I live in the Caribbean and watch BBC World on cable. The channel constantly bombards viewers with self-promoting 'adverts' proclaiming it has more reporters in more places than any other 'news organisation'. It was interesting therefore watching its reports on the NHS terrorist unit's attempt to blow up Glasgow Airport and the Beeb's having to repeat what an American TV channel (CNN?) was saying about the incident because its own squad of reporters could obviously dig up no significant information themselves. If the BBC cannot report in-depth on a major incident on its home turf then what is the point in the hapless licence payer having to pay for this bloated, useless organisation under pain of imprisonment? And as for Blue Peter faking a competition result! What would Biddy Baxter, Val Singleton and Patch think of that? Time to sell any shares you might have in the Sticky Backed Plastic Corporation!

Joe Sobey, Providenciales, Turks & Caicos Islands, BWI

The BBC puts on great programmes, but it is definitely dumbing down and maybe that's because many of the programmes are not "in-house" anymore and also that probably explains the idiocy that happens. Someone expects someone else to be truthful, whilst not taking enough care themselves.

Its a wake-up call for everything the BBC does and for every other broadcaster.

Michael Hatton, Stoke on Trent, UK

All of this is one thing but surely the bigger issue for the BBC is the loss of Neighbours. Tsk tsk. Apart from the news what does anyone watch on it.

Tom, West Kensington, London

We may not agree with everything the BBC says, but we have to say that the DG BBC has shown exceptional honesty in acknpwledging the various mistakes made in tha production of shows. I have believed in the BBC for the last forty years and after seeing the kind of reporting news channels in India make, I go back to BBC with a sigh of relief. Hats off to you BBC

INDU RAMESH, bANGALOE, iNDIA/kARNATAKA

It's about time that the BBC is finally held to account for all of its "gaffes". It's impossible to believe that such an experienced group of professionals could inadvertently make so many "oopsies". While not a conspiratorialist, I have come to believe, albeit reluctantly, that these serious errors in judgement have sadly not been unpurposeful.

The difficult truth is that Auntie has lost her way! It's time for some structural and organic changes that will ensure her lasting independence and reputation, both of which have been sorely challenge over the last ten years. Absent some serious changes at the top, it is very unlikely that the public will allow an untrusted Auntie to feed at the public trough much longer.

R H Stern, St Annes, Lancs, UK

BBC should be privatised except for a minor role as a public broadcaster

Frank hodes, Dukinfield, Cheshire

Agree entirely with Paolo, from Rome and Rob from Plymouth--I'm sure the Queen personally, would never have made such an issue of it -after all she's gone through the past few years , this really was quite trivial--the media has gone over the top !

Wyn Pedder, conwy N.wales.,

Making a mistake is human. The BBC apologized. What more do you want? It's still the finest public broadcast service in the world. So, please don't touch the BBC. The rest of the world would never forgive you.

Paolo, Rome, Italy

The BBC has about the same credibility as a Tony Blair pledge.

Thorrun, Brentwood,

Why is every bbc gaff treated as a conspiracy,whilst at the same time our newspaper media is rarely questioned? Are right wingers so blinkered that they want any vestige of centrist politics to be stamped upon?Should all media be forced by law to stick to a Daily Mail approved agenda?The bbc is a constant target by right wingers,and yet it generally attempts to stick to a fair and balanced news presentation.Perhaps it annoys those with dictatorial inclinations,that the bbc,does not know it's place.As for the licence fee,I reckon that I receive a fair service on the whole (though I resent the huge payments made to the likes of Jonathan Ross,and it's cheif execs),it gives top quality telly,and brilliant programmes.The monarchy however,live in unearnt luxury,often create embarrasing spectacles of themselves (at least Mark Thompson doesn't don a nazi uniform as a "larf"),and I am given no choice,as to paying taxes to fund them.

Rob, Plymouth, uk

A (not so) new oxymoron is now becoming public knowledge: trustworthy BBC.

Francois Conil, Pau, France

How may times does the Goverment have to be told.
Scrap the licence fee now and give the viewers the choice of subscription to the BBC or not. There is so much tv and radio choice today I now despise the BBC for forcing me, under threat of prison, to pay the licence.

The staff and "celebs"are grossly over paid and the programming is awful. When did the BBC last show a first run film, live league football or test match cricket? When did they last show a top quality import like the Sopranos? The BBC thinks that by producing one hit like Dr Who it has done its job.

The BBC is 30 years out of date. It is an institution that should have been privatised years ago.
Stop the fee now!

Geoff, Swansea,

My response to Paul of London, who writes below: "c'mon, yes it was a bad error of judgement, but take it from an American living in London, the BBC is far ahead of their American colleagues in literacy, accuracy, balance and overall journalistic quality."

What does that tell us? American journalism has been a disgrace to Western Culture since the 1960s. It was dumbed down long ago ... indeed some would say it was dumb to begin with. There is no literacy, accuracy, balance and overall journalistic quality in American journalism largely because emotionalism trumps everything else, followed by the profit motive. After watching CNN for one hour, I always feel in need of a lobotomy.

We British will judge the BBC according to our own values and benchmarks, thank you very much. What passes for 'normal' in America is completely irrelevant. After all, we are the dupes paying for the BBC. Sorry to insult America, Paul, but that is the way many of us see it, and have seen it for many years.

Errol Flynn, Chester, England

The general management of the BBC leaves much to be desired. There can be no doubt in anyones mind that the service is losing its touch with the people it serves and has concentrated on Entertainment at the expense of Informing and Educating. That said, I believe that the response to the current matter regarding The Queen has been more like the BBC of old. The management has openly admited the error, explained how it occurred, apologised to HM and the public, and commenced an examination of its production methods. Unlike other commentators, I suggest that for once, the underlying integrity of the BBC has returned - I only hope that it does not again sink under the weight of popularism and 'dumbing down'.

Jonathan Mills, Brighton,

I am 71 years of age and for all of my adult life I have been
proud of and defended the BBC, having no grudge in paying
my license fee.
However in recent years I have become totaly disenchanted
with the Corporation . They care more for ratings than truth
accuracy or intergrity. The Blue Peter and the recent Royal
fiasco are only the straw ---------. For example they allow young upstarts to interpret the News instead of reporting it. All of my life I have relied on my instinct to reach conclusions - and have
been more often right than wrong . Without going into a detail of chapter and verse ( I could ) I have no doubt that the BBC has lost it's way - big time !!. This is so sad in a world where we need obective reporting dedicated to truth we have now
a BBC which has joined the common media herd.

