us made f—165 and back training ukrainian pilots to fly them. voice—over: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour, straight after this programme. hello and welcome to this edition of the media show, and this week? gaston needs very little introduction, jeremy bowen joined the bbc as a trainee journalist in 1984 and he is now bbc news's international editor, one of

the bbc�*s most recognised faces. welcome to the show. thanks very much for asking me. you have a new series for radio 4 called frontlines of journalism, billed as your reflections on the most difficult stories you have covered. one of those is certainly ukrainian we heard the news that the afp journalist had died, killed by russian artillery. he was 32 years old and this is a conflict you know very closely. yes, he was killed somewhere in the east, somewhere near bakhmut, where i have spent quite a bit of time, i was there at the end of last year, these things are tragic and in all the years i have been doing this, i have known quite a few people who have been killed. i was reading his twitter account today and if you go back to me the first he has posted a video where he and some soldiers, who are accompanying him are lying down and he is describing them, and it is pure terror as artillery fire comes in. in

those moments, and you must have been in those moments, they must be a decision to make about whether you stay?- about whether you stay? when ou are about whether you stay? when you are in _ about whether you stay? when you are in a — about whether you stay? when you are in a situation _ about whether you stay? when you are in a situation where . you are in a situation where shells are landing, you don't have a choice, you just have to put your head down and hope that none of them had year. i was in the war in grozny, chechnya in the winter of 94 and 95, and i got caught in an airstrike, andi and 95, and i got caught in an airstrike, and i lay in and 95, and i got caught in an air strike, and i lay in the snow listening to the explosions all around thinking you are going to die now or you are going to suffer excruciating pain from being hit, i had a flakjacket and a helmet and i was hunkering down behind next to a sort of a 6—inch high curbstone because it was the only thing i could find that i could just hear these explosions that seem to go on for ages and at that point you don't have a choice, you just think please let us all be over and let it be ok at

the end of it.— the end of it. when you are l in: in the end of it. when you are lying in the _ the end of it. when you are lying in the snow, - the end of it. when you are lying in the snow, do - the end of it. when you are lying in the snow, do you . the end of it. when you are i lying in the snow, do you have a moment to reflect on the situation you end up in and whether you regret being there? i remember thinking to myself you really messed up on this point, he pushed it too far, you posted too far, we should not be hanging around anyway but we promised someone left, we had a freelance colleague working who had been giving us material and there had been airstrikes already, it was a square in the middle of the city, half the buildings were on fire, we were waiting for this guy to emerge and he was late, and after the airstrike we had 25 pieces of shrapnel in our vehicle, there are not many moments like that but my god when they happen you certainly do not forget them. how when they happen you certainly do not forget them.— when they happen you certainly do not forget them. how do they affect the decision-making - do not forget them. how do they affect the decision-making that i affect the decision—making that follows is your career continues to direct you towards war? ., ., ,. , , war? for me, and i discussed this with _ war? for me, and i discussed this with colleagues - war? for me, and i discussed this with colleagues who - war? for me, and i discussed this with colleagues who had | this with colleagues who had similar trajectories over many

years, i think when you start out you don't know what to expect, and then you get a massive burst of adrenaline and huge highs, some of those as well of course, but mostly highs, to begin with, unless something awful happens to you, and the first war i went to el salvador i thought i was in my own wall movie — my own wall movie, in the middle of the jungle, the middle of a city, drinking on the terrorist afterwards, swapping war stories with all these other people and we all thought we were pretty cool probably, but quite soon i realised that the only reason for doing this is to have a strong journalistic imperative because often we would come into people's lives at their worst moments, the lowest abs, members of the familyjust killed and we would ask them about it. you have to have a good reason for doing that otherwise it is the worst kind of intrusive... i'm in the job by its very nature is highly intrusive at times and

as time has gone by and friends of mine have been killed and i have seen awful things over many years, i get to bars whatsoever from many years, i get to bars whatsoeverfrom being in that situation i try very hard to avoid being somewhere like that, and i have been working in ukraine with a very good team, and a lot of the time with a cameraman, fred scott, was about my age, early 60s, done all the things i have done over many many years and i'm telling you, the two of us, as soon as we get there, we want to get out, fill what we have to get out, fill what we have to do and get out of there. there has been this huge shift between the young man in el salvador and the slightly older man reporting an ukraine. has thejob you are man reporting an ukraine. has the job you are doing changed as well? , as well? some things never chance, as well? some things never change. the _ as well? some things never change, the fundamentals i as well? some things neverl change, the fundamentals of journalism don't change, you still have to be accurate, you still have to be accurate, you still have to be accurate, you still have to be on time, you still have to be on time, you still have to hit your deadlines, be apathetic, that's

