this is bbc news. the headlines and all the other main news stories for you at the top of the hour, straight after this programme. hello — how should journalists cover climate protests? the climate conference, cop27, ended this week. but you might have seen more about the activists who threw oil on a gustav klimt painting in vienna or the protesters who brought the m25 to a standstill. in an era of apparently increasing action, what's the media's role? and by giving the latest stunt publicity, is it

fanning the flames? i'm joined by cameron ford, who's a carpenter and spokesperson for insulate britain. and richard felgate, a documentary maker who was arrested last week while filming at hejust stop oil protest. also here, wolfgang blau, who left his top job at conde nast and co—founded the oxford climate journalism network. danny shaw, who used to be a bbc home affairs correspondent. he's now free to say what he really thinks. and fiona harvey, the guardian's environment correspondent who is at cop27 in egypt and hasjust left a session to get on the phone to talk to us. fiona, what's the mood amongstjournalists? have your stories been cutting through on the front pages this week? well, the mood is pretty grim here, actually. last week, we had the world leaders arrive, there was great fanfare, they had great things to say, it was all hugely interesting. what's happening now is that it's a lot of men in suits gathered in windowless rooms, just pouring over pages of text, deciding what to do about a semicolon here and a phrase there.

it'sjust a grind now, these negotiations. and what does it mean for whether the stories are getting out then? well, for the guardian, we have a commitment to put the climate crisis on the front page of our website every day, and we also cover it very deeply in print. so we're still covering it, we're still here and writing a lot, but i think for my colleagues in other newspapers it's very, very difficult. 0k, well, we'll come back to you in a bit, fiona. but let's talk first about what happened last week, the arrest of three members of the media alongside protesters by hertfordshire police on the m25. the media three were later released without charge. yesterday, the national union ofjournalists joined civil rights groups to call for an independent review into police powers and the public order bill which is currently going through parliament. rich felgate, you were one of those arrested from the media. what's the latest? have the police apologised to you? i'm still waiting for an apology.

0k... are you expecting one? we'll see. we will see. just to recap, so you were filming on a footbridge opposite the gantry where the protesters were. what happened ? why were you arrested? yeah, so i was filming in a public space away from where the protest was actually happening on the gantry, and as soon as police arrived and closed the road then i heard them point up to the bridge and say "detain them," directed at me and another press photographer that was there. and straightaway, they came up to us and just put handcuffs on us. no interaction or discussion about what we were doing, they weren't interested in seeing press cards. just straightaway trying to get us out of the area and stop what we were doing. and how long were you held? about 13 hours. 0k, and then released without charge, as i said.

how did you know to be on that footbridge at the time? i mean, had you been tipped off that this protest was going to happen? yeah, sojournalists have sources, otherwise we wouldn't know about these protests. and were you surprised by being arrested? i mean, did it feel unusual? so this is the second time i've been arrested whilst filming a just stop oil protest. so frankly, i wasn't surprised at all. 0k. it feels like where there's so much media attention around thejust stop oil protests and that perhaps there's this trend of arresting journalists at the moment, it feels like this is almost a tactic by the police to make the protests less effective. we've heard the hertfordshire police and crime commissioner say... criticising the media for kind of giving the protests oxygen... yeah, i was going

to come onto that. and i'd like to say, the national police chiefs�* council of course said journalists have a right to report on any form of protest, so they were taking a slightly different view from that. but do you think the lines are a bit more blurred in that kind ofjournalism, rather than other more traditional types of journalism? well, we're documentary film—making, and especially this kind of style of long—term following the people involved and kind of getting deeper into the story, it's essential to not only report on the scene but to build trust, gain access to be able to tell such a close story. and i think it'sjust an essential part of a kind of wider ecosystem of reporting. it's only possible to kind of really authentically portray what these protesters are doing and why they're doing it and how they're doing it with film—makers who are using this kind of medium of spending

time with them, getting closer to what they are doing. i suppose, is it difficult, do you think, for the police to tell the difference between a protester and a journalist these days? when everyone has cameras, everybody has phones, it's difficult to tell who is a journalist who is not? all they have to do is ask. which they didn't do, you say? is that right? they didn't. right, 0k. you know, let me bring in someone who actually takes part in this kind of protest. cameron ford is from insulate britain. let me just play you a clip you might have already heard of him on talk radio with mike graham from last year. what you do for living, cameron? i'm a carpenter. carpenter, right. so how safe is that for the climate? well, i work with timber, which is a much more sustainable material, rather than concrete. i also... but you work with trees that have been cut down then, don't you? it's a sustainable building practice. how is it sustainable

