“Mr Fincham said, "This was not a case of misleading viewers."

What else is it ?

The BBC cannot be trusted with the truth because it does not know the difference itself.

There are no excuses.

Mr. Fincham must go.

Tom , Staten Island, New York

What a storm in a teacup. It's blindingly obvious that someone at the production company was too ambitious and stupid to realise that there's a difference between being licentious with the editing on a cheap reality tv show and misrepresenting the Queen. The BBC took the material in good faith, assuming the edit was fair. It patently isn't their fault. Doubtless the cause of all this strife from RDF Media will end up with a job editing for Endemol...

Janet, Oxford,

Mr Fincham seems to miss the point. The fact that the Queen is 80 years old and for over 50 years has faithfully served her country with distinction. The producers showed a total lack of respect in even considering such mischievous action against our Head of State.

The question is are the BBC going to commit themselves to placing no further work with this independent producer. That is the only way the message will sink in with BBC staff and their suppliers.

Mr Fincham should also be fired as he seems to have no understanding of what he has done and has made no apology only excuses.

Gerald Barc, Cockfosters, Herts

Its pretty serious when a public service, supposedly high quality medium, such as the BBC knowingly delivers such controversial material without carrying out any basic checks on its accuracy. Instead they go straight to press conference. Blaming the supplier is an appalling dereliction of duty. The BBC is ultimately responsible for the material it puts out whether series or excerpts. This is a huge mistake involving the highest profile person in the land. Fincham must go not just because of this mistake (which is bad enough) but also because of the obvious personal pleaseure he took in introducing what he thought was genuine material - he let the mask slip. Fincham joins a sorry cast of Politicians, Senior Civil Servants/Police, Social Services and others who fail to take any genuine responsibility for blunders of their own making. Come back Lord Carrington - the last man who stood down on the principle of responsility. No wonder the public has little respect for these institutions.

Julian, Finchampstead, Berkshire

The BBC choose to describe last year's conflict on the Israel/Lebanon border as a war between Israel & Lebanon. This description has been used in their news reports & is currently in the introduction to their "Have your Say" comment feature -

"The 12th of July marks the one year anniversary of the war between Israel and Lebanon"

They are so persistent in this false description that it must be official BBC policy to regard Lebanon as a protagonist rather than Hezbollah.

Robert Williams, Halifax, England

How does the BBC One Controller comment to his staff on a monumental faux pas without checking his facts first on a programme about our Head of State? Who does he think he is?

What do the Board of governors have to say, or does it take a week to respond to such an insult to Queen Elizabeth ll, who despite advanced years is still hard at work ?

Brian Seals, Scarborough, Nth Yorks, England

'have not been trained properly'? I thought all these people had media studies degrees??? Presumably that's the point of them.

Carolyn , Oxford,

Mr Fincham should realise that the buck stops with him and he should resign. This was a gross insult to the Head of State and he is responsible for it.

Rod Pitham, Solihull,

It is interesting to learn that BBC top gun has not got intention to confirm whether the thing has really happened?

This top gun definitely knew what would people think after seeing the footage. He just let it had a go! They are not a bundle of dum people.

Why BBC should be funded by public money to embrassing the Head of state?

P MacFarland, Watford / Hertfordshire, U.K.

How does the BBC One Controller comment to his staff on a monumental faux pas without checking his facts first on a programme about our Head of State? Who does he think he is?

What do the Board of governors have to say, or does it take a week to respond to such an insult to Queen Elizabeth ll, who despite advanced years is still hard at work ?

Brian Seals, Scarborough, Nth Yorks, England

THE BBC HAS BEEN EXPOSED FOR ITS PARTISANSHIP ON MORE CRUCIAL ISSUES SUCH AS ISRAEL AND PALESTINE
EVERY ONE KNOWS THAT THE BBC POSITION IS ANTI ISRAEL WHATEVER REALLY TAKES PLACE BECAUSE IT PREFERS TO KEEP ITS PREEMINENT POSITION IN THE MUSLIM WORLD RATHER THAN TELL THE TRUTH
THE BBC HAS IN FACT BECOME A PROPOGANDA ARM FOR THE PALESTINIANS HENCE THEIR DISMAY AT THE KIDNAPPING OF ALAN JOHNSTON - THIS WAS NOT MEANT TO HAPPENT TO A BBC MAN AFTER ALL THE HELP AND SUPPORT GIVEN BY THE BEEB TO THE THUGS AND MURDERERS RUNNING AND RUINING PALESTINE AND PREVENTING PEACE.

