when i walked through the doors to start myjob there, i was excited. at no point in time did i ever anticipate being on the receiving end of an attempted rape. ijoined harrods because i wanted to be a buyer, - and i ended up working i for an absolute monster. i think he damaged me in some way. he's just left a scar. in the days since the investigation was released, more women have come forward to share their experiences. we've also heard accounts from former harrods staff and from journalists about the measures al—fayed took to keep these allegations out of the media. we started this week's show with the director of the documentary, erica gornall. this has been a culmination of months and months of work and investigation. and actually, i think over a year ago, a man called keaton stone, who's

a journalist himself, his wife, he discovered, was actually a survivor, and a survivor of one of the worst abuses that fayed has kind of committed against these women. and he did some investigation and found many, many more women. i came on board at the end of last year. i've had loads of experience in this kind of area. i've, you know, interviewed lots of women of sexual abuse and domestic abuse, in the past. but when i saw the amount of women, over a significant period of time, talking decades, and the seriousness of the allegations against fayed, which i'd never seen before, myjawjust dropped, and ijust knew that a film like this had to be made. and i did wonder at the time why it hadn't been made before. and how do you approach those conversations with women who have had these experiences, when you raise the possibility

of recording a conversation that will be broadcast? i mean, it's a long process. um, you know... uh, just thinking back at the beginning of the year, i end up having these conversations first on the phone, and then my producerand i, cornish, erm, cassie cornish—trestrail, we then go and meet these women face—to—face, and you can imagine the atmosphere at that first meeting. a lot of trepidation. i mean, i have to say, some of the conversations were ones i'd not come across and are quite specific to fayed. and you might, um, go into that a bit later in the show. but i had women who were petrified of even meeting us. i had women who insisted on meeting me here at the bbc, to make sure that i wasn't someone working for fayed, and that this was some kind of trap. not the first time that a trap has been hatched in that way against the women, let alone journalists. and then, even when that was satisfied, the amount of women who were petrified that these meetings would be discovered.

and then, when we filmed, that that would be discovered. um, and there was a real fear. and it wasn't unfounded because, as you see in the documentary, some of these women have been followed. they have been threatened in the past. so it's a slow process, but even slower because of the amount of women that i wanted to have in this documentary, and that element of fear that i'd never come across before. and given the trepidation that they were expressing to you, there's evidently a duty of care, as you consider whether to broadcast their stories. but presumably, there's also a duty of care that goes beyond the broadcast, too? absolutely. i mean, this is, i would say, an unprecedented number of survivors that have gone onto a documentary that i've ever seen. and with it comes massive amount of duty of care about those women, making an assessment, whether it's the right moment for them to come forward and talk. and that's an ongoing conversation that we have very regularly with each of those women. and then, for us, we had this

kind of system in place which, i have to say, i hope happens with all television programmes, with all independent companies that make these films, because it is a privilege and an honour to make these kind of films and work with these kind of sensitive matters. and that is to make sure that throughout the process and throughout the filming over the months, there is support in place. so not only was there me, the director and cassie, the producer, on top of that, we had a therapist as well, who was engaged in order to talk to those women after they'd filmed their testimony. and also, as you'd expect, throughout that period, before transmission and after. and that was ongoing. and i thought that was a good example of duty of care in television. doesn't always happen. absolutely not. and it's been an evolution. i mean, through my career, i have definitely, unfortunately, done quite a lot of stories with women, mainly women, not entirely, who've experienced sexual assault and sexual abuse.

and one of the things that struck me about your programme is i went into it... well, actually, i have a tiny, tiny role in it, as a very, er, quite large—faced, very pregnant, reporter standing outside harrods when the allegations were made about the 15—year—old, and i was reporting that for channel 4 news. but, but... but what. .. i went into it assuming that a lot of the people would be anonymous. and what is amazing about your documentary is that so many of them, all of them have, um, waived their right to anonymity. and did you think, when you started, did you think that they were going to, or how did they come to that decision? i mean, it was a really long process. and you're right, having so many people speaking, erm, we call "face to camera", showing their faces, on this kind of subject, it is unprecedented, and it was a long journey. i mean, when i started, i would say the majority of people did not expect to be filmed, let alone show their face. and over multiple conversations, as the film grew and grew, more people then did decide to show their face. and that... um, but what i would say