if you're killing trees? because it's regenerative, you can grow trees. right. well, you can grow all sorts of things, can't you? well, you can't grow concrete. you can. see you, cameron. cheerio. well, that is the interview, but after the broadcast it got many millions of views on social media — and continues to. cameron, when you hear that again, what do you think? what a shame that we have to endure such idiocy in our media spaces. it really is crazy he still has a platform, really. is that how you see it? i mean, do you think, despite the way the interview went, would that be counted as ultimately a successful media appearance for you? what is your rationale when you decide who to do an interview with? yeah, i mean, off the back of that, i think a lot of people realised what we're up against. he clearly had his agenda for how he wanted the interview

to go, just drilling into what i do for a living. i can only imagine the sort ofjobs or not—jobs that he was hoping that i had that he could pick me apart for. so it did shine a light on what we are up against, and they will just say whatever they want to to undermine us, belittle us and not really open up an actual conversation about, you know, why we do such things. i mean, there's certainly a sense that, i don't know, some people are potentially looking for a reaction and it perhaps seemed to make good television. i mean, in september, piers morgan ate a big mac in front of a vegan activist. i've watched you on gb news get drawn into shouting matches with laurence fox. why do these interviews? i mean, if we only take the guardian interviews and we're on page one of the guardian, it's not going to cut it, we're not going to change public perception on the most existential crisis that we've ever faced as a civilisation.

it's mega. and if we just allow these shock—jock right—wing broadcasters to just sort of belittle the crisis, which they do in every single way that they can, in all of their shows, with all their presenters. some of them are just atrocious, and clearly paid for by the fossil fuel industry. although, i suppose, some of them are also pushing a point, which is by doing these protests, there were people who missed their father's funeral or who didn't get to their cancer appointment. they are putting the side of, you know, many people in britain who feel, yes, they may be in favour of sorting out the climate, but they're also thinking that this isn't the right way to do it. sure. i mean, that's the only side that i've ever heard them want to talk about when i've gone into these spaces.

i mean, that we can talk about for maybe a minute, and if they want to drill down we can explain why we're using these tactics. the concept of the radical flank and that, actually, by being disruptive and more visceral like we are, broader movements that want the same thing, other movements like greenpeace or the green party, gain popularity. and so there is a lot of social science behind why we do what we do. but we never really get to talk about that. and clearly your clip went viral, lots of clips around this do go viral. do you get a sense, i don't know, are you conscious when you go onto these programmes? do you get a feeling that actually the aim is to wind you up so that they will get something to go viral? is that how you perceive it? i don't know. i think i'm a bit ofan optimist. i think each time ijust hope we will have an actual conversation. and that there is potential

for that in all of these. they are human, they have got deep down they have fear too about our planet changing with the climate so rapidly. and they have children and loved ones. and i know that even though their whole angle is to anger, they are also human beings who have got complex emotions around this really tricky situation we find ourselves in. and genuinely, i want to open that up with them. well, i've got wolfgang blau in the studio here. cameron's interview went viral and now that clip has an advert on it which presumably makes money. is the current vogue for direct action, actually good business for the media industry? media likes events, and that is a big challenge for all climate journalism. when you ask a typical news desk editor who decides what to put

on air or what to put on the front page of still printing, what are the filters? how do you pick this topic are not this? initially they were just brush you off and say it needs to be relevant, but when you spend time with them they say it needs to be new, it needs to be close to where my audience lives, and ideally if there is an event or person angle, it is easier to get it on the news. it needs to be simple. so these kind of protests deliver an event, and you see the same in how the news media covers cop. now we are in the nitty—gritty of week two and discussing formulations, and now you see an increasing number of stories about the food at cop or the sewage spills, any little event only to not look at something that is much more complex. i think news media in general is better at covering events then covering processes, so events or stunts are easier

to cover byjournalists, especially if they have very little actual climate knowledge. i would like to bring in danny at this point. interesting, obviously we were talking earlier about whether or not the lines are blurred betweenjournalism and activism these days, butjust the specific one, if a journalist has knowledge of a protest that is likely to be against the law, what obligation do they have to call the police? i don't think they have got an obligation to i call the police. they are there to report what is going on, and if they get . a tip off which means - they are in the position ahead of the protest or ahead | of the event, then good luck to them. that is a journalist - using their sources well and being ahead of the game. i think what happened i to the three journalists being arrested by hertfordshire police was frankly a disgrace. l and, you know, it was a bad day for policing i when that happened. we have seen it happen occasionally at protests| before, but for three -

journalists to be arrested by one police force does indicate that somethingl was going wrong systemically. and can you see how it happens? can you see how in the days where it used to be the case thatjournalists, all broadcast journalists, carried cameras and nobody else did, now everyone has a camera. richard was talking about, they didn't even ask. they would have been able to tell he was a journalist if they had his business card sort of thing. it doesn't make sense at all. it is so easy. there is this system by which reporters, i journalists, news carriers carry a uk press card, . it is accredited, it has- the national police chiefs' council on the back of it. it actually says that it. is recognised by them, there is a hotline number to call to verify the press card. here is my press card right here, it says - the national police chiefs' .