very important, you still have to be impartial, particularly important for us guys at the bbc but the technical side has changed unbelievably, the first time i went to afghanistan, when the soviets were leaving in 1989, we arrived there with one time of equipment and two engineers had to spend three days rewiring the tv station before we could consider trying to get our pictures out onto some failing soviet satellite. now, you do it all from a laptop basically.- laptop basically. the technology - laptop basically. the technology you - laptop basically. the technology you are l laptop basically. the - technology you are using laptop basically. the technology you are using has changed in your attitude to the conflict has changed, what about the journalistic content you are producing? do you find yourself in these dangerous places and feel pressure to be constantly feeding social media or digital output rather than working towards one report at the end of the day? i working towards one report at the end of the day?— the end of the day? i don't feel that- _ the end of the day? i don't feel that. |_ the end of the day? i don't feel that. i don't _ the end of the day? i don't feelthat. i don't feel- the end of the day? i don't feel that. i don't feel thatl feel that. i don't feel that but i probably am somewhat

insulated from those pressures because i have been doing this for years, because i have been doing this foryears, iam because i have been doing this for years, i am very experienced, quite a long way up experienced, quite a long way up the food chain at the bbc and i tend to do what is right rather than feeling pressure to do things i don't want to do. i think if you are in a really awful place, say buckboard, and you have a mobile signal, i would not dream of tweeting that i was there, i don't want anyone to know i was there. i might treat afterwards to say i was there, send out a few photos, i think there is a security issue not to do that in terms of feeding lives, no, my view now after all these years is what i want to do, i believe more than ever, i believe more than ever, i believe in quality, not quantity. believe in quality, not quantity-— believe in quality, not quantity. believe in quality, not auanti . ., ,. , ., quantity. you describe some of the crucial _ quantity. you describe some of the crucial relationships - quantity. you describe some of the crucial relationships you i the crucial relationships you do with this work including the immediate crew you are working with but almost always in war zones you will be in a place of conflict with the cooperation

of at least one of the sides. how do you manage that relationship, particularly when you are in the heat of battle some of the people who are allowing you to be there are also helping you, maybe they offer you with a drink, someone is injured and you help them, how do you manage that relationship?— how do you manage that relationshi - ? ., , relationship? one of the things that have really _ relationship? one of the things that have really changed, - relationship? one of the things that have really changed, all. that have really changed, all groups, from little armed groups, from little armed groups to governments are much tighter about control of the media and they want to somehow control the message so they do like to keep a very close eye and insist on lots of permissions, just getting to somewhere like that like bakhmut requires all sorts of permissions and permits to get in there in the first place, and that gives them quite a bit of power over you. one of the things you have to realise is we are fairly powerless, and sometimes it requires making

compromises, if you are working in the libya in the days of gadhafi, or other authoritarian players, you have to work on their system, which involve sometimes a lot of schmoozing but you must not compromise what comes out of it which is the journalism, what comes out of it which is thejournalism, and if there are problems of things you can't see, it's very important to be transparent and say we could not get that because... i was going to ask you about that because you think the journalists are transparent enough around the relationships and system that is necessary for them to be there? do you think the consumers of news understand that is the equation?— understand that is the equation? understand that is the euuation? equation? some people say --eole equation? some people say peeple find _ equation? some people say people find it _ equation? some people say people find it more - equation? some people say i people find it more interesting if we actually went more into some of the process. i think we tend not to do that because we might think the process is a bit boring, it is not really why we're there, it is not about us, we feel that very

strongly. but you have to, i mean there was a situation for example last year when the russians pulled out on the southern part of ukraine in kherson and everybody wanted to get in talking inhabitants about what it had been like, see what the situation was an ukrainian said no—one can go in, and they blocked the roads, that was because they were going around the city looking for collaborators and they did not like, they did not want us to touch on the fact that they could have been collaboration, so of course when they say you can't get in, everybody tries to get in, and they threaten to take away�*s people's press passes and they did take some away for a while, ukrainian guy who was working for one of the american newspapers had just been presented with some kind of medal of freedom and it took away his card. i think they have given them all back, we lost one, maybe two for a few