Tom Stevenson, Greenock, Rnfrewshire UK

The BBC distorting the truth is regrettably no longer news: these days it is a regular event. What is news is that the BBC has for once made an admission and issued an apology. Normally they brazenly refute any question of impropriety and persist in that stance even when all evidence – including invariably their own letters of explanation – is to the contrary. That the BBC continues to enjoy the reputation of being an impartial and accurate disseminator of events – both domestic and international – is truly frightening and given the dependence our politicians have on breathing the air of publicity, over which in the UK the BBC holds such sway, it is unlikely the BBC will ever be held to democratic account (I emphasise account not interference) and our democracy will continue it’s steady inexorable decline.

MN, London, UK

So the BBC, after the recent 'Wagon Wheel' report identifying its cosy incestuous left of centre culture immured from criticism, lionises the ghastly spin doctore Alistair Campbell and simultaneously conspires to produce a libel against the nation's head of state by grubby cutting and pasting which would get them into court were it against eg Murdoch or Kinnock.
And we have to continue to pay their poll tax for the broadcast version of the Guardian
How can we get a proper reformation of this huge corporation, far more powerful politically than the monarchy now? HOW can we reform this infallible indefective ministry of propaganda? Boycott the licence fee?

T, Oxford, UK

Will someone please end this hysterical witch hunt, and all over what exactly? Oh yes, a mistake on the part of the beeb, in failing to properly scrutinise a trailer put together by one of the production companies it employs. Is that it?

Is really is not the great scoop of the century, in spite of the baying for blood by numerous backbenchers in the House. There really are more pressing things MPs should be occupying their time with, like the very real and present terror threat, taxpayers' money being spent by the bucket load in the wrong places in the NHS, bringing back proper sentences for violent offenders and recidivists so that prison becomes a deterrent, and not a second home to which offenders can return for a few months every year or two, or what about the sexual discrimination routinely practised against men by the state's so-called 'family courts'?

We are not living in a 'big brother' house, so let's return our focus to the worthwhile shall we?

will richards, Droitwich,

It's shameful that I am forced to subsidise an organisation that is synonymous with poor standards and a lowest common denominator, inclusive editorial. Where is the brave politician who will free us of this TV tax? I shudder at those three letters - BBC - and what they now represent. They ceased speaking for me, representing the life I lead or producing anything I would call entertaining a long time ago.

Barbara, Bath, UK

The TV licence fee that people pay are for: the good lives of corporate fat cats, and self-righteous leftwing journalists.

James Wong, Macau,

What ever happened to Kate Adey?
Not pretty enough?
Or marginalized by that buffoon John Simpson?

Daniel, Melbourne , Australia

Not long ago I had a pathetic, insincere, form 'apology' from the BBC following a complaint about a piece that got 'edited' to make it the exact reverse of what I said. Having just had a complaint to OFCOM about an edit - which turned black into white - upheld, SKY has replied in its defence to the effect that because it was only a few seconds long it doesn't matter, and it would set 'a bad precedent' for reality TV shows to accurately represent, er, reality. It’s abnormal practice nowadays across the whole sorry industry to drive up ratings through 'enhancing' actuality. And now, we have this. I am sure we can look forward to a bumper edition of Newswatch, where an arrogant troupe of executive 'mea not blooming culpas' fob us with the usual 'it wasn't me, or if it was it wasn't that bad, or if it was it didn't matter, or if it does who cares?' BBC Trust? Oxymoronic choice of words. You cannot lie and expect to get away with it. Repeat. You should not be able to lie and get away with it. Repeat. You can lie and get away with it. Now that's what I call editing.

Peter Martin, Ross on Wye, UK

Unfortunately, GM of Toronto is correct. The BBC's bias is clear wherever you look.

A while ago there was a phone-In about Islam on Radio 5. The woman taking calls equated the Pope's opposition to contraception with the calls by Imams working in British mosques to murder British soldiers. She almost screamed "The Pope says No Contraception" as if this was some big "Aha" moment of equivalence. If I went on TV and said, "I'm a Catholic and I've used condoms" the Pope might tut. The general reaction would be "Why is he telling us this?" If a Moslem went on TV in Riyadh and said "I'm a Moslem and I've just eaten a pork pie and washed it down with a pint of John Smith's" he'd be stoned to death.

Some equivalence.

There is an orthodoxy about the BBC. People toe the party line or they just don't get on.

John Lynch, Oswestry, UK

BBC is no stranger to 'massaging' events to suit its purpose. In its battle with the government re Gilligan and Iraq it no doubt selectively chose to give more air time to anti-government, anti-Blair opinion in its 'vox pop' slots on radio than to other opinion - thereby giving a false impression of public 'feeling'. Ah, the power of editing!

Gary Tebble, Chesterfield, England

Why can't the BBC go offshore and leave us ? It behaves like a State Secular 'Church' forcing us to pay the tithe and then demanding we see the world the way it prescribes. It is out of control and has become a hydra. If it can broadcast deliberate untruth in connection with The Monarch how many lives does it ruin as it ruined that of Dr David Kelly used a Kafkaesque pawn in a game between the BBC and Alistair Campbell ?

It is an affront to civilised values, a deceitful and mendacious force with great capacity for evil....and yet a huge monolithic corporation impervious to criticism and with a self-perpetuating managerial elite contemptuous of the public

Observer, Peterborough, England

I have often wondered if one of the questions people are asked when interviewed for a position at the BBC is
"How far left are you?"

H Potgieter, Johannesburg,

I see that the cover up has already began. "Oh! Sorry it was all a mistake, the film was not for publication," etc . I will make a prediction that no heads will roll, those guilty of this truly awful slur on our Head of State are going to be protected by those of a similar ilk within the Corporation

FEF, Cheltenham Glos,

Youve just thrown away £50,000.00 on a fine for misleading the public. Peter Fincham, give us back our tv licence money and stand down now.

david, peterborough,

If the BBC value their Royal Charter let them tred lightly...

Tony, Portsmouth, UK

Does making people believe in human caused global warming count as misling the public ?

