thoroughly and responsibly which i think we have done. but you need scoops to lift yourself above the run—of—the—mill. i guess when it comes to scoops, right now, the biggest scoops are all around politics, or more specifically politics and parties during covid lockdown. i'm sure the audience will be interested to know, what is your relationship with borisjohnson? i notice that you had him on times radio, the first interview with the prime minister that morning. yes, that was great to get. we have contact with him. i don't think he's a particular admirer of the times, we've been pretty critical.

i think boris was a great campaigner, i'm not sure he's a great governor. and you see what's happening now, evidence of the chaos in downing street which he's trying to sort out. he is, of course, in considerable personal danger of remaining prime minister and we will have to wait and see how that plays out. is it right that you play tennis with borisjohnson and other members of the family? i think i've only played once with boris but i played with his brotherjoe and his sister rachel. any good? yeah, they're good. you? adequate. when did you last visit downing street? a couple of months ago, i think. does it happen often? no. how often? not very often. maybe a couple of times a year, i might speak to him and other ministers on the phone. and is that fairly common? how often would an editor of the times, someone with good

connection speak to the prime minister on the phone? not very often, it depends on what comes up. sometimes he's complaining. other times he wants us to tell him what's going on. what's useful about speaking to the prime minister and other politicians, is not really what they tell you because you discover they're telling exactly the same on the bbc the next day. it's really what's on their mind, their preoccupations. and you learn from the subject they raise what's really concerning them. and that's quite valuable. the information you get from them isn't. what does he ring to complain about? famously, we did a story saying he was going to get rid of his dog. which i think might have been planted by dominic cummings who wanted to get rid of the dog. this greatly upset the prime minister and carrie and he rang up to complain about that story of all things. anything more serious that he complains about? sometimes coverage, really, it's more nonspecific. and when the prime minister calls, do you feel under pressure, it's the prime minister, does it impact what you do? no. and do you speak to him more than you spoke

to other prime ministers, teresa may for example? no, about the same. under your watch, sunday times broke the story with cash for honours story with allegations of donors to political parties being rewarded. there've been many scoops since. why didn't you break partygate? would've loved to. it was a good scoop, that one. lots of stories i would love to have broken. i think the fte, cameron greensill, was a very good story. it's interesting because pa rtygate, very few journalists, lots of parties going on a very few journalist knew about it. you had it on your lap in a sense because on saturday, 20th 2020 the times published the story of the political editor, the policy editor and said borisjohnson celebrated his 56th birthday yesterday with a small gathering in the cabinet room, rishi sunak and a group of aides sang him happy birthday before they tucked into a unionjack cake. so back then, you had what then became a huge story, how could you print it without realising it was incendiary?

we missed it. what you think about that now? it's embarrassing. had you heard about parties at downing street before the mirror and itv published their scoops? no, apart from that when you mention. in that sense, you've heard of it but not recognised it as a party. i don't think we put it together, at that time that it was clashing at that time exactly with the instructions of the government. i think that's what happened, that's why we didn't spot it. others did. and when you saw the video, when you saw it emerging, i always ask people how they feel when someone else gets the scoop. how did it feel? oh, sick. clearly, these revelations have been damaging for the prime minister, whether terminal is stil up in the air. do you think he will be prime minister by the end of the year? it's really hard to predict that. he is a survivor. i happen to know david cameron has a bet on it, an expensive dinner that boris will

survive the year. so the former prime minister thinks that. a bet with who? i don't know. not with you? no. it's really hard to predict at this stage how the police inquiry will go and what the sue gray report will actually say. and how the party feels, i think his greatest advantage iss, they can't agree on who will succeed him. he is a fighter. i don't think you give up easily. i guess our audience will be very interested in how powerful is the times, if you wanted to could you bring borisjohnson down? only through a story that was shocking and that people thought was absolutely unacceptable. you couldn't do it any other way. if we were campaigning that he should go, i don't think that would make any difference, for example. it's the actual stories that change public opinion and the tory party views. could it also be more subtle than that?