on that as well, though, is that i kind of like to pull away from the idea of showing their face as something to, to hold up as a kind of, um, best practice, because i think we've nearly gone a stage further than that, where we accept that women are all different and have different lives, different family, different situation. and i hope that those stories will encourage other women, this story and others, if they have been victims of something like this — and obviously, in this case, fayed — it's ok to not have to tell your story fully face out. it's ok that later, you do or don't change your mind. do or don't, yeah. because i think now we've got to the stage, we've got kind of the metoo, when people came out on camera. and then i think we've got maybe the post—metoo era, where you can tell your story as you want to tell it, and that's ok, and it's actuallyjust as powerful. it seems extraordinary that these allegations

about mohamed al—fayed weren't published while he was still alive. some journalists did take on the story. one of them is henry porter, a former uk editor of vanity fair. in 1995, he published an investigation into these allegations, and hejoined us in the studio. it wasn't as strong as erica's . film, by any means, but it had started out- as a positive piece. graydon and maureen - were tickled by the idea... graydon carter, the editor. graydon carter, i should have said, yeah. - ..were tickled by the idea of this slightly clownish, i anti—establishment figure, . causing trouble in the british establishment. and he was trouble, you know. he was bribed...bribing mps and then revealingj that he had bribed them. he wasjust a nightmare for pe0ple~ _ er, they thought it was funny. and then, she — she's| a very good reporter — came to britain, was about here four weeks, five weeks, - i should think, and really. nailed the story, and got his habitual racism, his habitual

use of cctv to spot womeni on the floor, to pry into, - you know, his staff's business, their phone calls. he was bugging people. and how did he respond? he responded with a writ, - which came winter of '94, '95. so, nearly 30 years ago, probably 30 years ago. l and you then worked, did you, with a lawyerfor, i think, two years? yeah, pretty much 18, 19 months, actually. l um, with david hooper, from biddle & co. - i mean, i said before, - we were hardly the practised investigators. the key point is that we found seven women who gave us - affidavits. it's a really important point for the rest of the media, l because it's - a matter of effort. and, you know, - we just found them. they came, didn't come to us. we found them byjust connecting and talkingj to people we knew who had had experience with fayed. - so it was, you know, - it was a tough 19 months, but the evidence was there.

and were you under pressure to... i mean, clearly, vanity fair were investing a lot of resources, if they were spending, you were spending 18 months on this investigation. but at what point did you feel, did you feel under pressure to drop this, to, you know, settle with al—fayed? what happened ? well, i never felt... i never felt like - settling with al— fayed. i'm sure you didn't. i wrote a four—page memo injune '95, saying, - "do not settle with this man. "he's a crook." and, um, it was a very... i'm quite pleased with. the memo, which, ithink erica's read it. and, um, uh... i said, don't settle. we should do a second story. but then, of course, - dodi was killed at the end of august and all bets . were off, and we settled. but, you know, there was a lot of information in our case. - and we absolutely nailed him on the racism and the use - of cctv. and, of course, the _ general...general intimidation that he levelled in practically every area of life, _ where he needed to win. are you surprised that it has

taken this long for the scale of his crimes to emerge, and is a lot of it about the fact that he's died, so people can now say this stuff? of course, he died, - and all bets were off there. um, but, yeah, iam surprised. i mean, it's not as if i didn't... i i mean, i had... whatever evidence i had l at the time of settlement, in my study, i kept. and gave to anyone. i gave them to erica - and i think to channel 4, as far as i remember. um, so, you know, it was a pretty good outline - of a case there. you know, there was noi possibility that you could think this man was innocent. he was a very, very bad - individual, with unusual power. i want to make one final point. this is money talking. he had a lot of money. we had a lot of money. si newhouse, once fayed had tried to set me - and david hooper up . with a criminal charge. didn't manage, but once he'd tried that, si just said... - si newhouse, who's the head of... he was the owner of... conde nast. yes, he's now dead. si just said, "go for it.