John-Paul, mondeville, France

If it was an apology to the Queen it was certainly well disguised. I for one hope that this is the final nail in the coffin of a prejudiced, self serving, unreliable organisation that continually fails to met its charter requirements. Considering the cost to each license holder in the UK, we expect, deserve and demand a better service. If its was a commercial broadcaster it would be in liquidation.

R Jackson, Isle of Man,

As professional filmmaker, I am in no doubt that the edited material as shown was the deliberate choice of the program's producer or director, who must take full responsibility for it. Such things do not happen accidentally or by oversight. It is quite possible that nobody beyond the producing company would have been aware of this. Instead of farming out programs, the Beeb should be making them themselves with properly employed producers who would stoop to such unprofessionalism. (Yeah...) Not that the climate that prevails presently at the BBC would allow a program-maker to move in any direction other than Left.

Mike Fox, London, UK

The BBC has to be privatized.

Fabio C, London, UK

There are some good fact based comments above regarding the BBC.

There are better programs & less biased production & direction staff found on other networks.

The UK public are being duped by having to financially support a company with such poor ethics as has been highlighted in the aforementioned cases.

In my view the BBC must win back credibility with high quality programs & news coverage. With the emphasis on integrity & demonstrable, factual, non politically biased reporting or allow it's viewers the option not to support it financially.

The first step should be to fire any reporter/ producer / program management that fails the integrity test in their work.

James Myatt London

James myatt, London, UK

After years - many years - of naturally watching the BBC morning news on TV while ironing my day's shirt and digesting my breakfast, I have gradually found myself over the past year unconsicously switching to a rival news channel - Sky. Particularly irritating in the BBC is the false, giggly bonhomie together with the massively patronising tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee alternating of sentences between 2 newsreaders in the same news item. Why? Do they think we cannot concentrate on one person for more than a sentence?

Steven W, London,

And, of course, nobody is responsible...lessons will be learnt...let's put this behind us...not our fault...acted in good faith...important to have a public debate...(pick any three).

David Masu, Zürich,

BBC lies - about Gaza about anything

namorf, herzlia pituach,

Can we Trust the BBC?
From the deception concerning the Queen to the on-going deception from the News Department, Radio and TV concerning anything relating to Christians and their heavily pro Islam bias on any reporting concerning Israel, the answer is obvious, NO. There are many thousands who are aware of their deceptions.

David Greer, London, UK

This "much loved public institution" has had its day. It now seems to be not much more than a playpen for Guardianistas and luvvies, shorn up and protected against the realities of the modern world with generous public funding .

First - drop one of the 'Bs' in BBC. It's no more 'British' than my car - built in Sweden by an American owned company. Second - sell it off. Privatise the lot.

H, London,

On what other issues have the BBC made 'human errors'?
And since when has deception been redefined as human error?
i feel disappointed by an organisation which has abandoned integrity in the chase for fatuous ratings.

Anne Orange, London, UK

I have watched BBC News for years and noticed just how Left Wing it was on all reports and wondered if the British were to uninformed to see BBC was more propaganda than hard news. It give me hope that someone called them on it. They seem to have edited all there news to fit the Left Wing agenda of BBC.

Dennis Davis, Nixa, Missouri

Aw, from across the Pond we have always admired the BBC. How could it have engaged in such a dumb stunt? What point was it supposed to make? What possible point could there be in showing the Queen out-of-sorts? The asking of Her Majesty to remove her "crown" was in itself bad taste and totally unnecessary. Wasn't the photographer there to photograph a Queen? Aaaaaargh.

Ferol Austen, Kennebunk, Maine, USA

The BBC is in need of an overhall, it should be producing high quality dramas such as those of Charles Dickens and Jane Austen. So called soap operas and game shows are just chewing gum for the eyes and should be deleted from the portfolio, together with those fly on the wall programmes, for which you need a labotomy to view properly.

pdw, birmingham,

This smear may have been deliberate. There are many people who disapprove of the monarchy, perhaps such persons were involved in the video edit. I have listened to BBC journalists 'grilling' (I use the term loosely) BBC management yesterday and this morning and have yet to hear this question posed.

Furthermore, it is disgraceful that this matter should overshadow the Queen's attendance at yesterday's momentous Passchendaele memorial event. Those men gave their lives for King and Country. The BBC must make due amends for what has been done. Deceiving children was bad enough but this is utterly despicable.

Times, please, hold them to account.

Charles, London, England

Clearly,there was a deliberate intention to highlght the Queen in an unfavourable light.

The BBC was responsible, those involved should accept responsible and resign or be sacked,and the Queen should withdraw her agreement for the programme to be shown by the BBC.

A, Woking , England

The criticism of the Biased Broadcasting Corporation is absolutely merited. It was once an institution to be proud of when its staff was selected on merit alone. Sadly, it can no longer be trusted to tell the truth.

Journalistic integrity has all but gone and it is rare to hear or see a totally objective news item . It's strongly pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel anti-American slant in its reporting may have contributed to the worrying rise in anti Semitism in this country, so well documented by Channel 4 recently.

As the BBC does not have to contend with commercial pressures it should be a beacon of integrity to other broadcasters. However, this is clearly not the case and the licence fee should be optional. I resent having to pay money to an institution that I cannot rely upon to be scrupulously honest.

Maureen Acorn, Beith, Scotland

So now we know that three senior executives at the BBC don't know the difference between "principal" and "principle". Standards aren't slipping, they are non-existent

Mark, London,

“I would now like to ask you to consult both your records and your colleagues to identify any further programmes where you feel there may be a risk that in some way audiences could have been misled.”

When it comes to the BBC’s coverage of Israel it would be much easier to identify programs where the audiences were NOT misled - there are so few of them

Mladen Andrijasevic , Be'er Sheva , Israel

In relation to the editing of the footage of the queen "storming out" i find that almost all television today has been edited to a desired effect, which in some cases is ok. I assume they have to make things more interesting, but when it comes to the BBC, a company that is supposed to represent the facts as opposed to opinions, it worries me to think that there may be other unreported cases where i have formed an opinion that, on hearing/seeing the full facts i would have come to a different conclusion.

Brad, Liverpool, Merseyside

I agree with the comments of gm of toronto. We used to have NEWS read out by newsreaders but now the news is often presented with snide comments by the newscaster. I also wonder what purpose is served by fining the BBC £50,000 since most of the money they have comes directly from our licence fees.
I wish I knew howto get the BBC back to being a trusted and respected service.