if you decided for example, if you backed rishi sunak tomorrow and you did it subtly, so you just started writing articles that painted him in a positive light. do you think that that would swing it? no. and would you do that? no, not at this stage. there could be a stage where you might switch allegiance? yeah, maybe. what would it take? i don't know, we have to see. do you plan to do it anytime soon? we will have to see. interesting, interesting. do you think papers can do that, can bring people down? it used to be the case that that was an understanding, that newspapers could if they chose to bring down politicians. stories can. i don't think a paper like the times can because we don't campaign overtly, we don't roll against a politician. you may find a paper like the mail or the sun can be much more vehement and vitriolic against a leader than we can. i think our readers like that and they want us to present

the news, for them to make up their own minds not for us to tell them what to think. you have a columnist, james forsyth whose wife allegra stratton was central in the partygate story early on, just to remind the audience, she was downing street press secretary and she resigned after a leaked video showing her being asked about a now infamous cheese and wine event during lockdown. what conversations were you having with him at the time and was it uncomfortable for you both that he was a personally involved in the story? i think was very upsetting for him what happened to her, she was clearly very upset. but the strength of james is notjust through allegra but through other sources. he has amazing contacts in government. he can tell readers what he thinks is going on and the general drift of the party, what ministers say. they'll talk to him extensively off the record. and is very cosy with rishi sunak. and he's closely linked with rishi sunak. he has a real insight, it's important papers give the readers a sense of what's happening through somebody who is incredibly well—connected. do you think that the story,

partygate, what happened to his wife, has it changed his attitude to the government and the way he writes about them? i don't know, i haven't asked him that. we've talked about the revolving door between the press and politicians. his new director of communications who worked for a time here 20 15 for uk for that, is there something uncomfortably cosy about the relationship between the press and politicians? the, there is source of information to journalists which is valuable. because ministers wants to stay clear of — special advisers, that's useful. it seemed director of communications, if they are good are also valuable i don't think it's corrupting in any way or distorting.

obviously, they're pushing a message, it's thejob of journalists to discern that and try and find the path through it to get to the truth. generally, they're pretty valuable, i'd say. but when a journalist or director of communications comes to work for a newspaper, presumably the newspaper is buying something from them, expertise, is it more than that, the access to power? maybe but it's pretty transient as people move on. if you hire them as a journalist you're hiring them for their skills as a journalist, not necessarily for context they have. if you are not hiring them as a journalist that's different? yeah. obviously, everyone would understand that everyone needs sources at the heart of government. that's what you're talking about how much of a mouthpiece are you going to be, would you be happy for somebody, one of your journalists to be printing verbatim for something dominic cummings was telling them? well, dominic cummings tells everybody what he thinks. and a lot gets printed verbatim. if you are getting good information on what's going on inside number

ten, that's valuable. and you would report it, it would have cummings�* influence on it. but if he was telling you what was happening, that's very useful. you allow readers to balance that against other things. other sources say that's not true, that's not how it is, it's different. so you do it in the round. i suppose part of the problem is when he was at the heart of downing street he wasn't being quoted. he wasn't being quoted, but he was providing information. i'd like to turn to the broader question of rupert murdoch's influence of the british media. the culture secretary is changing existing legislation to allow your boss to interfere in the times and the sunday times. nadine dorries says it's not in murdoch's financial interest to do so — can you just explain why it wouldn't be? yeah, that's not true what you described. just to explain, the undertaking, when

he bought the titles in 1981 he gave undertakings the two titles that would remain separate. there was a real interest then that without digital media that we needed a plurality of opinions. and they didn't want the times and sunday times to merge. that's what's existed for a0 years. the anomaly was, this was a 20th—century decision that doesn't apply to the digital age, 21st century. the fact that a government could have some say on a free press is an anomaly. i think the department of culture, media and sport accepted that, that we should not be involved, you look after your own business, you have a level playing field with the other publishers so you are treated the same. so they've agreed to these undertakings to be removed from their influence. but the undertakings remain, they are being put into our employment contracts and we are going to continue to have independent directors. it's exactly the same set up that with employment law governing it rather than the government. so the times and the sunday times will remain separate? they'll remain separate