days. lost one, maybe two for a few da s. �* �* . . lost one, maybe two for a few da 5. �* �*, . . lost one, maybe two for a few das. ., days. but it's a warning shot. yeah, a days. but it's a warning shot. yeah. a lot — days. but it's a warning shot. yeah, a lot of— days. but it's a warning shot. yeah, a lot of it _ days. but it's a warning shot. yeah, a lot of it is _ days. but it's a warning shot. yeah, a lot of it is about - days. but it's a warning shot. yeah, a lot of it is about the l yeah, a lot of it is about the personalities of the people that make the rules, that's what i mean about working around a system, and you have to push the system, otherwise you just do as you are told is a reporter, and you will get nowhere. a reporter, and you will get nowhere-— a reporter, and you will get nowhere. ., , ., ., nowhere. your series for radio 1. nowhere. your series for radio 4 is called _ nowhere. your series for radio 4 is called the _ nowhere. your series for radio 4 is called the frontlines - nowhere. your series for radio 4 is called the frontlines of- 4 is called the frontlines of journalism, and you explore your experiences covering war but you also explore some fundamental questions about journalism, the pursuit of truth in particular, and when i was listening to the first few episodes, i was thinking, is there a problem he that journalists are wrestling with how to get to the truth and how to share it but perhaps this their audiences are perhaps not as concerned as they once were with what is true? i as concerned as they once were with what is true?— with what is true? i think that one consequence _ with what is true? i think that one consequence of - with what is true? i think that one consequence of the - with what is true? i think that i one consequence of the current media landscape in the media landscape we will have probably forever and developing in all kinds of different ways that we can't predict particularly if there is so much opinion flying

around and social media as a series, can be a series of echo chambers and there is plenty of evidence, people like to listen and watch what they like. america is the best example of that, if you are a trump supporter, you get all the stuff you need from fox and if you are on the other side of politics, if you watch nbc, you are nodding and seem quite right, so that is not really, i'm mean there are aspects of journalism about it, but it is also about opinion.- journalism about it, but it is also about opinion. you find a level of scepticism _ also about opinion. you find a level of scepticism directed i also about opinion. you find aj level of scepticism directed at yourjournalism tiring? it is level of scepticism directed at yourjournalism tiring?- your “ournalism tiring? it is a bit yourjournalism tiring? it is a bit tedious _ yourjournalism tiring? it is a bit tedious but _ yourjournalism tiring? it is a bit tedious but yes, - yourjournalism tiring? it is a bit tedious but yes, i'm - yourjournalism tiring? it is a bit tedious but yes, i'm an i bit tedious but yes, i'm an honestjournalist, i do not make things up. there was an incident in ukraine last year and i, a was in a prone position and someone behind me stood up and there was a huge thing on twitter about how i

was faking it and people did little memes, it was pathetic, and it was lies.— little memes, it was pathetic, and it was lies. you did engage with that, _ and it was lies. you did engage with that, i _ and it was lies. you did engage with that, i remember - and it was lies. you did engage with that, i remember you - with that, i remember you tweeting about it. i with that, i remember you tweeting about it.- with that, i remember you tweeting about it. i did not enttae tweeting about it. i did not engage to _ tweeting about it. i did not engage to begin _ tweeting about it. i did not engage to begin with - tweeting about it. i did not engage to begin with but l tweeting about it. i did not engage to begin with but i | tweeting about it. i did not - engage to begin with but i saw something like 70,000 lakes, and i thought i had to say something, i spoke to people here who know more about social media than i do, and i thought i had to say something, so i said look, this is not true, and you can say whatever you like about what i am doing but you are also insulting all the ukrainians because they were being people killed there that day trying to escape that selling, and if you want to ridicule them by implication, you are welcome to, but i think some of the people do it, they just like lampooning, and there was an agenda which is data believe the kinds of things that we do.— believe the kinds of things that we do. one of the ways that we do. one of the ways that you _ that we do. one of the ways that you counter _ that we do. one of the ways that you counter that - that we do. one of the ways that you counter that which | that we do. one of the ways i that you counter that which you have alluded to is being more