Jack Taylor, Andover, England

I'm very disappointed i'd expect this kind of behaviour from Fox not from BBC.

Cameron Gill, Charlestown, St. Kitts-Nevis

This casts a shadow not only to the BBC but to all the TV news broadcasting in the world. If they did dare to do this with the Queen what could they have done, or do in the future, to an ordinary person that has no means of replying? What are the foundations of our daily information sources? Are we being bluntly brain-washed?

m suarez, Santiago, Chile

The Controller of BBC 1 has done a great dis-service to his country, and if the DG can't understand it, if he has any honour, he should give way to someone else who can - for the sake of his country and organisation.

As for the slippery slope, and gradually falling standards - these can only be rectified when the employees of the BBC are able to reclaim their own pride in their work, for which they used to be the envy of the world. We can only feel pity for them!

an adopted British citizen, Berkhamsted, UK

There used to be a BBC manual for conducting interviews which advised interviewers that if they felt that the programme could be made more enlightening or interesting by re-phrasing the question to camera after the interviewee had left, they should do so. Entertainment is paramount.

Berkeley Cole, Port Bannatyne,

The BBC is a disgrace. A professional oragnisation should have viewed the tape before it was shown. I fear they knew it would put the Queen in a bad light - was it deliberate? The BBC is anti-monarchy, anti-english and anti-middle class.We are fed up with the licence fee being mismanaged to produce programmes we do not want to view. It claims to have reporters in every single country yet reports are never seen on BBC 1.

The BBC is "dumbing down " almost every programme because we cannot concentrate for more than 30 minutes. and it is easier to timetable becuase the BBC cannot organise anything. One programme for deaf people was 45 minutes and shown on a Saturday morning for deaf families to watch together and now it is being shown on Wednesdays at noon and only 30 minutes. Most programmes have subtitling errors due to the applling speech of presenters and newsreaders.

Sue, Southampton, UK

Back in the fifties and sixties we, the upcoming generation, were delighted with what was then called the “anti-establishment” element within the BBC, which produced programmes like TW3.
Within a decade or so this element, via the corporation’s opaque and corruptible appointments system, had effectively colonised the BBC. Since then all of the UK – its institutions, culture, history , allies – have been under constant and multi-layered attack from a media organisation which has £3billion of TV licence fee money thrust into its back pocket every year.
This latest little incident over the Queen is as nothing compared to the damage that has been wrought over the past 40 years

Charles Guest , Pembrokeshire, Wales

The BBC said on three news bulletins yesterday that they had been forced to apologise. Anyone with integrity would have issued instructions for an abject apology without reservation before sacking the BBC representative in charge of this fiasco, and blacklisting the company who produced it.

Our wonderful BBC became the Blair Broadcasting Company some time ago and is now the Brown Broadcasting Company. Republican ideals are blatantly shown in many presentations, and the news is constantly biased and lacking impartiality.

To put the BBC back on track, get rid of any employee with a political bias who is unable to put it to one side when at work; stop using media companies to produce your presentations and do the work yourself; stop wasting our money and get back to basics.

What was a service to the world is now a service to politicians and minorities. How shocking and sad we have come to this.

Rosemary Venner, St Neots, England

I am appalled by the actions of the BBC in misrepresenting the Queen. Sue for compensation, Your Majesty?

Gerry, exeter, england devon

How Mark Thompson his Producers and all those with responsibilities on the production and screening of the lie on the Queen are allowed to get away with this is sickening. What message is being sent to the youngsters of this country...all should be suspended and a full enquiry and then those responsible fired and fined. Truth must suceed.

Paul , Leicester , UK

Leibovitz's photos were published in Vanity Fair in June, and an account of the photo shoot written up. (There was no reference to any walk out.) Didn't Fincham or any of his senior people think of checking with this edition, and maybe the reporter.
Why didn't alarm bells ring, as in "The Queen walking out in her own palace? Just how likely is this? The Queen famously never erupts. Can we be sure she did so here? "
We hear balance (or "the other side") scrupulously introduced into so many BBC items. If they had done so here, they would have found they had no story.

Gareth Davies, Aylesbury,

The 'Senior Executives' are grossly overpaid because of their heavy responsibilities and their liabilities for the errors and ommissions of their staff.

It is about time that, for once, they accepted their responsibilities and resigned without being told.

One still has great respect for Lord Carrington (the last honourable Cabinet Minister) for his admission of error over the Falklands and his immediate resignation. 'Executives' and ministers who carry on to the bitter end and never admit to error are worthy of no respect whatsoever.

Brian Vallance, LEFKIMMI, Greece

I do not believe for one minute that this footage was broadcast in error and the BBC in their explaination have most likely attempted to decieve the public once again.

In my oppinion this is a blatant character assasination attempt on the Queen, this represents chep, leftwing, tabloid, gutter journalism at it's lowest.

With regards to the BBC conning the public over their blue peter competition who ever is repsonsible for this should face criminal charges for fraud.

Marc Krajewski, Durham, UK

I wonder how many mistakes (apology excluded) is contained in the average newspaper on a daily basis. To close the BBC would be an act of folly.

Rex Tee, Dartford , Kent

Please put the BBC out of our misery!. Recognising the Brown will never forego the tax raised through the licence fee I propose instead it is given to a cause which will help the nation, cancer research.
It is the overweening arrogance with which the BBC manipulates its programmes to promote its own political view of the world; this we see everywhere from drama to current affairs where american is bad and EU good, business bad state good, conservatives bad labour good and Brown good. Meanwhile the corporation is rife with corruption, nepotism and conflicts of interest in its appointments and programming. I amongst many resent that I have to pay for what is in effect a self interested political pressure group which has the temerity to lecture me without my permission of the back of my money.
End it now.

simon, London, UK

The BBC incident with HRM pales in conparison to her watching "The Queen." A little humour... I respect your royal family very much. Long live the Queen.

Dr. Earl Mitchell, Mishawaka, USA/Indiana

Your third leader today "Television Treason" is brilliant and your description of "the corporation caught in the narcissistic web of its passion for self-promotion" is spot-on. It is most annoying to have so many BBC adverts between programmes and I am sure that they are counter-productive: I certainly tend to switch channels when they appear. these promos continue to play even when programmes are running late which is doubly insulting. I am afraid it shows up all too clearly the BBC's naked commercial ambitions regretably funded by the tax payer.