in terms of editors, in key areas. we've already started merging parts of it. a lot of readers now read us seven days, we're trying to do that to avoid duplication and that would were made on thing so we don't repeat stories or cover the same ground. it's just sensible. scenarios like sports and features where we agree on things. there will be people who say nadine doris is wrong, they'll argue that rupert murdoch already meddles in our democracy and this decision could give him more power to do so. that's not true. you need to remember, with the wapping revolution, murdoch essentially saved the press, it enabled the other titles to become much successful, for that enabled the sunday times to become multi—section and all newspapers to flourish. it was a very positive thing. it wasn't written like that at the time. some people will disagree with you. the print unions had their boot on our

throats at the time. and that got rid of it and all the others followed suit. the fact is, he doesn't interfere, he doesn't interfere in the times or the sunday times ever since i've been there. so he doesn't get on the phone and talk to you about stories that are in the papers or... no, he'll ask what's going on and what's happening in government and general things. he doesn't interfere. i give you a good example, one of the most important decisions that this country has taken in the century was brexit. rupert murdoch was pro—brexit and indeed the sun was. but the times was pro remain, sceptically pro remain but it argued that it was better to remain for economic reasons and better to be inside the tent than outside. did he get onto the phone about that? he accepted it. i said most of our readers are pro remain, most of the staff are pro remain and we need to reflect

what we instinctively think is right. do you tailor it all stories to his case, is there any pressure on that front even if it's not coming from them to feel that you want to please the proprietor? no, no not at all. what's your personal relationship with rupert murdoch, what's he like is an individual? he's kind of a mixture of a businessman and he has a strong journalistic trait. he is very curious about things. his father was an editor and a fine journalist in the gallipoli campaign. a he's just curious, he asks questions a journalist would ask. his interest in politics, business, he's a bit of a political want, actually. i wonder how you managed to work with him for so long when other editors are coming on. i'm very lucky. one of the thing doing a few things i could do adequately is at it and i think he acknowledges that. i've been lucky that i've had the sunday times and then they times both financially successful. and the times is now. and it gives you an enormous amount of strength if the paper is successful, it takes the pressure off,

and management are much more positive in helping you, investing injournalism, investing in digital and all the key objectives. one of the ways he's characterised is as an outsider. i wonder, in a sense the establishment, you even play tennis with the prime minister but you like murdoch see yourself as an outsider, do you think that? i thinkjournal should be outsiders. we shouldn't be part of the establishment, we should always scrutinise and be critical when we think it's right. supportive if they do the right things but generally we are critics and that's the right thing. let's think now about some of the big debates that are threatening to fragment the establishment, the times has taken a campaigning agenda particularly with turner's column and also general news coverage — what is your take on that debate? it's an explosive topic as you know. and the line has always been, we are sympathetic obviously to trans people who are transitioning. and so we should be. what she's done is taken

on the militants, the people who self—declare themselves, in many cases, as women. and in janice�*s view, it's intruding on women's rights, when they appear in public laboratories and changing rooms and sports and this is right. i back her on that, i think it's the right approach. people get very, very angry about it. because those are quite controversial views for many, for some. certainly when people hear this there will be complaints that you said that. do you get a lot of complaints from readers and indeed from campaigners? we have, janice has had a lot of hostility. we think it's the right thing. i think the vast majority of our readers agree with that point of view. is that what they say to you? yes. we hear the terms culture wars bandied around about a lot. clearly the gender wars are tied up in that.

in your view, do the culture wars exist? yes, i think there is a generational gap going on. attitudes are changing. i was talking to a young man in his 20s who doesn't believe in a lot of these culture wars, and i said, why don't you go out there and say those things? he says i can't. i'll be cancelled. it's so intolerant. and that's one of the problems i think we face now, that we would as a newspaper encourage tolerance on all grounds. and yet this has become an extremely vitriolic debate which is very unwelcome, i think. you mention being cancelled, cancel culture, what's your take on that? for example like the jimmy carter —— jimmy carr story, when that story reported in the times, on the bbc, does a little part of you think, we are contributing to potentially cancelling someone or does it come into your mind are all? a little bit but i think you just report the stories and people make up their own mind.