"spend what you need to get this guy." - and the next nine months, we spent a fortune on it. . now, later in the programme, we're going to hearfrom a man who's running a tv network, a tv news network in afghanistan. but before we hearfrom him, let's turn our attention to politics, us politics to be precise, because the election is just weeks away now. and as you would imagine in terms of the tv companies, the competition for viewers is ferocious. cnn thinks it may have a secret weapon for saturday nights, and viewers in the uk will have heard of it. it's a comedy news show called have i got news for you. amberand matt, here's your headline. um... ..tiktok. what do you think? something open. something like now. spy agency. it's a big surprise. now has... i like your answer of tiktok. and i think you should

believe in yourself. look...look roy right in the eye and say with all your might, "tiktok." tiktok. podcast. close! have i got news for you is, in fact, a format that's been airing on british tv for more than 30 years. the format�*s owned by a production company called hat trick, and its managing director, jimmy mulville, came to speak to us. i'd been working with a brilliant american producer called jim biederman, and he said, "oh, you know, "you've noticed that mark thompson's taken over cnn." iwent, "oh, yes, of course he has." so i contacted him and just said, "look, you know, "you know the show. i don't have to explain..." you see, explaining have i got news for you sometimes to the occasional american executive i've tried to explain it to, when you say it's a quiz where the points don't matter and no—one has any money, they kind of glaze over. so i said to mark, "look, i don't have to explain "it to you. "how about have i got news for you being on "during

"the craziest american election ever and possibly segueing "into a civil war?" and he said, "that's a good idea." and that's how we got the commission is we did a try—out show. it wasn't a pilot. we did a try—out show a few weeks back, launched the show a week ago last saturday, and it has been doing quite well. and we did the second show this saturday. one of the things that people say is that panel shows don't work in the us, and also that american humour is very different from ours. hmm, yes. they don't get satire and they don't get irony and they don't get sarcasm, some people say. i wouldn't say that, but what's your take? who are these people? don't know, people, just people. people, 0k. great research. there's definitely a sense that... a lot of people say... ..that comedy is different, that humour is different in different countries, or do you think not? do you think actually they get it? they'll. .. i think. or have you changed it, i suppose? i think america has quite a strong tradition in politicaljokes. i mean, if you look at late night, most of the opening monologues are flecked through withjokes. john oliver, of course, who's a brit, has won the emmy, i think, six times in a row now doing jokes, and they feed

an american audience who get those jokes. so i don't buy that, actually. and as for the panel show, you're right. i mean, you're absolutely right. traditionally they don't work because, again, it goes back to, well, what is it? is it a quiz? what is it? and i said, "this is a comedy show," but... but so have you changed it a lot? well, no, what we've done is it's now an hour long, so it's 45 minutes in real time with the ad breaks. that's the weird thing is suddenly we've got a show that never had ad breaks now having ad breaks. so we've had to construct the show so each... there are games that fit the segments that then go to the ad break, but the show itself is — you would recognise the show. i mean, it's got the same kind of rounds. we've added a couple of other rounds, but it's a very recognisable version of have i got news for you, yeah. and what about the "women" question? those same people that i was talking about earlier, some would say it's difficult to get women to go on panel shows. certainly every person... not any more. do you not find that here,

and is it a problem in america? no. i mean, not any more. i think it was, and i think we've addressed that kind of balance. and, you know, on the show in america, ourthree regulars are roy wood jr, who's a fantastic comedian, amber ruffin — she's the head writer on the seth meyers show, which is a kind of late night topical humour show — and then michael black, who's a funny commentator. so, you know, we've got two african—american regulars and a... so quite different from... ..a white... yeah, yeah. in fact, michael black, who is the white guy in it, says he's the diversity hiring. so, you know, it's a great show for that because we can talk about race in a way which we couldn't do, of course, if you didn't have that kind of configuration. i think if i've done my calculations correct, your first edition would've been a few days after the debate between kamala harris and donald trump. yes, that was correct. and i'vejust been in the states, and, of course, everyone was focusing on his comments about cats and dogs and pets and

so on in springfield, ohio. this is a lot of material for your programme to work with. do you think that it can live on and succeed once you're beyond that? well, as we've seen, we're not always having an election in this country, but the show goes... i mean, the truth is that the news recycles itself, so the news is always there. we live and we breathe the news. have i got news for you in this country fulfils a very important function, i think. it's a very reithian — informs, educates, entertains. and at the end of a week, we've all lived through the same week, and then we have three funny people — maybe if we're lucky, five — and they'll unpack the week for us in a way that is manageable and makes us laugh. and laughing, as you know, is very good for your mental health, so we should do it more often. and in america... especially on this programme, we need more laughs. yeah, just generally, i think. stay with us, jimmy. let's bring in someone else to join our conversation on this. nayeema raza is a semafor contributor and co—host of semafor�*s mixed signals podcast, and somewhat of a regular on the media show, too. nayeema, great to have you back on. have you watched have i got news for you?