transparent, coming to show how you have produced the journalism that you have. we have to do — journalism that you have. - have to do more of that, and we have to do more of that, and we have always done a bit about. as a goal i understand it but in practical terms, what does it mean? how do you do that within the constraints of how journalism is produced, whether it is on the news at ten or the bbc news website or a tweet or all the sorts of places you appear? in all the sorts of places you appear?— all the sorts of places you auear? , ., . , appear? in broadcast “ournalism and in daily * appear? in broadcast journalism and in daily television _ appear? in broadcast journalism and in daily television news - and in daily television news which is where i spend most of my time doing on the bbc, there are lots of constraints. the amount of our time you have is one, access is another, you can't put the piece together if you have not got the pictures, and when you have got the pictures, if you don't have a decent slot, you can't get everything out, so you don't want to go into all the stuff about how you got your accreditation so maybe there is accreditation so maybe there is a place without an accompanying social media message or website

peace, but if there is something you want to see in and you are stopped from seeing it or they try to manipulate what you are doing you need to expose that. i think you need to say we wanted to get to axe village where, but we weren't allowed to. but we were able to see this, and the problem with this, well, what can we learn from that? maybe we learn some aspects of the truth or when i interviewed that person, you need to show that maybe you might have a government minder next year and it clearly affects the way people speak. so there is impartiality which you talk in detail in your series and you had a series of very interesting exchanges with a number of your guests and one of the examples that was highlighted, notjust by you but some of the people speaking to you, was an article you wrote for the bbc in march about the araque invasion of 20 years ago and you called that a catastrophe and you were maintaining this is an

impartial conclusion —— iraq. some people you are interviewing was a hold on, this is an opinion. how do you explain the difference?- this is an opinion. how do you explain the difference? well, i think that it _ explain the difference? well, i think that it was _ explain the difference? well, i think that it was all _ explain the difference? well, i think that it was all about - explain the difference? well, i think that it was all about the l think that it was all about the 20th anniversary of the invasion of iraq in 2003 and if on invasion plus one, one day, i said this is a catastrophe, it would have been this is going to be a catastrophe, it would have been my opinion. at 20 years later, when you've seen the consequences of it unfold and continue to unfold with terrible terrible detail, that i think you're perfectly entitled to say yeah, it was a catastrophe. it turned iraq into an incubator for jihadists. into an incubatorfor jihadists. it into an incubator for jihadists. it resulted into an incubatorfor jihadists. it resulted in into an incubator for jihadists. it resulted in the rise of isis. tens of thousands of hundreds of thousands of people have died, etc, etc. that's catastrophic. it's a catastrophic by any definition of the word and i've used it repeatedly on a deliberately.

these words don't slip out. people may think you could describe what has happened and then you could let others decide what word should be attached to it, that the description is impartial but the addition of a single word steps into something more. i think that in my role as the bbc international editor, it's my duty to sometimes to say well actually, guys, two and two does equal four. [30 well actually, guys, two and two does equal four.- two does equal four. do you think you — two does equal four. do you think you are _ two does equal four. do you think you are in _ two does equal four. do you think you are in a _ two does equal four. do you think you are in a position . two does equal four. do you | think you are in a position as a very senior editor to do that more than some journalists? i think that's why some people at the bbc i called editors and some are not, yeah. part of the thing, not to bring in, i mean, ihave thing, not to bring in, i mean, i have loads of my own opinions as i get older, i have even more of them.— as i get older, i have even more of them. they 'ust keep comint , more of them. they 'ust keep coming. do h more of them. they 'ust keep coming, do they? _ more of them. theyjust keep coming, do they? it's - more of them. theyjust keep coming, do they? it's funny i more of them. theyjust keep| coming, do they? it's funny as ou aet coming, do they? it's funny as you get older. _ coming, do they? it's funny as you get older, it's _ coming, do they? it's funny as you get older, it's like - you get older, it's like baldness, itjust occurs. but the thing is it's not my opinion. what i have to show is how i got to the conclusion. so

