A simple yet effective action would be for The Queen to remove the Royal Charter from the BBC. It may not mean much to the 'peoples corporation' but to many many others it would speak volumes.

simon, UK,

the Widow's Mite saved On the Mantlepiece for BBC licence. 14th July 2007 (WMOM)

It is wonderful to read the 'Have your say ' from the English speaking World in the DEFENCE of HONEST and TRUTH.

May the TIMESONLINE long CONTINUE TO PUBLISH this breath of fresh air.

Next Wednesday the corporation publish a special training initiative of 'editorial values' , the BRITSH VALUES of which should have been imbibed with their Mother's milk. May they include Government publication of the exact reponsiblities of the Trustees, and the line which if crossed they walk.

If a World wide production used 'magic wand' to include the Queen Mother in the present debacle video is a grudging 'Sor-rry' sufficient or do they walk ? Where is the line ? Is a reversal of the timeline to give a completely distorted impression of the news enough ?

Gut Liam, Hertford, England

Al,
I think the opposite is the case and the BBC has a better reputation internationally than it does domestically. The BBC is far from perfect but in terms of major broadcasters it is one of the best. Most people are quick to disparage the BBC but they fail to take into account all of he fantastic work that they do in terms of documentaries, dramas etcetera, much of which is miles better than anything produced by commercial broadcasters. The BBC is attacked from all sides, it is described as anti-Israel, anti-Palestinian, anti-government, pro-government and all of the rest. I think the net result is that is BBC is actually quite objective. Most groups have a bone to pick with it because it doesn't conform to their own bias.

P.S. Are you intimating that the BBC has an anti-American stance? The BBC itself has produced documentaries on so-called 'anti-Americanism'. Frankly, I think it's sophistry and some Americans don't like hearing the truth about the goverment that they elected.

James, London, U.K.

Many people now seem to think that the BBC has a political stance, a political opinion of its own. This episode would seem to fit that view in that it was the Contoller of BBC 1 who promoted this contrived video of the Queen's ( the head of state's) behaviour without sufficient concern to adequately check its truth. I have at least come to the conclusion that the BBC sources and employs staff in 'News and Current Affairs' largely from amongst those of a particular political persuasion and doesn't exercise sufficient control to stop them using their jobs to promote their political views. I base this on observation of the careful construction of 'news' items, including selected / omitted content, and the messages and opinions that they seem to intend to convey. I expect political opinions from newspapers, not the BBC. If the BBC is meant to justify a nationwide fee / tax on TV reception as a public service then, to use the phrases, I think it is institutionally unfit for purpose.

mike, Midlands, UK

For many years, BBC Radio 4 in particular has been producing material to reflect the views of the staff and not the factual evidence. they do not understand the term scientific objectivity. On topics such as MMR, nuclear power, GM foods.

They do not emply a formal quality management system!

the situation is finally being revealed

Paul , northwich, england

I was at film school in the nineties and one of the first rules we were given for editing documentaries is that you don't edit significant scenes out of sequence. The reasoning behind this should be obvious. In the first place you want to tell a true story. Secondly, any manipulation of the actions or comments of a particpiant that can mislead the audience leaves you open to action by the injured party.

I'm surprised that it is Peter Fincham who is being held responsible for this transgression. Surely it should be RDF Media who are punished. Why did the editor of this piece choose to run scenes out of sequence? I can only assume that it was an attempt to gain publicity for a film that might not be very interesting. In that case then the producers need to look at why their project is failing, not keep quiet while an executive at the company who gave them the contract in the first place is left to carry the can.

Kevin Meadowcroft, London, United Kingdom

Interesting that it takes the Queen to be misrepresented before there is any real come back.

The Prime Minister can of course be seriously misrepresented with only the justification that he and his government must be 'held to account'.

Question is, who is holding the BBC to account?

The organisation NEEDS a serious overhaul!

Mark, London,

The press seem to have decided that they prefer 'making' the news to reporting it.

Chantel, UK,

This latest incident and the appalling know all manner of Mr Fincham is to be see every Saturday morning on a breakfast proggame where BBC MANGERS/PRODUcers/etc are called to account for viewers distaste of their progamme. They are never wrong and learn nothing from the feedback of viewers. Time for a first class example---he must GO NOW before more damage to all is done. REGARDS MR. B. GRESLEY

Mr B. GRESLEY, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire U.K.