KATZ HAIM, JERUSALEM, ISRAEL

The arrogance! The BBC are blamed for a lot of things, not being impartial, being too impartial but most of all, for not being relevant to today's youth. There could not be a clearer sign of the BBC's attitude towards this demographic, than to pass the buck for this debacle onto "young producers". At the end of the day, the footage had his seal of approval. If he saw it, it is his poor management decision. And if he didn't, then perhaps the BBC would be better off with a controller who did their job.

Victoria, London, UK

The BBC lost it's integrity and credibility a LONG time ago!

Susan, Los Angeles, CA

HAVE YOUR SAY FROM AN ENGLISHMAN
This is an FUDAMENTAL ISSUE from an original ENGLISHMEN mailing from ENGLAND who was lucky to have the truth during the DUNKIRK peril of WORLD WAR II. Knowing the worst enabled the wider world to creat a mighty resolve to defeat an evil.

The BBC has the mission to publish the TRUTH, the WHOLE TRUTH,
and NOTHING but the WHOLE TRUTH.

The principle is that if that mission is betrayed, from HRH to Common man, the DIRECTOR GENERAL and TRUSTEES walk.

To reverse the sequence of events to give an opposite impression of the truthful news is a bretrayal. THEY MUST WALK, or nobody will trust the BBC again.

Gut Liam, Hertford, England

The joy of outsourcing.

You can blame it on someone else.

The fact is the BBC are responsible for the content they broadcast.

Sack those in Blue Peter for the fraud they perpetrated, sack those responsible within the BBC who authorised the broadcast of this footage.

Or where does the buck stop?

Clark, Gen., Switz.

Had the story been correct I would have looked upon it as shameful that the BBC would feel the need to report on it, trying to show our queen in a bad light. Even she hs a right to lose her temper in certain circumstances without it making world headlines!
Perhaps as it was such a stupid mistake to make Peter Fincham should be replaced by someone more professional and experienced such as Jimmy Young, Moira Stewart or Nick Ross?

Robert Johnson, Newport, Isle of Wight

It would be a good move for the individuals who actually made the mistakes that led to this fiasco to stand up and say "Sorry".

However, since they're probably young, they're of the "It's not your fault generation" so we won't hear a peep from them.

Roger Viggers, Coalbrookdale, England

This is outrageous, the BBC should no longer be funded by our license fees!

Ian, Falkirk, Scotland

This very much reminds me of the anecdote in the family about my great-grandmother? In the 1860s, she made an appointment to have a daguerrreotype portrait taken at the famous Ruritania Studio in Oxford Street, London. She wore her Sunday best for the occasion, including boater, scarf and shawl. However, the studio 'artiste' was unhappy with my ancestors choice of costume and politely requested that she remove her ornate hat and shawl? Well, my g-g was a typical Victorian prude and took offence at this suggestion and told the photographer that he had an effrontery asking her to remove any of her clothing for a portrait sitting! The photo- grapher tried to explain to this old Victorian battleaxe that it was the middle of summer and less clothing would be more appropriate for the portrait but she would have none ot it, before she stormed out of the studio into the bright sunlight. Many in the family suspected she was delusional, and she thought she was Queen Victoria!

Mr Lachie Todd, Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K.

The BBC seemed more indignant over comments by Patrick Mercer, MP than they are about deliberate perversion of the truth in their own broadcasting with respect to The Head of State.