John Drew, Shipton-under=-Wychwood, Oxfordshire

The BBC makes wonderful drama and nature programmes and disgraceful political ones -the left wing bias is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence -with a totally destructive method of criticism rather than constructive -their coverage of the problems in the middle east go a long way to ensuring this country are deceived and therefore help to continue the misery for all in that unfortunate area .the rude ignorant and aggressive manner on newsnight ensure the opinions of interviewees do not come over and seem to this writer just an opportunity for the presenters to show how wonderful they are ,much to the detriment of the facts ,and i do mean all sides of the argument . It is high time something was done about this problem, we pay for the truth and we do not get it-perhaps i am an old fool who well remembers when we all trusted the BBC -personally i turn to SKY when i want to know what really happened

phil, manchester,

None of this would have come out in the open had the Queen not been the subject of the programme. Yet, the BBC has been sexing up its output for many years, particularly News & Current Affairs. They sexed up the interview with Kelly (as found by the Hutton enquiry) who ended up killing himself, but the BBC is in denial to this day and only mentions sexing up by the Establishment (government, police, doctors, nurses, foot&mouth etc). It does not deserve any trust from the public who pay their salaries.

Gary, London,

The BBC should not be funded by the tax payer. It is over manned too costly and untrustworthy in its news coverage.
Other organisations are doing a much better all round broadcasting job. It is disgraceful that HM the Queen should be treated in the way that she has been by the BBC. I suspect it was done deliberately.

Allan Davies, Peterborough, UK

Just another sign of the failing times we live in- the quality of people coming through middle management and journalism is a reflection of the rise of "media studies" type university degrees.

If people are taught issues rather than facts and processes why should we be surprised when watered down, lowest common denominator reporting is what we get.

MGB, Carmarthen, Wales

I think that everyone is being too sensitive - so they made a mistake, it wasn't a life or death situation!

Fair enough, the Blue Peter scandal was bad - as it conned it's audience into giving something. But a little misinterpretation never hurt anyone.

I'm not saying it was right to do and i think that the BBC should be fined. However, everyone should just move on.

It's been done, noted and now you can just get over it.

Madison Giddings, Romford, England

It is really quite simple; News may or may not be dramatic, but news is not drama.
I resent being coerced into richly rewarding those who do either do not know, or do not respect, the difference.

C Richards, London,

I entirely agree. As a Scientologist I found in particular that the documentary about Scientology was absolutely awful and highly offensive. I honestly thought to myself, 'this is Panorama - it will be great', but instead we got a very clear example of 'substituting sensationalism for rigorous journalism'. When it comes to an expose on something you know about being so poorly put together, it of course makes you wonder how much faith you should place in all of the other expose's.

David Stone, Telford, Shropshire

It is time that the BBC's lies and biases came more out into the open. Causing the suicide of an eminent scientist in connection with the war in Iraq, and its lies and distortions against Israel and their treatment of the "poor" Palestinians, are among many of their one sided view of the world. Their pro terrorist line and sympathies " mustn't upset or anger the Muslims", runs deeply through their psyche

albert, Miami, Florida USA

I agree with most of the criticisms of the BBC. At one time this channel was highly regarded but in the past few years their reporting from the Middle East and USA has been terrible. I do not trust them to TRY and present an objective viewpoint.

LINDA, Philadelphia,

If it had been any other broadcaster - Sky, ITV, C4, C5, etc - would there have been any outcry. Indeed would any other broadcaster have done anything differently

At least this wouldn't have happened under Lord Reith - but then Lord Reith wasn't forced by government to farm out programme production to a bunch of fly-by-nights - sorry independent - companies

Alan, Edinburgh, UK

Our Queen must despair of this country now and the way in which almost everything is subjected to 'spin', hype, dumbing-down or downright misrepresentation. Stuffy and old fashioned the BBC of the 1970s and 1980s may have been, but it was always trustworthy and stuck to the facts. The behaviour of our Queen is always, without exception, exemplary... unfortunately, she is one of the only unsullied treasures this country has left, and I admire her greatly.

Abby, Kendal, England

@ Paul , Yes we know and we would like to keep it that way .

Benzo, Nr Chelmsford,

Does the BBC not want the license fee to continue ? Such arrogance to assume a right to charge people to watch lies ! I have always tried to support the BBC , but they are making that nearly impossible at every given opportunity . Where have the standards gone ?

Benzo, Nr Chelmsford,

well i guess we can all figure out now that the bbc negative view of israel is all lies and their love for terrorist palestinans wrong.

when do the jewish people get their aplogy from the bbc?

marc, nyc usa,

Someone definitely needs a telling off for this but I think that regular apologies on the BBC news channel and programmes for a week should suitably chastise the offenders. If the same people do it again then the chop for them. I still adore the BBC. I've lived in France for 12 years previous to moving back here, often visited the USA and Spain and I know how good it really is and the value for money we get as licence payers. In many countries you still pay a licence fee but get nothing like the service we get here, and where you do not pay a licence fee you generally get very poor service. Poor service in my opinion equates to having 30min ad breaks during a programme (Spain - Mira Quien Baila), 5 minutes of ads for every 10 or 15 of program (USA - any sitcom but particulary Friends), nothing worth watching (USA public service television which is what you get unless you pay for cable television).

The BBC keeps standards high among the others. Travel around a bit and you'll see.

Julian Carro, Maidenhead, Berkshire

So the BBC had to apologise? Big deal. Come across the pond and see the kind of lies, distortions of real news issues as well as the coverage of faux news issues, such as Paris Hilton's jailing, played over and over ad nauseum.

Appreciate the BBC. We do in the U.S. and turn to it when we want to find out what REAL news story is.

Donna Anderson, Brighton, Michigan, USA

I suspect that Mark Thompson and others at the top of the BBC will receive good bonuses, and of course, a knighthood will be awarded to Thompson as a matter of principal\principle.

Paul, Eastleigh, England

The BBC operates under a Royal Charter. The Queen is their patron. Now they have insulted and seriously embarrassed her. This is one of the consequences of contracting out the making of programmes to other companies. I doubt that this deplorable incident would have happened if the programme had been made ''in house''.