The latest BBC outrage should awaken people to the danger that the BBC represents.
Whatever you say about the BBC one thing cannot be denied. It is a highly professional organisation that knows exactly how to present news in such a way that it can serve any agenda they have.
They don't have to lie to make the news item appear in a certain light. Simply add an emphasis here, delete a sentence there, carefully choose the interviewees to reinforce the message.
All this wouldn't matter if we were only talking about trivial items. However the BBC is internationally respected as an honest newsmonger and people tend to believe them. We already know that their endemic anti-Americanism and anti-Israel attitudes colour their reporting.
The democratic West is currently involved in a life-or-death struggle with Islam, however non-PC it might be to admit it. The BBC are actively undermining the West by distorting the news and weakening our will to resist. Its about time they were stopped.

Maurice Major, Manchester, UK

BBC produced a lot of erroneous message about my dear Africa but since the voiceless have no voice, no one demands an apology and no one ever retracts stories about my dear Africa. For once, the BBC has jumped into a big lake and the whale in that lake has demanded that they withdraw the falsehood. My people in Great Britain, you are only receiving a tip of the iceberg that BBC puts some of us through. Let them change otherwise they will lose a lot of audience, i don't lwatch or listen to them again though, Al Jazeera is far better than the BBC, BBC is only living on past glory.

T K Dzimega, London, England

Ref Blue Peter, what's the point of fining the BBC? It just shifts money from one government department to another, there is no individual accountability. Fine and sack the producers sez I.

David Ellis, Shekou, China

Sack the whole lot of them I say! There has been an ongoing debate about institutional bias within the BBC as a whole company for far too long.

One simple solution begs examination: put a tender out for a contract to take over the license fee as a source of funds. The contract could be a fixed period, renewable (in the absence of misuse) contract.

Such as scheme would put the fear of God into all senior executives in the company that has been handed the contract. That pressure alone would ensure that bias reporting is kept to a minimum and accusations of bias are treated seriously rather than being dismissed out of hand as presently happens.

Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,

The Queen is revered all over the world with great esteem except within BBC houses. We are all enraged by this ill-intend and deliberate act of nonsense by BBC. We cannot expect them to behave properly for our license fees. Remove the license fee and let them survive in the world of business. Let them have the taste of their acts of nonsenses.

M A Jabbar, Altrincham, Cheshire

On moving to the UK from Australia last year, I was constantly telling friends 'At last I will get decent televion again' after experiencing TV in the UK in the early nineties. What a surprise to find that the BBC and the commercials have sunk to a brain dead low as bad as any of the worst TV in other countries. Wake up UK. The BBC shouldn't try to compete with trash by producing more of it. That is what the TV licence fee should guarantee. Quality.

Noel, Oxford, UK

As a tv licence payer I do not expect the BBC - using public money - to lie about anything, and certainly not about Her Majesty the Queen. When viewers watch the BBC they expect the Corporation to promote education, information and entertainment; not thinly disguised inaccurate trailers broadcast as 'news'. Peter Fincham is responsible for this latest scandal at the BBC - he must resign in order to demonstrate that he actually regrets this insult to our Monarch. The BBC Trustees have a clear responsbility to the licence payers - if Mr Fincham doesn't resign, he should be dismissed.

Mai Hearne, Kirriemuir, Angus , Scotland

This is all in keeping with BBC culture these days - any deception is fine as long as it plays to their overall agenda. The only surprising thing was the ineptitude which Fincham displayed in getting personally involved instead of letting one of his acolytes do the deed ... but he's probably bored with the job anyway. Within the week he will be able to "resign with honour" , and the DG will be able to spin it as a temporary lapse. Business as usual will resume soon after.

David Stuart, Aldershot,

-----how anyone from a country that produces the bile that purports to be fair and balanced news in Fox News has little room to comment on standards in TV!!!

Michael Bolton, Essex, UK ------

Here speaks the voice of the tolerant left. It's a pity you fail to understand what damage has been done and that it doesn't only apply to the Queen.

Viv, London, England

"Mr Fincham, in a presentation to journalists, said that viewers would see “the Queen walking out in a huff”."