i have, and my american. humour managed to get it. don't worry. you got through it. great. and what was your verdict on it, both as a product, as a viewer and also as a media analyst? yeah, as a viewer, a media analyst and maker of stuff. j i mean, i have to say, i came in sceptical as a journalist - and having watched the british version of the programme - and having been a bit of an anglophile for, | you know, preferring, say,| the uk version of the office to the american. but i was pleasantly surprised. i think the second episode, i you know, in particular having a politician on there. there was a former pennsylvania congressman on there who just i played the role brilliantly of. being a bit of a straight man. and i think that the show is... it's early, so i look. forward to, you know, it becoming even more natural and seeing the kind of host - dynamic, but i think the talent has been fascinating. - like roy wood jr, entertainment weekly once described him - as "characteristically- and charismatically cranky",

and i think that works really well as a host. i i think michael ian black- and amber ruffin play well off each other, so, yeah, i like it. and in terms of the moment when it's broadcasting, saturday night, for people listening who don't know the landscape of broadcast television in the us, what kind of a slot is that to have? it looks, on the face of it, a good one to have. what are news network's normally doing on a saturday night? i mean, i think viewers. are usually not watching television on a saturday night, with the exception of, - you know, ithink- college football is big. fox news has a comedy programme on, in fact, | on saturday evening. so cnn isjoining that with this 9pm slot. i and bill maher, which of course, is in the broader family of the warner bros discovery — that merger. that we saw happen just a couple of years ago — i bill maher is broadcast right before this show. so it's becoming a bit- of kind of comedy—driven, or news—driven comedy- programming on that evening. but i think it's - an evergreen play. you know, watching this.

makes me wonder if there will be a cnn plus, - you know, in their future. we're already seeing l it is on the distribution platform for max - in the united states. and there's a cnn max now stream. i so it'll be curious to see, i you know, how does this do in the clip world - and the social world, which is really where . late—night still comedy in the united states stays relevant. - it's less on the networks . and more in its evergreen. nayeema raza from semafor, thank you very much. well, our last guest is saad mohseni. he's the co—founder of the moby media group, which amongst its many assets, has the tolonews network in afghanistan, the biggest news network in afghanistan. despite the taliban being back in power, tolo still broadcasts news and educational programmes and uses female anchors. saad'sjust published his autobiography, radio free afghanistan, and when hejoined us, he told us about the beginnings

of this media empire. well, it was after the us invasion, and there was this opportunity to start a free, independent media company. and we went back assuming that, you know, we'd invest a little bit of money and go back to australia and have a sort of an independent manager run the business. and then it became a huge success and dragged us into the business, the four siblings. and then we spent the next 20 years building this group, mostly in afghanistan, but also in africa and the middle east and south asia. so it tells the story of, you know, a pretty difficult job in a pretty difficult environment, and the difficulties continue in this new environment. and who is helping you with the funding to get something that ambitious off the ground? it was actually a very small grant of $200,000 from usaid. we invested

$300,000—odd ourselves. and that got the operation going. i mean, it was a very, very small local radio station to start off with. but i can remember being a journalist on the bbc world service and being a presenter on bbc news when tolonews got under way. it had quite an impact from the start, didn't it? yes, i mean radio, you know... you are on radio. you understand the importance of radio. and radio, as we refer to as the cockroach of the media industry, it keeps on surviving and it has a listenership. but television is so much more powerful. so radio was controversial, television was even more controversial. but today, we have both. we continue to have radio networks across the country and tv networks, and we entertain and educate and inform the afghan public. but more importantly, given that there is no—one on the ground from the international media, hardly anyone, we also get a lot of information out

of afghanistan for the outside world. saad, hello, it's katie here. i'd like to talk specifically about your female staff, because, you know, as many people in our audience will be aware, afghanistan under the taliban has become a horrendous place for women. there's been no formal secondary schooling for girls for three years now. women's rights have been eroded, and most recently women have been banned from talking in public. but you have managed to keep female presenters on the air. how have you managed that? well, you know, there is sort of a disconnect between some of the decrees which are being issued from the leader's office in kandahar and what's being implemented across the country. so, so far, women can continue to be...appear on television. they can continue to host programmes on radio. their voices are heard. they can walk... you know, if you go to all the major cities, you can see their presence.

