peter underwood thought... and jacob aron added...from the bbc was available to discuss the review�*s findings, although it did tell us that the corporation's board has asked the executive team for an action plan to address the challenges it lays out. but i am pleased to say that i'm joined on the line from oxford by one of the review�*s co—authors, sir andrew dilnot. so what were your key findings? did anything surprise you? so our key findings were, well, firist of all, i say that we spoke we spoke to a very large number of people both inside and outside the organisation. and we deliberately spoke to people who we thought would be critical as well as supportive, but without exception, everyone we spoke to said what a great thing they thought bbc was, how lucky we were to live in a country where such an organisation existed, even those who had serious concerns about particular aspects of what the journalism had been in this area. so that's the important thing to say first. like any assessment, it's easy to focus just on the negatives

those criticisms struck a chord with a number of viewers, such asjeff kay, who wrote: peter underwoodrganisation existed, even those who had serious concerns about particular aspects of what the journalism had been in this area. so that's the important thing to say first. like any assessment, it's easy to focus just on the negatives, but there was a lot of positive. the areas where we had concern were not that it seemed that overall the bbc�*s output in this area was biased either to the right or to the left, but that there were areas where we thought the coverage wasn't impartial between the arguments that should have been in play. we thought there are a few reasons for that. i said one reason seemed to us to be that politics seems to be driving the news agenda, and that's, in many ways, entirely legitimate — politics is a terribly important thing — but we thought there were a number of cases where it would have been better for an economics correspondent to have been talking about the economic issue that had become a political issue, rather than asking our extremely skilled politics