BBC News Mandela Coverage

Alot of the people tweeting wanted info because they were concerned about relatives in different parts of the UK so local radio isn't gonna be useful for someone in Manchester concerned about whats going on in Norfolk. It should have been reported simple as that. They let alot of people down. They can send reporters to the USA and use our money to cover hurricanes but they can't cover a storm in the UK its just not good enough imo.

Of course the level of coverage of something like that would again be significantly different had the death occurred when an American hurricane was happening.

A major world news event was occurring following the death of one of the most important figures of the 20th century.

Last night's storm should have had more news coverage on TV from the BBC than it did in my opinion but you can quite understand why it didn't.

Of-course i can understand but does a former South African presidents death justify nearly 8 hours of non stop coverage? Thatcher was a world icon (To Some) we did not have 8 hours dedicated to her. The BBC should have Balance alot of people saw BBC News for what it was last night.

Just some of the Tweets from last night...

https://twitter.com/michaelt1979/statuses/408723196763205632">December 5, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/GemLouise1985/statuses/408729124333944832">December 5, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/sluc496444/statuses/408741146777878528">December 5, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/u405mw2/statuses/408746788439719936">December 5, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/MarkyBunny/statuses/408748584771678208">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/Sparky_tarpi/statuses/408758592255557632">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/WorkwearS/statuses/408765904525475840">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/BBCNews">@BBCNews</a> are going on about is Nelson Mandela! He was a great man but come on BBC</p>&mdash; Aarron Kingham (@Aarronkingham) <a href="https://twitter.com/Aarronkingham/statuses/408772093971816448">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/BBC">@BBC</a> national news last night offered no advice and we were facing worst storm in 60 yrs</p>&mdash; Leandra (@PaperArtsy) <a href="https://twitter.com/PaperArtsy/statuses/408847614697021440">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

You're talking as if he was any old South African president.

Sometimes they can't win though, you'd have had people complaining whatever route they would have took.

I can't believe people b*tching over whether Mandela deserved 8 hours of near blanket coverage - of course he did. Nelson Mandela is in the top 5 influential and important political figures of the 20th Century (Him, Gandhi, Churchill, Lenin and LBJ (in my books anyway)). The BBC gave more than 8 hours of near-blanket coverage for Thatcher's death who let's not forget was the most divisive Prime-Minister ever and who bought misery to millions of peoples lives. BBC viewers were also treated to several hour long news specials about her death and about 4 hours of coverage of her funeral. Anyway the blanket coverage was overnight when the average viewer wouldn't have been watching anyway.

Lets not forget he was an inspiration to millions and completely revolutionised one of the last segregated cultures in the developed world. Just because he stood up to British Imperialist values which had been imposed on the country does not mean he shouldn't get the respect he deserves. Just because over Breaking News was happening does not mean that probably the most important and significant death of the year shouldn't be given priority. I'd like to see you say the same if the Queen dies on the same day as the Budget and a massive earthquake? If it had been the President of the US it would be 8 days of blanket coverage so does not the founding President of the Republic of South Africa deserve some blanket coverage. He was an inspiration to all and is the person who has done more for civil rights than any one else in history.

jjlk if anyone does anything on television, you'll be able to find numerous examples of people who don't approve or think something else should be broadcast instead and do you know what? If they had their way you'd probably find the same amount of people arguing the opposite! This just goes with the territory of having thousands and thousands of people watching.

Please don't be stupid of picking select examples from Twitter and suggest it can be used as an accurate barometer of how the whole nation feel. Especially when you've made a specific search for such reactions to back up your argument.

They could have listened in to the BBC local radio station in the affected area online. They are all available.

I don't buy that BBC1's national news HAD to cover the floods, especially since the Mandela story had broken just minutes before, and was quite obviously the major international story. The weather was not even the top national story at that point, it was second to the Autumn Statement., and both stories got bumped, in fact every other story got bumped. I think that realisation is lost in the kerfuffle over the floods story getting bumped, it wasn't the only story to get bumped off the Ten, it wasn't even the biggest story to get bumped off the Ten.

Local radio was the place to go to get that information, not BBC1's national news. BBC Radio Lincolnshire and many other stations up and down the east coast, was the place to get that, and it was available to listen to online. To expect the national news on BBC1 to cover that, when the Mandela story was that fresh, is not realistic.

Now, on any other night, I'd have been calling for extended regional news programming on BBC1 regions where the floods would be the major story, but quite honestly, I don't think it would have been editorially correct to have some regions covering their own floods situation, at the same time the rest of BBC1 would have been covering the Mandela story. You can argue that with BBC News showing the Mandela story, there would have been a choice, that's not an insignificant argument either, but at the end of the day, in editorial terms, BBC1 is primarily a national channel, with regional opt-outs. yes it is now the only BBC channel to have regional opt-outs and I consider that a mistake, but still, a major breaking international news story is always going to crowd out every other story. Did ITV News at Ten cover any other story other than Mandela? Now, if they had, then you might have an argument, but AIUI they went with Mandela the whole way too, so this argument that the BBC were somehow wrong not to cover the floods, actually belies the reality that neither did ITV in their News at Ten.

I agree he was an icon, he should have airtime but it should be balanced equally. British viewers are more concerned about the severe weather affecting our country they don't want to see a South African street with people dancing and chanting for hours on end and non stop regurgitated reports hour after hour, the news moves on and the BBC seem to be obsessing over Mandela. If you look at the Most Read on BBC News website, Mandela's death isn't even on the list of Most Read Articles. Real people are interested in whats going on right here, right now.

But, look at the most shared stories on social media. Mandela is 3 of the top 4 stories shared on social media. That's more telling than the most read stories right now.

It would have been regurgitated reports every hour which ever stories they were covering. You have no evidence the nation as a whole were more interested in the weather.

If you're going to try that one, should the second story on the News be Simon Amstell's joke?

[quote="cityprod" pid="896048"]

''They could have listened in to the BBC local radio station in the affected area online. They are all available.''

Why should people that pay ridiculous amounts of their hard earned cash for a over funded corporation have to search online to get the info that should be on a NEWS channel. We pay for News Channel, we should get News not just ONE story.