Read this: Should the BBC have called the Christchurch shooting a 'terror attack'?

BBC sounds music Radio podcasts BBC Radio budgets are fighting and the controller videos please decision to catch the much admired late Junction down for three Editions a week to one longer edition has caused house of pain from fans of experimental music.

I think they do for you should be building on the strength of this program as opposed to reducing it as much of the general public.

I'll be talking to the editor of Radio Forth p.m.

Programme about how she's trying to cover that ever so repetitive issue in freshways.

I haven't been ruthless nothing saying actually that are the bit of brexit coverage has to go so it has ended up approaching of wall of noise and the mysterious absence of the absence of normal no apologies by your leave.

No we really

Cocktail why did Radio 4 play the wrong episode of Alexei sayle's serial comedy series we begin with the events last week in New Zealand and some listeners concerns about aspects of the corporations coverage concerns that I will be putting to BBC News as editorial director Kamal Ahmed the horrific Christchurch attack which occurred on Friday last week claimed 50 lives with many more injured some critically the headlines this morning.

There has been a mass shooting at 2 months early this morning as the first details began to emerge of the Massacre at to Moston reported dead before the 28th and hospital with gunshot wounds those the latest again are the only ones who aren't calling this the terror attack there will be some reason some guidance and policy that says he know he mustn't in flame the masses by calling it terror attack until somewhere.

Another has confirmed it but really Andrew Richards I was astonished.

I can think of no parallel were the victims have been white or European where the BBC is equally failed to describe the terror attack as terrorism Herefordshire I wasn't concerned about the coverage which was very full what I'm saying is that we don't cover other things of similar size princess the Philippines where 20 people were killed in a cathedral again a terrorist attack but it hardly got any coverage in Britain man on Tuesday morning New Zealand's Prime Minister made a vow not to name the alleged killer again which leads some listeners to demand that the BBC for her example.

I heard one of the presenters telling us that the New Zealand Prime Minister had said about the man who shot dead 50 people in her country last Friday that the suspect will be nameless.

The present event immediately gave us the name of this man.

I'm sure I cannot be the only person who is so angry about this should be seen from Stowmarket in Suffolk I think this was absolutely ludicrous.

There was no need for it whatsoever it didn't add anything to the bulletin and I think Radio 4 should have taken the lead from the prime minister's stars are highly critical of the world at one which trailed a discussion of his naming debate with what listeners considered a highly inappropriate clip from the Harry Potter films will ask what it means to deny someone their name analogue when the Harry Potter theme tune started playing it seems to completely devalue and trivialize the point that Defender are done with making m.

I'm not sure I'm in Thai

Comfortable with a discussion the hots blaze leaving the Christchurch attacker to Voldemort Sally l.

This is worse than simply craft.

What are so blended approach to be relatively new BBC News editorial director Kamal Ahmed I talked to him earlier and started with that controversial clip from the world at one.

I think you're really with one of your listeners that it was uncomfortable to listen to now.

It was one item in many many hours of coverage of the Terrible events in New Zealand of course sometimes we make missteps and people were thinking about how to think about the notion of denying someone their name in coverage.

It was done in a certain type of way, but yet as I say the listener who said it made them feel uncomfortable.

It made me feel like I'm table.

It was one of the areas where in retrospect you may not have done it.

That's in that way again.

That's not to say that huge amount of the output on.

One and across radio output was very sensitively handled.

I think that just clicked out of context of all the other coverage it sounds worse when you just put that start question to me than the praise that should be given to many of our reported in the field and your reporting on radio about how much sensitive an excellent coverage.

There is a short history about three key issues related to that coverage that start with the use of the word terrorism should the BBC of use the term terrorist attack instead of shooting on the issue of terror and terrorism and guidance is clear.

There is no definition of what is a terrorist attack and who is a terrorist if we use the word we want to attribute it and we actually did it correctly to the New Zealand Prime Minister who has come back and say and quite possibly if there's been conducted by islamists you would have called a terrorism because it was good.

Did by someone was not you're more reluctant to apply the term terrorism we went through a long list of other headlines and how we had covered other atrocities like the London Bridge attack like the Westminster Bridge attack like the Manchester concert attack because terrorism and a terror attack carry a huge amount of different opinions about when we should use that term we need to explain what has happened first as I say that is some pleurisy daddy, but for some reason the audience largely a team does not understand this you are reluctant to use the word Tara clearly one of their rooms is not just a kill people but to gain publicity and to create a sense of terror.