in that piece, i said it was a catastrophe and it was about 15 or 1800 words. basically it describes why. 50 or1800 words. basically it describes why.— or 1800 words. basically it describes why. or 1800 words. basically it describeswh . ., ., describes why. so iraq was one bi sto describes why. so iraq was one big story you — describes why. so iraq was one big story you covered. - describes why. so iraq was one big story you covered. i - describes why. so iraq was one big story you covered. i wouldl big story you covered. i would imagine the story you cover the most in the last ten or so years is the conflict between the israelis and the palestinians and sometimes when i'm watching your reports i think there's history here whichjeremy perhaps doesn't which jeremy perhaps doesn't have whichjeremy perhaps doesn't have space to get into as a labourer tape reporting and as we the bbc don't provide that worker for we the bbc don't provide that workerfor in we the bbc don't provide that worker for in day—to—day reporting. do we risk compromising our reporting by not providing the complex? i’ge not providing the complex? i've done loads _ not providing the complex? i've done loads on _ not providing the complex? ie: done loads on them over not providing the complex? i�*”2 done loads on them over the years now and, in fact, the last ten years is probably the consequences ofjihadists and things like that and syria and iraq but history is really important. if you work in the middle east, history is a live there in a way that people in our country i don't think really get. so how do you get into all of that? and the

problem is you can't really always put in a sort of newsreel section, black and white, this is how we got here, guys. the recent time. and also, ifound over the years producers find its boring and it's very well, jeremy, can we slip archive section —— there isn't time. so the way to do it isn't time. so the way to do it is how you write it and talk to people. the way to, i think, news report to get the correct kind of analysis and context in is by using the drive of the, i'm talking television news now, the drive of the pictures that you get from the event and maybe some archive if you can work it in. combined with a very carefully worded script and carefully chosen clips. they will enable you to tell the story and that the same time explain it, rather than say i think mistakes happen sometimes when, and when i first was middle east editor

about 15 years ago, people were doing, the editors thought, it was the first time anyone had thejob and editors was the first time anyone had the job and editors and programmes would say well, we've got a piece from so—and—so and jeremy can you do the explainer so i said if you did not get that, jeremy will not explain it. so my argument was always i should get the material and i should then build this construct, and that's what i tried to do. doesn't always work but when it works, it works. bud doesn't always work but when it works, it works.— works, it works. and you mentioned _ works, it works. and you mentioned you _ works, it works. and you mentioned you spent - works, it works. and you mentioned you spent a l works, it works. and you | mentioned you spent a lot works, it works. and you - mentioned you spent a lot of the last ten years talking about jihadists the last ten years talking aboutjihadists and some of those would have been in syria especially when islamic state was taking a lot of territory and that leads me to something else i'd like to talk to you about which is your close encounters with really significant historical figures, one of them president asaad of syria. let's listen to a brief part of your exchange with him a few years back.— a few years back. what about barrel bombs? _ a few years back. what about barrel bombs? you _ a few years back. what about barrel bombs? you don't - a few years back. what about| barrel bombs? you don't deny your forces use them? i barrel bombs? you don't deny your forces use them?- your forces use them? i know about the _ your forces use them? i know about the army, _ your forces use them? i know about the army, they - your forces use them? i know about the army, they use - about the army, they use bullets _ about the army, they use bullets and bombs. i haven't

heard — bullets and bombs. i haven't heard of— bullets and bombs. i haven't heard of army using barrels or mayhe — heard of army using barrels or maybe cooking pots.- maybe cooking pots. large barrels full _ maybe cooking pots. large barrels full of _ maybe cooking pots. large barrels full of explosives . maybe cooking pots. large l barrels full of explosives and projectiles which i dropped from helicopters and explode with devastating effect. there's been a lot of testimony about these things.— there's been a lot of testimony about these things. bombs, we have bombs. — about these things. bombs, we have bombs, missiles- about these things. bombs, we have bombs, missiles and - have bombs, missiles and bullets _ have bombs, missiles and bullets. �* , ., have bombs, missiles and bullets. �* ., �* , bullets. but you wouldn't deny that included _ bullets. but you wouldn't deny that included under _ bullets. but you wouldn't deny that included under the - that included under the category of bombs are these barrel bombs? which are indiscriminate weapons. . barrel bombs? which are indiscriminate weapons. , there is no indiscriminate _ indiscriminate weapons. , there is no indiscriminate weapons. i is no indiscriminate weapons. how— is no indiscriminate weapons. how do — is no indiscriminate weapons. how do you deal with it when you're doing an interview like that and the interviewee is simply refuting what you're saying? simply refuting what you're sa int ? �* . . simply refuting what you're sa int ? �* , ., ~ saying? he's telling a lie. and in the series _ saying? he's telling a lie. and in the series we've _ saying? he's telling a lie. and in the series we've done, - saying? he's telling a lie. and in the series we've done, that| in the series we've done, that exchange is actually in the programme which is called the big lie. what you have to keep pushing, you have to assure of your ground, you have to do be able to war game it a bit in advance. at interview with asaad, we really war games it. we worked out he would possibly say this. and then, so if he