It is beyond belief that the BBC thinks it can simply ride this out - they have engaged in deliberate distortion and inversion of the truth. This is like something from Orwell's "1984" and is not acceptable in a free society

Voyager, Lincoln, England

On the dismal subject of journalism schools: there should be an international audit of these "schools," with bite and the power to fire a lot of people. The "schools" cannot teach language skills at all, how to read a document or any text. They are incapable of teaching the simplest logistics: to one of these benighted modern students, it would not make any difference if the Queen was coming or going because they do not have a clue. Try gazing at the picture of the donkey in Sir P. Stothard's blog if you want to get an idea of how the youth play the information game: just pin the tail on the beast. They just cannot think at all, so they resort to wild "interpretation" of everything they see. So just how many useless journalism schools are there in the UK? Who is in a position of power over them so that they can be fired at once? Except for the destruction being brought about by faculties of "education," it is the journalism schools that are bringing society to its knees. A UK disgrace!

Clayton Burns, Vancouver, Canada

The problem goes deeper that that. I used to teach a Media Studies course, and the last thing the students cared about was integrity and accuracy - presentation, impact, was everything. Mr Ficham is not to blame for the slovenliness (or worse) of a cub editor, nor for the fact that his/her superiors did not check his/her work before letting it go forward.
Mind you, even if HM did not lose her rag on this occasion, she would be less than human if the idiocies of media production and the pomposities of TV people did not exasperate her. Why should she be ordered about by a photographer, however eminent? If she pulled rank and told them to get lost, she would have all my sympathy (and I am a republican at heart).

J.Fletcher, Canterbury, UK

Once again mealy mouthed words from the makers and the BBC. No genuine person would even contemplate besmirching another human being for headlines or anything else. Those responsible should be sacked and the firms involved should never be asked to provide coverage of anything half decent ever again. There's plenty of litter-picking to be done and those involved should be doing it!

Charlie, Nottm,

The problem with trust is, that once it is gone, it is gone. It's important to be able to distinguish entertainment from reportage and the "bright young things" in the BBC, for all their cleverness, seem unable to manage that.

Martin Evans, Newmarket, Suffolk

The fact that the BBC and the U.K. press have swarmed on this debacle is instructive.
When innuendo or misrepresentation might apply to any number of American issues portrayed in the daily media parade, one can't imagine an inquiry and self-flagellation equivalent when and if similar distortion occurs when the US is misrepresented (yes, it happens).
In this sense, the BBC et al share the unfortunate comparison with FOX News.
Innuendo appeals to those predisposed to prejudice.

T manley, Madison, USA

The Footage came from RFD Media, a company formed mainly from ex BBC employees. This outsourcing of program making seems to be at the root of the problem, as the BBC themselves do not appear to be in total control of their own output. It is no doubt a profitable exercise for the ex BBC staff and relatives etc of current BBC employees whose companies actually make the content.

Don Ramsbottom, Thornton, Bradford, West Yorks, UK

One of the problems of massive cost-cutting, streamlining and value-for-money measures is that the BBC has lost its understanding of public service broadcasting. 15+ years ago the BBC was imbued from its management to the lowliest employers with a pride in its mission to inform accurately and impartiality, and within the organisation checks and balances existed which were designed to ensure the highest quality of reporting and accuracy. However, with all the financial cuts and all the pressure to make the BBC strive after audiences and behave more like a commercial broadcasters, these checks and balances proved too expensive to maintain. The BBC statesmen of the past have been replaced by lower-quality, less inspired and inspiring people. It is another example of 'you get what you pay for'!

Peter Johns, London, UK

There's a certain amount of Chutzpah on display from the print media. Yeah, the BBC got it wrong, but NONE of the UK's vaunted newspapers actually took the time to check the veracity of the BBC trailer and all appear to have slavishly jumped on the bandwagon with "Queen in a snit" stories of their own. What happened there? Why didn't you guys do some basic reporting? I attribute to the economic pressure that has seen papers cut costs, with few reporters and high staff turnover. The pressure is on to get the stories out the door and, as a result, standards of journalism have dropped dramatically across the board.

Matt Winkler, London,

I'm 85 and have listened to the BBC since I was about 15, through the war years and into the messy post war period.
I follow the BBC on the net but no longer on my radio. It's great that 'top' management support their youngsters but first they should first taught how and when and how to toe the line

Peter, Panama, Reep of Panama

What nonsence.

If anything, all Mr Fincham needs to do (if he has ruffled anyones feathers) is to sorry for the mistake - he doesn't even have to mean it.

Carl Teper, Tavira, Portugal