John F. Sweeney , Calne, Wilts

Trust in the standards of both the BBC and the ABC should stem, primarily, from their use and guardianship of the langauge and culture of our respective countries. Care and accuracy there would, in my experience, encourage similar practice in other areas. I've long since lost trust in both companies, as neither can maintain a reasonable grammar or lexical correctness across the range of news and documentary programmes broadcast. The subject of a sentence is frequently lost or confused in a report and the use of relative pronouns are at times reminiscent of Ernie Wise "plays" ("like what I have written"). Talking, pointlessly, with the hands or in one BBC World case, violent head jerking, neither attributes of quality British or Australian presentation, are tragic illustrations of the populist, rating-driven companies these two are allowing themselves to become.

Jeremy Allen, Turku, Finland

Yaya,

I regard the 'dodgy dossier' as yet one more nail in the coffin of the BBC's journalistic integrity.

As a lawyer if I alleged massive fraud on the basis of an unsworn and unsubstantiated claim by one individual over a quick cup of tea in a hotel I would be very publically hauled over the coals.

Yet apparently the same standards do not apply to the BBC when it alleges a massive and monstrous abuse of power. The work then was shoddy and we see this again and again.

The BBC is now living on its past reputation - and that is being diminished day in and day out by its present conduct. Lord Reith must be spinning like a top.

H, London,

Sequence - Sweeney goes into a redfaced rave. Then his rave is put on youtube for all the world to see. Then he apologizes and the BBC questions him. Then two more incidences of BAD reporting appear. Then the Queen herself is apologized to. Meanwhile the BBC's reporter claims investigative reporting is akin to finding an aligator and poking it in the eye with a stick. Doesn't this all lead you think the problem BBC is having is one of moral philosophy, rather than a problem of mistaken, individual actions?

Terryeo, San Francisco, California

It's great to read this roast of the BBC! It's long overdue. As a U.S. listener to BBC for many years, I've long since noticed the drift into trendy, lefty land of the formerly world's best news source. Paul, the American living in London, is the kind of audience we have here--'As long as it is left, it has to be right!' these guys believe. Soon they will pass from their adolescence into their senility.

Thelester, Petaluma, USA

To Paul in London. You can suggest that the BBC ain't as bad as american television, but you are not FORCED to pay for the american television networks. Here, I have to pay for the BBC to do it's thing. Imagine if you had to pay for the existence of ABC, NBC or CBS!

Mr. King, Manchester,

Why so many comments about a couple of dinosaurs. Time for a Republic and a commercial BBC.

Neill, London, United Kingdom

While it is appropriate for the BBC to apologise for the supposed misrepresentation of the incident involving the photoshoot of the Queen, I was less disturbed by the incident itself as by the rude, assertive instructions of this so-called celebrity photographer. How dare this woman speak to Queen Elizabeth in such a manner: she is the one who should be apologising, for not simply ignoring the standing of the Queen but also for addressing an elderly lady so dismissively.

I was delighted by the Queen's spirited response.

Maureen Reynolds, Bridport, Dorset

Suppose we woke up one day and the BBC was gone? What bliss it would be to be alive!!

Jim Good, Hatfield, Hertfordshire

I really could'nt care about the queen is angry or not at the BBC about the recent controversy over the BBC's recent blunder. The BBC should make sure that they avoid getting thier information wrong in the future to avoid such problems. The BBC shouldn't have to worry about the Queen, they need to worry about the Fine thhey have recieved and all the media attention they have gotten!

R Steele, London,

We think that it was disrespectful for Annie Leibovitz to ask Her Magisty to remove her crown whilst attending her photoshoot and would have been understandable if she was to leave the interview in a huff. We also think that it was wrong for the raw footage of the Queen to be edited to portray the Queen as anything but an average person, who had no right to act the way she did, even though none of the footage was true to begin with.

Hayley and Sherie , Romford, England

Tax boost for every household! Scrap the license fee and the BBC (Blatantly Biased Corporation.) It has long ceased to be a public broadcaster, more a voice for the views and prejudices of those that work there.

Alan, Luton, UK

If someone at the BBC thinks they can harm the Queen's reputation at this stage of her life with their editing tricks they are sadly mistaken.

Jacques Fortin, ely, Cambs

Who is BBC Controller Peter Fincham trying to kid? Surely he should have taken some precautions given how explosive the content of the footage of the Queen was. Why didn't he ask himself two simple questions - how on earth did the TV crew manage to film her "departure" from a static position in full view given that she was supposed to have flounced off and more importantly, if this had happened, wasn't it odd that Vanity Fair never mentioned it when they published the pictures several months ago?

Perhaps he might have had a better chance of survival if he had said that heads will roll - instead, his is the most likely one. He tried to squirm out of this particular fate by saying it was an error by the production company. Are we supposed to believe that somehow or other the sequences were just joined together with no human intervention? Immaculate Deception?

Bruce Palling, London W11, UK

The BBC pays the great spin doctor Campbell for his diaries, implicity approving him, while cutting and pasting film to invert the truth about the Queen - pure spin.
That says it all about what the BBC values.
And we have just had that 'Wagon Wheel' report identifying a cosy incestuous left of centre culture - evidenced here again
The BBC is a vastly powerful corporation, far more so than the monarchy. It needs a drastic reformation, but only a boycott of the licence tax will get it to 'listen to its tax payers'.

Hildebrand, Oxford, UK

The BBC has had a left wing republican bias for some considerable time. Such a blatant misrepresentation is an insult to the Queen who has never deviated from her role of serving her people. It's a great pity the BBC cannot follow her example and serve its customers truthfully and responsibly.
The political agenda involved is absurd when you consider that the charter behoves the BBC to serve the country without bias. Perhaps it is time for a change? Make the BBC compete for its customers and its money. Personally I object to paying a licence fee for a politically oriented so called public service.

Bill Meechan, Puntous (La Riviere), France

I was born in England too, and have lived in Australia for the last 40 years. Many of my Australian friends talk with great affection of BBC comedy shows, and how they like them so much better than the American ones. But when asked which shows they like, they mention 'Dad's Army', 'Yes Minister', 'As Time Goes By', 'Fawlty Towers', 'The Two Ronnies', and so on - shows made 30 or more years ago. They have given up on the grotesque, ugly, brutal and unsubtle stuff that is pumped out nowadays -'Little Britain' and the like, where the main joke seems to be projectile vomiting and similar revolting things. As for bias, I can't say, because the public broadcaster is always likely to upset somebody; but if 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' (was that BBC?), in its bias, its inaccuracy, its polemical hectoring, and its insulting accusations, is representative of British TV journalism, then Heaven help us all.