says this, you can answer or counter with that. and bring out this proof or maybe this example and so, working with others, the team from hardtalk helped me out, and did a very good brief, so you get these things which you can push back at them but yeah, if they are going to keep at it, they are going to keep at it, they are going to keep at it, they are going to keep at it. find going to keep at it, they are going to keep at it.- going to keep at it. and in those moments _ going to keep at it. and in those moments on - going to keep at it. and in those moments on each i going to keep at it. and in i those moments on each side going to keep at it. and in - those moments on each side of the interview when you arrive, when you're packing up, both with president asaad but also gadarfi as well, can you learn things as well about how they interact with their colleagues about how they carry themselves?- about how they carry themselves? ., ~ , themselves? -- gaddafi. aside is incredibly — themselves? -- gaddafi. aside is incredibly polite _ themselves? -- gaddafi. aside is incredibly polite in _ themselves? -- gaddafi. aside is incredibly polite in an - themselves? -- gaddafi. aside is incredibly polite in an old - is incredibly polite in an old world courtly way, the leap to your feet when you get to the room, he will break his neck to make sure he is not the first person through the door, after you, and then he always, i've interviewed him a few times, he gives you about ten or 15 minutes one on one beforehand, to have a little chat. gaddafi

on the other hand, you know, he swept in, the absolute caricature of his own image. in a flowing ochre robe, sunglasses. mike slightly spacey, at the head of a massive convoy of vehicles. so you know it was almost like being in the room with his spitting image puppet. bud being in the room with his spitting image puppet. and in the case of — spitting image puppet. and in the case of those _ spitting image puppet. and in the case of those two - spitting image puppet. and in the case of those two men . spitting image puppet. and in| the case of those two men had also spent time reporting on the consequences of the actions of their government. considerable amount, yeah, and their victims.— their victims. how did you st uare their victims. how did you square the _ their victims. how did you square the two _ their victims. how did you square the two men - their victims. how did you square the two men who i their victims. how did you - square the two men who were in front of you, who was speaking to you, with apparent conviction and what did you to be the cause of their instructions?- be the cause of their instructions? ~ ., instructions? well, i tried to use it against _ instructions? well, i tried to use it against them. - instructions? well, i tried to use it against them. for - use it against them. for example, with gaddafi he was saying my people love me, they love me all, i remember saying that in english. and i said hang on, i was earlier on today, people were out on the streets of tripoli and they

were protesting. he says no, they were supporting me. i said no they weren't, they were saying down with gaddafi. no they won't! i think you believed in his own propaganda. he lived in a bubble. so i think you can try to use things you've seen but great strength, one of the great strengths of being a reporter is that you can use your own eyes and ears and you have proof that you can then show to people. you and you have proof that you can then show to people.— then show to people. you were taettin then show to people. you were getting close — then show to people. you were getting close to _ then show to people. you were getting close to events - then show to people. you were getting close to events and - getting close to events and people that we know war crimes tribunal, for example, are interested in in looking at and it's starting to become more and more frequent that the work of journalists and more frequent that the work ofjournalists is being of journalists is being required ofjournalists is being required in those kinds of legal environments. is that something you're comfortable with, if requests coming from the international criminal court or... crosstalk. for four searate court or... crosstalk. for four separate trials _ court or... crosstalk. for four separate trials in _ court or... crosstalk. for four separate trials in the _ court or... crosstalk. for four separate trials in the former- separate trials in the former yugoslavia war crime process. including luggage and courage, the bosnian serb leaders. and i found, the great cliches that