i was going to ask you, how you see the times�* role in navigating all of this, navigating the culture wars. are you fighting culture wars are just reporting on them? we are reporting on them but when we comment or our columnists comment, they take up positions when in our reporting we should be as objective as possible. when it comes to gender do you believe that broadly you reflect a broad spectrum? because you are under fire as opposed to having janice turner, very big profile at the paper and people complain and say there's not enough of the other side? we do represent the other side. maybe not as much as janice, or as prominently. but she is taking on the militants. and as i say, our readers support that. we've attracted women readers from other publications because of janice�*s stance. you've been editor of the times for nine years, you were at the sunday times for 18 years before that, just turned 70, happy birthday. are you planning to retire anytime soon? not unless i'm retired. i love it.

any sign of that? i love it. it's an incredibly privileged job and every day is different. i come in with a spring in my step thinking, what can happen today and what will we report? i'm incredibly lucky to do thejob. how many more prime ministers do you think you'll see while you're editor? depends on how long boris stays. you're a giant on fleet street, what do you think your legacy will be? i hope we made the times and sunday times successful, financially stable with good journalists. we have incredibly talented journalists and they will survive for another 200 plus years. that's a key objective. we are just guardians of these titles and we have to establish them to be successful for the future. john witheroe, editor of the times, thank you so much forjoining us today. thank you very much. for now, thanks for watching, goodbye.

hello. sunday brought more squally winds, heavy flooding rain, and travel disruption as yet another named storm approached the uk, storm franklin. and by monday morning, some of its biggest impacts and disruption can already be felt in northern ireland. with a met office amber warning, some gusts of wind along the north coast in particular, up to around 80 mph. it's just squeezing the isobars around storm franklin, pushing very strong and gusty winds as well across many western coastal areas overnight and into the morning, so you can expect some disruption in the morning and, indeed, through a large part of the day — although the winds are going to be slowly easing. but this is where some of the gusts will be at into the morning, the strongest ones in through northern ireland, into western coastal areas but elsewhere, gusting widely 50—60 mph for a time. it's where temperatures will be first thing. now, overnight, wintry showers will be giving a covering of snow in parts of scotland, northern ireland and northern england, especially but not exclusively into the hills, and this area of mostly rain will clear its way southwards through wales and england by the end of the morning and actually, we're left

with increasing sunshine, the odd shower in northern scotland, along the north sea coast, but many places in the afternoon will be dry with sunny spells — and these are the afternoon wind gusts by about four o'clock, so notice how much they've come down — so the winds — the strongest winds are going to be easing and by the end of the afternoon, it may not feel too bad out there with temperatures in double figures. but again, that destruction we'll have after the stormy start may well continue after once those strongest winds have eased. a chilly start on monday night. cloud and patchy rain spreading east, some heavier rain, then, putting on towards scotland and northern ireland as tuesday begins with the winds picking up again and gales developing in places but, from tuesday onwards, although it will be windy at times, the winds are not expected to be as extreme and severe as they've been. we'll see this cold front, though, moving southwards on tuesday with an area of rain. a few wintry showers following on behind. and notice after initially the rain's quite heavy through parts of northern england and wales, too, it does weaken as it reaches eastern and south east england later in the day. now, behind that, we have the sunshine, the showers again turning wintry, particularly onto the hills of northern britain. these are tuesday's temperatures.

now, by wednesday, there'll be another weather front moving into northern areas. a chilly start to the south. it will be cold across all parts on thursday with wintry showers around. it looks like a fine day to friday before low pressure moves back in at the weekend.

this is bbc news. i'm david eades with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. a diplomatic push to avoid war in ukraine as the us and russian presidents degree they will hold a summit on the deepening crisis. queen elizabeth test positive to covid—19, buckingham palace is she is experiencing mild symptoms. australia opens its borders to fully vaccinated travellers for the first time in almost two years. an american ultra— runner breaks her own endurance record winning the usa track and field 100—mile championship in nevada. after 16 days of competition the winter olympics come to a spectacular close, in

beijing.