Richard Whiley, St. Ives, NSW Australia

Back in the fifties and sixties we, the upcoming generation, were delighted with what was then called the “anti-establishment” element within the BBC, which produced programmes like TW3.
Within a decade or so this element, via the corporation’s opaque and corruptible appointments system, had effectively colonised the BBC. Since then the UK – its institutions, culture, history. allies – has been under constant and multi-layered attack from a media colossus which has £3billion of TV licence money thrust into its back pocket every year.
This latest little incident over the Queen is as nothing compared to the damage that has been wrought over the past 40 years.

Charles Guest , Pembrokeshire, Wales

I no longer watch nor listen to BBC news coverage because they no longer report the news as is. Comment and conjecture are the rule and I do not want to listen to their slant on the news. Humphries of the Today program is a classic example of agenda following. Post Gilligan/Hutton the petulant Humphries has been unbearably smug, self-righteous and at times rude when discussing Iraq or anything to do with Tony Blair. This morning he interviewed Major General Lamb the senior UK officer in Iraq and clearly disapproved of what he was told. He did not want to hear about improvements in the country and quoted another general who guess what, was anonymous! Absolutely pathetic and not worthy of the BBC.
With regard to the Queen thing of course they knew what they were doing - they have been doing the same thing to less regal people for years and getting away with it.

JH, Crowthorne, UK

The BBC makes wonderful drama and nature programmes and disgraceful political ones -the left wing bias is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence -with a totally destructive method of criticism rather than constructive -their coverage of the problems in the middle east go a long way to ensuring this country are deceived and therefore help to continue the misery for all in that unfortunate area .the rude ignorant and aggressive manner on newsnight ensure the opinions of interviewees do not come over and seem to this writer just an opportunity for the presenters to show how wonderful they are ,much to the detriment of the facts ,and i do mean all sides of the argument . It is high time something was done about this problem, we pay for the truth and we do not get it-perhaps i am an old fool who well remembers when we all trusted the BBC -personally i turn to SKY when i want to know what really happened

phil, manchester,

Ha ha ha - ROFL - it is soooooo funny! Thanks for sharing. Much better than all the repeats I seem to remember. Now that I am living in France Britain has become a very entertaining place - long live the BBC!!! And Blue Peter - what is going on there? Here is a winner I made earlier . . .

Michèle John, Saumur, France

There appears to be a wonderful little irony at work here. Some no-name outsourced editor has a little joke at the expense of the Queen, probably never thinking anybody would take him/her seriously.
The clip gets released by mistake, the BBC One controller makes a complete idiot of himself and apologies all round are required. But it happens all the time to others..
As McPherson would have put it, the BBC is institutionally dishonest.

Clive S, Crowborough,

i think that the way in which the bbc potrayed the queen is a disgrace to the public. the bbc is suposed to be the official broadcasters for britain, but they have broken our trust. some people may say this is just a one off, but actualy only a few days earlier they coonned us into thinking a little girl won the blue peter competion , but actauly she didnt even enter. the bbc may have thought it would be a good technique to get more viewers for their documentary about the queen but actually it was a scam and im discraced

chloe foley and frances robison, romford , essex

We believe that the Queens behaviour should not have been misinterpreted. The BBC obviously doesn't have that much respect for the royal family. We don't think that anyone should be protrayed as someone they are not, especially the Queen as she is the leader of our country. This is not the first time that the BBC have messed up on the television and they should have learnt their lesson by now.

Sarah & Terri, Harold Wood, England

This was a wilful misrepresentation. The BBC cannot hide behind an apology. The people responsible should go now and we can all be 1p better off. Michael Grade had it right this morning - how do we restore trust by the public in broadcasters. With difficulty. Go now BBC people.

Gordon, Woking, UK

The BBC is becoming irrelevant. I avoid it because of its political bias, and my kids avoid it because it's boring. I RESENT being forced to pay for this anachronistic, London-metroplitan exercise in self-congratulation.

Michael Grave, Birmingham, UK

Little things can say a lot, and the error in spelling 'principal' in a memo from BBC controllers to senior staff is a sure indication of how slipshod the BBC's standards have become in deeper respects as well.

Sara Harpenden, London,

basically my view is that i couldnt care less about the queen moaning, i think that we should move on from that and she shouldnt have looked like she was leaving in a huff in the first place. i think that the BBC will still be trusted, because there will be another load of programmes on that we would want to watch and i think the queen shouldnt be hung up on it and act like a little child. the queen should just forget about it and get on with her life, instead of being childish, because the BBC have apologised

jon, hornchurch, england

gm, toronto, canada. You should have put your last sentence in block capitals from my point of view:

"ENGLAND TOLERATES THIS BIASED NETWORK WHICH FAVOURS EVERY MINORITY VIEW OVER THE MAJORITY OF BRITONS."

Hear, hear.

Christine in Hayes (part of Londanistan), Hayes, Middlesex, England

"....had been spliced together out of sequence." Yeah, right! The weakest of excuses. And whether it was malicious or mischievous editing, either way the BBC's credibility has sunk to an all-time low.

Darvell V.P., Hong Kong,

When Alistair Campbell went after the BBC over the dodgy dossier affair the BBC did not pay a fine, Greg Dyke resigned - and for far less reason than this betrayal of our head of state.

Yaya, Haggerston, UK

Peter in Portsmouth is onto something: who gets any fine imposed on the BBC, as per Blue Peter cheating, the government? But it should be the licence payer - so fines should mean a reduction in the fee.

Ibn, Dalston, UK

BBC is now too old and suffers from Alzheimer's disease . That explains its bias : anti-Americanism, anti-Israel, anti-capitalism etc. It should be left to die peacefully and hopefully soon. License fee is imposed on people who do not use the product.

IPH, London, UK

I think this article has been blown out of proportion by both sides of the story, although this wasn't the first time that the BBC have totally mesed up. I do feel that the BBC may not like the royal family. However, the royal family doesn't really like the BBC as they blame the paparazzi for princess Diana's death.

james and dan, essex romford, england

The BBC is riddled with bias and has been for years. Back when it refused to show a documentary which showed Mrs Thatcher in a sympathetic light over the Falklands War, when it commissioned a pro-IRA drama, down to calling Tony Blair a liar, and right up to yesterday with Mr Stourton on Today clearly disappointed that the invited academic who had met President Bush described the President as being more thoughtful, well read and relaxed than he expected.
Even as someone who is highly critical of the Iraq debacle, I see the BBC as hopelessly myopic in its coverage. When did it last give Zimbabwe or Myanamar a fraction of the critical coverage lavished on Iraq or Palestine?
The BBC is very detached from the interests, views or concerns of most British people.