reporter say is what you do it, its bearing witness. well, i did not say anything in the courtroom i wouldn't have set on air. i do have any secrets or blow any contacts but what i did do is go into detail about what we reported and what we saw —— karadzic and mladic. to be honest with you, if that helps put some of these war criminals behind bars, i'm delighted. he criminals behind bars, i'm delighted-— criminals behind bars, i'm deliahted. �* ., delighted. he didn't feel that cross the line _ delighted. he didn't feel that cross the line into _ delighted. he didn't feel that cross the line into something where a journalist is seeking an outcome? it sounds like you were glad of the outcome. i was because i— were glad of the outcome. i was because i witnessed _ were glad of the outcome. i was because i witnessed crimes - were glad of the outcome. i was because i witnessed crimes of i because i witnessed crimes of four and i've seen people being killed on the orders of these people and so yeah, of course i was on a human level ——of war. i was satisfied, not happy, that i had been part of a legal process that was as much as putting people injail was about creating a record, that in itself became what we do. anotherjournalistic in itself became what we do. another journalistic cliche in itself became what we do. anotherjournalistic cliche is it's the first draft of history. of pages of evidence

—— the millions of pages of evidence they accumulated at the war crimes tribunal are massive resorts for historians in future and my work is part of that because they accept a lot of what i did as evidence and i think it was because my reporting was fairly done. i’m reporting was fairly done. i'm afraid that's _ reporting was fairly done. i'm afraid that's all _ reporting was fairly done. i'm afraid that's all we've got time for. to those watching, thank you indeed for being with us on this edition of the media show. you can hearjeremy�*s new series front of journalism show. you can hearjeremy�*s new series front ofjournalism on the bbc sounds up but from me and all of the media show team, goodbye. hello again. whenever we talk about showers, you can get vastly different weather from one place to the next. if we look at friday's weather in redding, we had hazy spells of sunshine coming through this cloud. it was quite a nice day. butjust down the road, 15 miles away in benson

in oxfordshire, got a direct hit from a pretty big shower. it brought 19 millimetres of rain in the space of two hours — that's a third of a month of rain — and instead of it being a nice day, it was a day where you might�*ve needed to paddle to get back to your car. now, over the next few hours, it's essentially dry across england and wales, most places having clear skies. do have some thicker clouds starting to move in across scotland and northern ireland, the cloud thick enough for an occasional spit of rain but nothing particularly significant. and here are your temperatures as you head into the first part of your weekend. now, the weekend across england and wales, lots of sunshine on the way and it is going to be mostly dry. for scotland and northern ireland, a bit more in the way of cloud but it'll still be bright. however, the cloud at times will be thick enough to give just a little bit of rain. now, any rain that we do see across these north—western areas isn't going to be that heavy because these weather fronts are weak. they're running into an area of high pressure which is tending to squish them. so, saturday morning, we start off perhaps with a nice sunrise for some across scotland, maybe north west england, north—west wales.

the thickest cloud across scotland and northern ireland. an odd spit of rain, but not much. england and wales, dry with plenty of sunshine from the word go and we'll keep those sunny skies all day. it is going to feel warm in the sunshine with temperatures widely18—21. a little bit cooler around some of our north sea coasts, given the developing onshore wind. and a reminder at this time of the year, the may sunshine is a strong sunshine and so, we'll have high levels of uv. so, if you're outside for any length of time, might be worth just thinking about slapping on a bit of sun cream. in sunday's forecast, it's a similar kind of split to the weather, really, with the cloudier skies across scotland and northern ireland. still some bright weather getting through. again, there could bejust a few spits of rain falling from this weather front that's very weak. england and wales, dry, more sunshine and warm again — temperatures high teens to low 20s. in fact, this weekend, we could see the warmest day of the year so far — not that the temperatures are that high. it says more, really, about the fact that the weather's not

been that warm so far this year. but into next week, high pressure's in charge and for most, it will stay fine and dry. next year and it clearly affects the way people speak.

live from washington, this is bbc news. the ukrainian president, volodymr zelensky, is to meet g7 world leaders in person at the hiroshima summit this sunday. the confirmation of the visit follows the us backing the supply of f16 figherjets to ukraine and that they will provide trianing. and former us president barack obama is one of over 500 us citizens now banned from russia in response to new anit—russia sanctions. great to have you with us. two major international summits today, more than 8,000 apart, with the shadow

of the war in ukraine cast on them both.