There is no agreed definition of what a terrorist is it is disputed, so we never use it independently that there is no ban on any use of words in the BBC so we can very close when we have used the

Expression without attribute into somebody we have very clear guidelines that the use of the word is surrounded by all sorts of complications and actually confuses the issue so reluctant to use that time does that mean your instruction to those who write the scripts and so on his avoid using the word another terrorism not at all.

We don't understand when you would think it would be suitable to use it other than when your attributing it to someone else.

I don't want your way trying to get down to a kind of precise definition which we're not going to get to we want to be consistent one of your listeners said that erm it was because we were worried about him flaming the masses that is not the issue.

These are live discussions.

He's a delicate complicated areas which we discuss with colleagues throughout but we're very clear the most important point is that audiences understand? What has happened? Can we move on to the question then is whether you should name or continue to name.

Chief suspect, why do you continue to name the man who allegedly carried out of this action when the New Zealand Prime Minister said she will not do so he's not for journalists to stop naming somebody because politicians they say the route.

They are taking he is an individual that for the audience.

They need to understand his background his motivations.

We don't have a situation Roger where we would tell all about output not to name someone that to your listeners Roger that's not how journalism works because the prime minister has said something and for the BBC then to say we are therefore going to ban the naming of that person on all output is not the way edit all decision main antagonist and then of course I understand why initially would use the name but I didn't the point that people get at is this what these people do want his publicity and is one of Alison said you can be very careful the reporter.

Does not become collaboration didn't reply to naming people who are in leisurely carried out the exact it does apply.

It does apply that we have to be very sensitive about the issues.

You absolutely right part of what happened in New Zealand was about the perpetrator trying to get as much publicity as possible.

We need to be very sensitive to the points made by the New Zealand patrimony of the name of sparingly accepting the argument that you can't ban the use of the name is it your view that the name should be used more sparingly.

I think the name should be used as appropriate to make sure the audience understands what it is.

We are talking about who it is we are talking about so the program editors make decisions about the output and they are absolutely aware of the sensitivities around not giving someone the oxygen of publicity that they may crave can move on to the scale of the coverage.

There are the suspicion of some of our listeners who think that because it's New Zealand because they speak English

Because there's a connection that's traditional connection with this country it gets more coverage than as one specific person.

He's Butler says and attacking the Philippines is that a danger I think we have to think very carefully about how we cover global atrocities of this type.

It was something that resonated for many audiences around the globe because of some of the beers from Muslim communities in particular, but others about right wing white supremacist attack so they had a residence that went far beyond New Zealand but you're right roger that we need to test ourselves to ensure we are giving due prominence to other events around the world over the last week.

We been seen the appalling events in Mozambique for example with the cyclone and we've been covering that incredibly broadly but I think you're right to raise the test do we ensure that we give our listeners at the correct amount of coverage of different events around the world, but as I say New Zealand was a picture.

The shocking event which had that resonance and there was a a big response from our audiences here to that attack.

Thanks to BBC News editorial director Kamal Ahmed the last week Radio 3 announced a series of changes to its late night schedule some of which its controller Alan Davies said were brought on by opportunity and creative renewal and Sam as a result of us having to play our part in finding 800 million pounds worth of savings the controller Brady of trees decided to cut the experimental music programme late junction from 3 auditions week 2 on though that will be slightly longer and it's be catered slots being filled by a slightly cheaper classical music programme The planned changes have triggered are more than 5000 strongest may petition and an open letter to Radio 3 published in the Guardian and signed by the likes of Jarvis Cocker Peter Gabriel Martin Carthy Brian Eno and Shirley Collins the reaction from listeners in

Our inbox has also been strong as in gale force hello feedback.

This is Rebecca and I'm calling to ask Radio 3 not to cut Junction to just once a week.

It's a bit like having a cool older sibling who lets you stay at past your bedtime play to amazing records and impatient you explain what it's all about in other words.

It's family.

I know I'm not alone in thinking it to best Pokémon the BBC so please don't change it to find music like that does a cinematic widescreen.

It's all going on you could actually feel People moving through Cameron Mitchell reducing elite Junction to once a week is such a backward step the shows brought me so much.

Pleasure over the years often challenging those presented in the most accessible of ways it really reminds me of all that swells and brilliant about creativity it opens up a world where outside.

The celebrated and it's music go for your national and Griffin cultural Borders on a personal note it refreshes and reset my imagination three times a week iMac ne22 against I'm not a typical Radio 3 listeners, but things like Samsung 3 liaquat eclectic and advances and you wouldn't find it anywhere else on the BBC the new late night classical music so seems like another step towards Radio 3 becoming more like a classic FM now this point.