council recognise the holder of this card as a bona fides news gatherer. | it has the number to call if you need verification. i it has got security features. all they needed to do - was to ask those people do you have a press card, and there is, you can. solve the situation. no need to arrest them or takej them into custody or whatever. and that is often what happens. journalists going around, reporting on things, - coming into contact with - the police, and they are asked to show their press card. so this, to me, suggests that. some kind of directive had gone out from hertfordshire police or a directive to kind of get. tough on protesters had been misinterpreted by someone . in the chain of command and they didn't care - what anyone said and they were just scooping people up- and then holding them in custody for hours, l which isjust, frankly, l adding insult to injury. and the national police chiefs' council, they have said that journalists have a right to report any form of protest and that it is very

regrettable that journalists were caught up in it. all protests, they say, come with an enormous amount of pressure for policing, butjournalist should not be prevented from doing theirjobs. there are guidelines, - absolutely in black and white, reporting as part of the media's role and they should not be presentedl from doing so from a public place. - police have no power or moral responsibility to stop - the filming or photographing of incidents of police personnel. l it is there in black and white. and a number of senior police officers have come out - and defended the right of the press to report. | it was, if you like, a rogue action. i but it is very worrying . and it is right that there is an inquiry into it. fiona, your view on the protesters? does it help or hinder yourjournalism? well, protesters are really important. here we are in egypt for cop27, and there are almost no

protests going on. they are very muted, people taking out banners and then rolling them up very quickly so they don't get chased away. we had a small protest during president biden's speech a few days ago. but we are not really seeing the civil society activism that we would expect to see in a free society, because of course here in egypt the sentence is a band and the jails here are heaving with political prisoners. so i think that maybe shows the difference that protest can make when you see a cop happening where it is almost more resilient. wolfgang, you were nodding there. i remember last year, - i'm advising the united nations climate change division - at the negotiations in glasgow,

several negotiators said they were really happy. there were protesters outside, it really helps build _ the pressure we need inside this venue for negotiations. | and i often think that . journalism and activism of course are two very different things. - but that journalists should never forget that we owe i all of our rights, the freedom of speech, the right to vote, i the right to gather, - the right for us to speak, we owe them to activists of earlier generations. . what is responsible journalism when it comes to the climate? i guess that is the big question. should we see climate change as a subject like no other to be covered byjournalists? fiona, i wonder what your views are from cop27? can you be impartial on the subject of climate change, do you think? i think you can be impartial, but i think you have to present the facts. and the facts are the scientists have told us very clearly that we are on a precipice, that we are facing a tipping point where if we surpass them we will be living on a planet that is unlivable. we will be seeing changes to the climate that are catastrophic and irreversible. that's not me, that is scientists saying that.

i am just reporting the facts here. and i think that we have to do that. are the lines are blurring between journalism and campaigning? i'm thinking of the guardian's front page yesterday. media around the world, co—publishing an editorial calling for a urgent action on climate crisis. yes, and that is a leader. newspapers have always carried leaders. they are opinion articles. but not on the front page, i suppose. it was right on the front page. one can run a leader on the front page. yeah, i think it was really important that we got a huge number of other outlets around the world saying the same thing, giving that opinion. but that doesn't affect what i do as a news reporter. rich, i'm interested in your views of campaigning journalism. do you see yourself as a campaigning journalist? i don't really see the situation we are in asa campaign.

it is not really a cause, it is life or death for everyone. so i think it is not really a situation where it's so valid to take sides. we need to get realistic about what is happening. and wolfgang, richard felgate doesn't see it as campaigning. clearly it is often called that. journalism. does it work? who does it convince? does it undermine objective reporting on this subject? it's really difficult to discern between journalism and activism because there is also a form ofjournalistic activism in the form of omission, of simply not covering the topic. and you could argue that a large part of the news industry is simply not covering climate change sufficiently, whether intentionally or not. but increasingly it looks conscious, because it is really hard to look away now. personally, i think that journalism should stay away from activism.

there is always the short—term impact of activism, because you leverage the brand and all the trust that your news brand is built off over decades and longer, but in the long—term, climate change is not going away, we will still be wrestling with it in 50,100 years from now. it is really important now that news brands do not take sides, other than to force the issue into the public sphere. so when you think about this front page of the guardian, it is a leader but it is on the front page — do you see that as activism? i do. you do. i do. that is interesting. but fiona, you don't? i'm a journalist, i i'm not an activist. i'm not an opinion writer, either. - i don't write leaders. i write news. and what i present are the facts of what is inl front of me. and here i am, at a climate change conference, where. we — discussing the entire future of humanity.