they can drive cars. even at the airport, they, you know, the immigration officers tend to be female. as you go into the country, they're the ones stamping your passports. but my concern is that something has to give. either the leadership is able to impose its will and implement its decrees fully, or some of the more pragmatic taliban push back. but the difficulty for us is the fact that, you know, something that seems very ordinary is a challenge for us. i mean, our female journalists struggle to interview government officials or, if they're out covering a story in remote parts of afghanistan, people refuse to talk to them. they're intimidated, they're abused, but they're very courageous. i mean, they carry on. we've actually gone from eight women in our news department to 20 women, since 2021.

sorry, just to interrupt, i was just going say, if the taliban disagree with your coverage, some element of your coverage, how do they make their displeasure known to you? they get summoned by the intelligence agency. there is a process. there's a media complaints commission, which actually met this morning in kabul cos i wasjust reading the notes from our head of news. but they, you know...they can do all of the above. they can intimidate you. they can lock you up. they can arrest you, but they can also throw the book at you in terms of, you know, having broken afghan laws. so there's a sort of a strange dance that over the last three years, there are relations that we've developed with key members of the taliban, and this is, you know... the point that i've been arguing the last few weeks is that there are pragmatic individuals within the movement. it's not a monolithic movement, and the situation on the grounds a lot more nuanced. so, dialogue's important.

many thanks to saad mohseni forjoining us, and saad's new book is called radio free afghanistan. but that is it from us for this week. thank you so much for your company. goodbye. bye— bye. and if you'd like to hear a longer version of today's show, search "bbc the media show" wherever you get your bbc podcasts. hello. on friday, we had some furtherflooding problems, causing disruption on some of our road and railway networks, particularly focused around parts of the midlands. this was how one of our flood—hit communities in warwickshire looked like, and we still have a number of flood warnings currently in force — again, tightly clustered around the midlands. and of course, it's here where we've seen extreme rainfall so far this month. the wettest place in woburn, bedfordshire, we've had over four times the september average rainfall, well over three times the average rainfall in oxfordshire, and that's what's caused

the flooding issues. now, we have something of a quieter window of weather into saturday. chilly north—westerly winds with us, yes, and a few showers draped around our coastal fringes. many inland areas, dry, clear and cold. yes, heading into the first part of saturday morning, in the countryside, temperatures well down into single figures, cold enough for a nip of frost into parts of scotland and northern england. so saturday, a very cold start to the day for september, but plenty of sunshine for most. the exception is scotland, where weak weather fronts will move in, bringing some thicker cloud and a few patches of light rain. and although there could be an odd shower for northern ireland, the northwest of both england and wales should be mostly dry here. and certainly fine for southern parts of wales, southern england, the midlands and eastern england. lots of sunshine, but it will be another chilly day for this time of the year. sunday, second half of the weekend is dominated by this next area of low pressure. it's going to be another cold morning, plenty of morning sunshine, but then it turns cloudier from the southwest. the winds start to pick up and it becomes very windy for wales

and southwest england — gusts here reaching around 50 or 60 miles an hour. through the afternoon, eventually, we'll start to see some rain getting into northern ireland, wales and western areas of england, leaving the north and east of the uk dry, with some hazy spells of sunshine. through sunday night and into monday, that's when we'll see some of that rain falling on our flood—hit communities. one thing i would say is the rain isn't going to be as extreme as it has been, but clearly any extra rain is probably not going to be too helpful. a wet and windy day, then, for most of us on monday, and it will continue to be cool for the time of year — temperatures from around 12 in edinburgh to about 16 in london. heading, then, into the first part of october — yeah, where has this year gone? — it looks like it should be dry but on the chilly side. bye for now.

live from london, this is bbc news. israeli warplanes launch further attacks on buildings in southern beirut where the military says hezbollah is storing weapons. earlier, massive explosions were seen across lebanon's capital as the israeli military targets what it says is hezbollah�*s central ho. these are the live scenes in beirut where a wave of air

attacks have taken place overnight. at least a0 people have died and millions left without power as hurricane helene roared through the southeastern united states. and us vice—president kamala harris has proposed to toughen existing restrictions at the us southern border during a campaign trip to arizona. hello, i'm catherine byaruhanga. we start with the latest on the conflict in middle east. israel has mounted a wave of attacks on the lebanese capital, beirut, hitting the headquarters of the iranian—backed hezbollah group and its arms stores. the initial strikes are believed to have targeted the group's leader, hassan nasrallah, but there's been no word on his fate. this is the scene live

in beirut this morning which has seen further attacks overnight.