I'm sure you hope that I have Alan Davie in the Studio with me to discuss this changes recently invited him unless he is as the BBC says unavailable and we've been told he won't be able to speak to us until after the changes coming to.

Affecting the autumn which sounds as if he will not be deflected by any criticism instead the BBC gave us this statement.

It's quite long so we thought we play music underrated chatted up a bit we in new commissioning rounds for the program and can't comment further at this stage, but does Alan outlined in his blog on about the BBC late Junction will remain a regular and important feature on Friday nights all musical genres are important to us none of the decisions have been taken lightly that's why one Radio 3 has to play its part in making significant savings in all areas.

We have sought to protect the full range of music genres I spoke to BBC historian and professor of media and cultural history of Sussex university David Hendy about why he thinks cutting and avant-garde experimental corner of the late night shed.

Has induced such an outcry from listeners, even though this is a program that really exists at the margins of the Radio 3 schedule.

It's actually a program that is actually at the heart of the BBC's Ethos and I think this is as a can of conflation hear of of issues about money.

I think there's an argument about distinctiveness and I think there's also a bit of geography and politics here.

I think you know you've got a program here which is remarkably eclectic mean more eclectic than Pat anything else on the airwaves, but in terms of distinctiveness in terms of the Pops even uniqueness you think the program isn't good but usually replaced.

I think this is distinctive and I think the timing is not under the BBC's own controller think it's in really important to make note of the issue of money here.

How is the government throws the BBC licence fee in 2010 and imposed new responsibilities and costs.

Since then the BBC's made I think about 700 million pounds of cuts and in the current BBC action plan it sets out over the next 2 years or so another 700 million pounds of cuts.

I needed now that several times over the annual running costs of all the BBC's radio networks if the overheads of being squeezed which of the they appear to be it has to be the program then and does it well, don't you see listening to pay the licence we care about the radio more than else will say the figures were talking about NVIDIA 304 come to think of it are peanuts compared to other costs broadcasting is a complex machine.

You can't always cut the most expensive bits of it, but when you're making cuts.

You have to make cuts that somehow end up with your network retaining its character in somewhere, and I think this is where the issue over distinctiveness matters.

I think you know there's been.

Battle here a buzzword especially since the government put Ofcom in charge of regulating the BBC and it feels as if distinctiveness is increasingly seen officially a something that occurs between each radio network or Channel as long as they are different from each other that's enough and I think that you and you're making cuts.

You can have calling to that distinctiveness now.

I think the problem with this is that there is another version of distinctiveness which is in the very DNA of the BBC and has been since the 1920s the days of its founding father John reef which believe that it was really important not to separate us out into separate acoustic bubbles in other words.

They should be diversity within each network within each program, so the pre-order is surprised by something.

They would not normally look for but suddenly find that they like yes, I think that's the public service bit of Public Service Broadcasting

National broadcasters Innocence have an easier task what they do is they find out what people want and then supply it now the BBC he embraces this idea deep down there instead of demand shaping supply supply might shake demand and I think what's really emblematic about late junction is that by it's very nature it refuses to bow down to the dogma of the algorithm.

You know that Dogma that says if you like this will give you more of the same.

Thanks to BBC historian.

David Hendy some programs are however cut an intentionally now waiting for the final installment in a series of dark comic please from Alexei Sayle the absence of normal continues as Katy Carmichael and Jan ravens star in the last woman killed in the Wall on my friends with Alexa sales absence of normal as series of comedy plays which we featured on.

Last week's feedback settled back to enjoy and you installments they didn't get it.

I'm Debbie blanket.

I'm currently in the House of Lords I've been enjoying the absence of normal.

I was listening on Monday morning coming down to London and suddenly I realised that the previous week programme was being played at the end of the program.

I waited for them to apologise and say we really really sorry we've run last week's episode Stead all we got was next week will be the last episode no apology no by your leave.

No we really sorry we've cocked up.

I'm not genuinely looking forward to the final episode if it actually comes on Monday country sounds but when I went to listen to it through sounds it was the same episode that I just been played it's almost as though someone has taped over the wrong with the original.

Episodes in the wrong ones on there for BBC told us that the rebroadcast was an operational error and that indeed the final episode will be played on Monday and that episode will go up on sounds only after its been broadcast for rights reasons now if you want to tell us about anything you've heard be a technical editorial or anything else to get in touch here are some listeners to tell you how you can email feedback at bbc.co.uk you can tweet us at BBC R4 feedback.

You can leave a phone message at 03 triple 3444 544 standard landline charges apply, but it could cost more on some mobile networks if you prefer old school believe it or not.

You can still write to us.

Please send your letters or comments to feedback PO Box 672 34.