so that is my reflection. over your time reporting, do you think the language has changed? i think at the guardian you have taken the decision to use the term "climate crisis", for example. that is an evolution in language. that is hugely important. when i started 18 years ago, | writing about climate change and global warming, global warming sounds lovely. - if you ask someone if they would like a bit of global. warming, they say, "oh, yes please." i climate change sounds nice and gentle, like something gradual. what we know is that - when the climate changes, it does so abruptly, - weather goes to extremes. what we are going to see is nothing gentlej and nothing pleasant. we are going to see real extremes of weather, i we are already seeing them, we are seeing floods - in pakistan, - droughts in africa. so we need to reflect that in our language. | we need to reflect what - the scientists are telling us. so we have stopped talking very consciously at the guardian, -

about "climate change" and started talking - about the "climate crisis, i climate emergency, climate breakdown", and we talk about global heating - because these were words that reflect what is - really going on. danny shaw, the bbc no longer balances the question of whether man—made climate change is happening, but it is still very careful with its language use. yes, i'm sure it is, and quite rightly so, because it has got a very different position from some other media outlets. it has to be very careful. but it's around the evidence and it is around trying to be true to the evidence, but also at the same time reflecting different shades of opinion, but not giving too much weight to opinions that are perhaps outliers and are reallyjust frankly not worth the paper they are written on. wolfgang, i wonder what your assessment is of how the heatwave this summer was reported by the media? i feel at the bbc we are

encouraged not to use pictures of people eating ice creams when it is a ao—plus heatwave. there is an issue around the illustration where thejournalism has become better, in terms of really warning people of the dangers. but then often, you see these really well—written pieces and then you see they are illustrated. that has to do with work processes in newsrooms, who writes the headline. you saw illustrations of dogs playing in fountains in parks and people on the beach that belittle the actual danger. ijust wanted to make one more point where i often think this question of whether climate change is human—made. that is the last year's or last decade's discussion. it is almost a sign of false courage to still make a point of that. that is kind of done. where the denial sits now is the ignorance, where media plays a hugely important role. it is to really help the public

understand the dramatic difference between global heating and warming by 1.5% versus 2 degrees or more. currently we are heading... the consequences are so radical, and that i don't see sufficiently covered. and there is also a lack of proportion missing. to me, climatejournalism looks like watching a football game with no goalposts. and the goalpost is the remaining carbon budget. this is how much more we can put into the atmosphere and this is how much time we have left. and against that, for instance, we could measure the entire business journalism. and there are news organisations that do that. just like the east—west conflict, climate change is one of our organising axes, for every department from culture to politics. fiona, how do you tell the story of 1.5 degrees? you don't call it climate change, but as something that engages people,

that hooks them in? you tell them what's out there, because if you are not engaged by the story of how floods are covering nearly a third of pakistan and 20 million people there are needing humanitarian aid, if you can't get a story out of the fact that there were 150 million people in africa at the moment in the worst drought for 40 years and they are on the brink of hunger, you shouldn't be doing journalism if that doesn't strike you as a story. the examples of the extremity of climate change are coming thick and fast now. what really counts is trying to explain to people some of these very technical terms. 1.5 degrees, as wolfgang just said. 1.5 degrees as the temperature increase if you are sitting in a really properly wouldn't even notice it, but when you translate into the whole planet it's actually a huge difference. and the way i've tried to explain it is that at the moment we are only about 5 degrees warmer as a planet than we were in the last ice age. and that is the kind of difference if you degrees can make.

we could keep talking about this and no doubt will, but i'm afraid that is all we have time for this week. thank you to all my guests and you for watching. that was the media show. goodbye. hello there. contrasting conditions to start the new working week. some heavy rain across south—west england, and gale force gusts of winds. further north and east, it is all going to be about the frost in the fog patches first icy stretches, too. but the strength of the wind is down in the south—west could be in excess of 60 to 70 mph at

times, some rough seas, is very difficult driving conditions, first thing, with torrential rain as well, that's going to gradually move its way north and east throughout the morning. perhaps grinding to out across northern ireland, northern england, central and south—east england, by the end of the afternoon. northern england and scotland however, the frost and fog will lift to some sunny spells, a ghoulish day with a few scattered showers, top temperatures six orseven showers, top temperatures six or seven degrees, top temperatures further south, eight to 11. as we move out of monday into tuesday, a slight lull in proceedings before more wet and windy weather moves in from the west.

welcome to bbc news. i'm anjana gadgil. our top stories: a landmark deal for developing countries at the cop27 climate summit — but little progress on cutting emissions. the deal on loss and damage is undoubtedly a breakthrough which disappointment in the room the rest of the text is not more ambitious. the qatar world cup kicks off with a lavish opening ceremony in doha after months of criticisms and controversies, but the host nation is beaten by ecuador in its opening game. vigils are held for five people killed in a shooting outside a gay nightclub in the us state of colorado. survivors speak of how they hid from the gunman. we heard everything,

and all i could think about is...everything. my life...