John, Edinburgh,

Absolutely disgusting behaviour by the BBC - am I'm far from being a fan of the monarchy! To blatantly sensationalise events and then claim that there was an error in the order the images were shown is snake belly low.
I don't (begrudgingly!!!) pay my licence for this kind of deceit.

john, london,

It is extraordinary that Jana king can say that 'The principle mistake on Blue Peter was the deception of the audience.' Does she not know that deceit is deliberate by its very nature. It's no mistake. But here we have again someone trying to avoid any form of accountability. But there again, if everyone in the modern BBC was held accountable for their 'mistakes', there wouldn't be anyone left!

David Cramp, Tauranga, New Zealand

Some years ago, at a Consular Association lunch, I was seated next to the then Head of News for the BBC in the North West of England. The then Chief Constable had recently made some controversial comments and had been asked to give an interview to the BBC. He had agreed to do so provided the interview was broadcast live without editing. This the BBC refused to do. When I questioned the BBC man as to why this was the case he said " We need to edit the interview so that we can stitch him up."
So much for unintentional mistakes!

Stephen Green, Correns, Var France

If one thinks the current "deceptions" are bad a review of BBC"s past and present political and foreign affairs coverage should also be an eye opener. The formerly detached BBC now is one of the most biased presenters extant with hidden and not-so-hidden agendas sprouting like 'lillies in the field'. Their coverage of the Americas, Russia and the Middle East bear witness to this. It is unfortunate that their slant often coincides with the biases of much of British public but that is no excuse - journalistic media of any ilk should be neutral and unbiased.

d.gaber, los angeles, california

Another example of the all to often failings of the BBC! And we have to pay a TV license fee for this! Its about time Gordon Brown scrapped their license fee once and for all.

Richie, Sunderland,

Instead of a fine, why don't the bbc just be made to pay back one year's TV licence to the people.

Peter, Portsmouth,

The BBC did a very similar piece of editing with Gordon Brown’s statement to the House of Commons on Wednesday. It was made to look as though two members of Browns own cabinet were furiously shaking their heads at a part of his statement when they had actually been disagreeing with something David Cameron had said during Prime Ministers question time. I think it’s fair to say that far from being independent, the BBC (or persons at the BBC) is working to its own agenda.

Mark Sheppard, Retford, Nottinghamshire

On BBC TV this morning Peter Fincham said we shouldn't have done that to the queen i.e. distort the facts.
Peter I've got news for you. You shouldn't distort the facts about anyone.

Dave Sommerville, Cardigan, Wales

BBC news has turned into a managed women's magazine.
Gushing reports on celebrities,and nanny instructions on how to live your life,instead of NEWS.
Why do we need TWO anchors all the time,mooning away at each other,preening themselves as if they are the stars, instead of newsreaders.
We need to be treated like adults, not ten year olds.
The BBC is now far too politically correct,there is no individuality or adventure left.

Edwina Rigby, Chorley Lancashire, England

and people in the UK are forced to buy the BBC if they wish to receive TV in their homes. Why?

mike, Midlands, UK

The BBC should be scrapped. Pompous, overpaid and to top it all they think they are the best.

CHRIS PARKES, BHAM, UK

This is not a blip, it is a reflection of the BBC today, a left wing bias, incredibly low standards of reporting, all too often followed by comment rather than fact, we suffer News where reporter interviews reporter, with questions like @What do you think is going on inside?" as we watch a reporter "live" outside a building, or in a foyer, or anywhere, but the site of the news.
The six o clock and nine o clock news was that once, factual reports on incidents from this country and abroad. Now its a soap opera of white teeth, meaningful glances and televisual angles with a report as a backdrop.
Style over substance should be the "new" BBC motto.

Tom E, Somerset,

So now we know that three senior executives at the BBC don't know the difference between "principal" and "principle". Standards aren't slipping, they are non-existent

Mark, London,

c'mon, yes it was a bad error of judgement, but take it from an American living in London, the BBC is far ahead of their American colleagues in literacy, accuracy, balance and overall journalistic quality. Let's not blow this out of proportion.

Paul , London,

Well,what else could you expect from a corporation who has a Director who can't differentiate principle from principal?

Brian, Adelaide, South Australia

The BBC would do well to watch its Australian counterpart, the ABC, and learn from its mistakes. The ABC is driven by ideologues; baby boomers who hanker after Woodstock and anti-Vietnam War peace marches. Their rise up the corporation has been paralleled by the corporation's fall in standards, public accountability, and trust among its viewers. It would appear the BBC is following suit. No wonder people are turning to alternative media to be informed.

Stephen McAlpine, Sheffield, UK

You can fool most of the people most of the time and if you are opposed just dont give them air or paper space. That is the method used by the media here in Australia.

wilma, Queensland,

The Director General should resign if the BBC is to be seen to have any integrity left to save.

C Bedwell, Colombo,

In the past I would have defended the BBC as the world's best public broadcaster. But for 15 years or so journalistic standards have fallen so low that I turn to commercial stations for the news. That they would distort a story covering the Queen - in effect lie to us -while insulting her - is not a surprise. It is now their culture to do so. I can't see how Mark Thompson can reverse this decline.

Dave Sommerville, Cardigan, Wales

A director of vision! you're kidding! but of course this says everything about the BBC. The vision is an ugly, illiterate Britain which is biassed against everything American, favours the Palestinians, patronizes the Africans and lectures the world.

the French, the Americans and Canadians put their prettiest faces on TV and their smoothest talkers. The BBC puts the least attractive people on TV with accents impenetrable outside their region. It's galling to hear Americans speak better English than the British. But I guess that's what the mole in the British establishment, the BBC, wants because it's quite clear that the BBC thinks it's the goverment with a leftwing agenda to overturn all tradition and history.

I was born in England and I'm ashamed of the shoddy way the BBC represents my country and the way England tolerates this biassed network which favours every minority view over the majority of Britons.

gm, toronto , canada

Good on you Your Majesty -- from your 'mates' in Australia. You've got ticker as we say in this part of the world.

David Jones, Sydney, Australia