London se1p 4ax all those details are on our website finally the unending agony that is brexit.

English procedural surprises, but no clarity is where things are going switching whose not who is yet to be persuaded.

I minister asks for a brexit delay or announcing unravelling of her strategy and her career for and audacious last gasp attempt to get her way allegations of BBC bias on brexit of Longfield up our inbox along with complaints of the coverage goes on too long and contains two little explanation, but other corporations news journalists sources suffering from brexit exhaustion owenna Griffiths is the editor of Radio 4 p.m.

I spoke to her on Thursday in the BBC newsroom as she was starting preparations for that afternoons program, which would of course have to cover the latest visit of the prime minister to Brussels

So this is a classic brexit Day by 5 remaining nothing more than we know now the reason we keep talking about it is because this is an incredibly significant story it is a very complex story and the fact that there may not be a news line by the time.

We got on air doesn't mean there aren't aspects of the story that we shouldn't be exploring the primary goal we have when we're thinking about a brexit coverage is how can we make sense of this in some ways morass of a story for the audience but at the end of each program believe you said what have we found out a lot of time the answer would be not a lot and that's why you get certain number of Alison the same just admit that and get on recover something else.

I would quite happily say there are days and I could 0.1 a couple of weeks ago when we came off and then heaven and I did feel we haven't lifted the fog of brexit in any way for the audience that day most days.

I don't feel that I'm not at all saying it's perfect but I think we buy honing in on a specific issues saved within explaining indicative votes today.

Yes, brexit has been around for two-and-a-half years, but actually indicative votes haven't been discussed for two-and-a-half years.

There is a real value in giving the audience and understanding of what could well happen next week now of course you could say that speculation.

I would say in that instance is making sure the audience is best raquib to understand.

What is a very complicated story of course we were somewhere if you plan the programme in the morning and it goes out at 5 Brazilian Never Dies because it's 3 4 and sometimes when you're on the air of course the news changes and you have to respond to welcome that or do you sometimes it goes a beautifully prepared program because I have to find 10 minutes for x on Monday we had a program planned suddenly at 3:30 the speaker is making a statement.

We had no.

Idea what he was going to say because bombshell and clearly as a journalist you live for something happening that you haven't expected to happen and that is undoubtedly you feel energised by that but it's also when you are really relying on the expertise within the BBC to help you make sense of something it very late notice in that instance.

You are doing this or the best interpretation you can in the time available for what you're doing also throwing things out and when you have a late developing story really important that contributions for foreign Correspondents you have to look at the same.

Sorry how to get it was just the first day when it was a really just an emerging story.

I think if I was being self critical.

I would say the programs when I felt we haven't provided clarity on brexit is when there has been a late development and as the editor.

I haven't been router.

Nothing saying actually that are the bit of brexit coverage has to go so it has ended up approaching the wall of noise and that's where I'd say if I was marking my own homework.

I could do better tonight.

You're going to have to do brexit as we said we don't know what the result is.

It's Thursdays before lunch.

We haven't heard the response of Europe to the request by the prime minister to extend the.

Are you really looking forward to this show.

I mean I said my knees UK music to have to do it again or is today one of the days when you think this is a really great day to be anything for you.

I've had to say in the round brexit is the most difficult story I've covered and this last few weeks as an individual editor.

I feel a great responsibility to try and get that right for the audience just that mean.

I'm sort of relishing it not always you know.

We've told everyone over talking this morning about before Christmas we spoke to her family that how do you

Deal with this is something everyone cares about how do you deal with brexit division within the family so we talked about going back to the family to sort of catch up with them for months on so I think what makes it exciting is the combination of trying to make sure we get the news of the day right but also trying to think of how p.m.

In its unique way can add value and make sense of the sort of national experience as well as the political story and how does reducing the show is now from the one that was presented by one of the best present is everybody would agree with that Eddie Mair how is it different now Eddie had a unique style.

You can't really compare Evan with Eddie in that sense.

It every was never going to come in and try and be ready.

He's got this incredible warmth, but he also has a mind with a sort of vice like grip on the detail of a story he approaches interviews universal of evidence-based way finding an illumination.

It's not that winning an argument.

And I think that's what's distinctive about Emma Griffiths on covering brexit and working with the new presenter perhaps you could offer some advice to her counterpart on Gardeners Question Time which is an ounce today to grab some is to step down after 25 years and be replaced by Kathy Clugston and I'm sure many many listeners will miss Eric but you'll have more time to look after his sheep in the glorious Wasdale Valley and Cambria entertained his own plot albeit too often in the rain happy gardening Eric goodbye.