-----Original Message-----
From: zzStephen zzWhittle
Sent: 23 March 2005 10:38
To: David Miller
Subject: RE: BFBS and the BBC

Thank you for your email.

The use of BFBS material within Good Morning Scotland on one occasion in November 2004 was unusual and unique. The piece was commissioned by BBC Scotland from a known journalist. It was included in the
programme as a feature giving Scottish listeners a sense of the place where a Scottish regiment was operating in Iraq and how they were responding to the challenges. It was
clearly flagged on air as coming from BFBS in accordance with the Producers' Guidelines and the BBC had full editorial control over what was broadcast.  Nor, did the BBC
pay for it. However, we acknowledge that given the public debate about Iraq it would have been preferable for the BBC to gather this material itself. Commissioning of this kind
of item will not be repeated.

Stephen Whittle

-----Original Message-----
From: David Miller
Sent: 23 March 2005 10:55
To: zzStephen zzWhittle
Subject: RE: BFBS and the BBC

Dear Stephen Whittle,

Thanks for your email and your reassurance that this kind of commissioning will not be repeated.

However, you seem to be under a misapprehension. The use of BFBS in November was not unique.  At least one
other report from BFBS (from a different journalist) was broadcast by BBC Scotland, on the lunchtime news on
Christmas day.  Can you investigate and confirm for me how many other times this has happened?

Also, if flagging up a report from an MoD funded unit is acceptable under the producers guidelines, perhaps you can point out to me the
passage which permits this.  My reading of the guidelines, as I suggested in my original email, is that this only applies to 'extracts from such releases' rather than the use
of whole packages.  Also, the guidelines state that 'we must be wary of using a News Release to illustrate a story about the organisation which provided it, particularly if it gives
an unrealistic or overly favourable impression of the organisation. We should normally use such material only to illustrate the way in which the company or organisation is
promoting itself' http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/policies/producer_guides/text/section5.shtml

Given that BBC insiders have described the report in question as an 'audio press release' for the army, this would also appear to be a breach of the guidelines.  If so, surely you
have a duty to say so?

Lastly, you state that the BFBS report was made available free to the BBC.  This does suggest, more than if it had been commissioned through the
normal channels, that what we are discussing is the use of promotional material rather than the commissioning of an independent journalist who would and should be expected to
be paid for their work. Can you tell me if the same arrangements applied to the other commission(s) made from BFBS?

Yours sincerely,

David Miller

-----Original Message-----
From: zzStephen zzWhittle
Sent: 23 March 2005 11:20
To: David Miller
Subject: RE: BFBS and the BBC

To the best of my information after extensive checking, there was no other report. As I explained, the
piece was commissioned by the BBC in Scotland and the provider identified.

Having read the transcript I would quarrel with the description of the item as "an audio press
release".  In any event, the BBC retained editorial control. We have made clear it was not ideal and will not happen
again.

Stephen Whittle