Mr Finchman should have checked extremely carefully on this and he must be held complicit in giving offense, historically that would have been treason. Perhaps a letter of resignation a few millions to one of the Queen's favoured charities and a few years retirement might mitigate in the circumstances.

As for RDT Media, their producers and associated companies, I doubt that they'll have any contracts now or in the future for the BBC and the BBC might sue for this semingly deliberate stunt as surely the BBC has been damaged.

Unfortunately from the Front Bench in the HoC to all aspects of business all that seems to really count is money- any punishment is ineffective without a significant monetary cost.

DM, Eastbourne,

Journalists at the BBC have an agenda. An opportunity to show the Queen in a bad light could not be missed.

Ben, harrow, UK

Once the Controller knew that what he had said in introducing the sequence was wrong, he also knew that the publicity in the next day's papers was based on an untruth he had told. Surely it is the failure to correct this lie, before the papers went to press, that is unforgivable and requires resignation.

Bert McMillen, Ballyclare,

bbc is owned by england goverment no? how it allowed to chastising royal family? in russia here it much better. no so much critisizing of our president all time.

khui, Moscow,

Peter Fincham of The BBC News system has wilfully suppressed evidence that tens of thousands of UK fathers have had their children abducted by UK government agents working for the ''authorities.'' Judges, lawyers, government court staff, Caffcass and the mothers who are given the right to take children from fathers are committing an evil act of child abduction which maybe censored by the BBC but its impact is seen nonetheless via the none goverenment funded news media. Should there be an URGENT Lords debate on this systematic trade in children whereby billions of tax funded state agents have been paid to invent and create telltale stories about fathers so as to take children from FATHERS without any lawful or logical reason? The BBC continues to lie to the public over all kinds of very serrious issues, and we should not be forced to pay them a penny via the Courts for this oppressive licence fee.

Dennis, London, UK

Fincham must go. He is said to be a clever man. At least, clever enough to know that saying something controversial about the Queen would boost his programme and bring him into the headlnes. He should also have known that the Queen does not "throw a wobbly". To get any sort of discipline back into life, someone's head must roll. I can't see a better one than Fibncham's.

Colin Garrett, Berkhamsted, Herts

I don't blame the BBC per se, just Peter Fincham, he looked to believe the juicy story rather than using commonsense and wondering how some-one who has always kept her dignity should suddenly appear to lose it over a relatively minor matter. Anyone with a modicum of professionalism would have flagged it as unlikely and checked, double-checked and then thought carefully before running it. He did none of these and so is not fit for purpose. Timescale pressures do not come into nor does who manufactured the clip, he was i/c and he did not stop to consider but went for it. No mature thought processes there; how can he be trusted with any other judgement calls?

James, Beds, England

The BBC holds public figures, including politicians, to a high standard. The same should be applied to its own actions. It's both about how the BBC acted and its reaction . First showing faked footage as actual events is despicable, no ifs or buts --,just imagine the reaction if the police, or the military had doctored some footage. Then there is the reaction of the BBC, which was late and half hearted in its acknowledgment of the misinformation. This is about the arrogance of the BBC.

Alex Bahman, Brooklyn, US

It does make you wonder how much media misrepresentation is going on elsewhere, with their victims less able to fight back than her maj!

ZL, London,

At least the BBC makes/commissions documentaries like this. When did you see one on SKY?

I think too much has been farmed out to outside independents.

Robert, Manchester,

The only thing that is surprising to me is that anyone actually watches the BBC anymore.The news is dumbed down,they provide free and grovelling Labour party publicity,they provide extraordinary publicity for a spin doctor who did a mean job of silencing Greg Dyke and others,they spend massive amounts on fillers (your money and mine!) and then they play at spinning a completely untrue story of the Queen,a woman who has served this country loyally and had to endure all sorts of circumstances and people (non of whose company she would have chosen!) with grace and tolerance.
I am utterly fed up with this corporation and would like to see it survive in the real world of business all by itself with no help from me or you!!

Disgusted Dorothy, Glasgow, Scotland

On Wednesday afternoon the Queen gave a private audience to Great War veterans. This event was publicised by the BBC and other media around the world. It was also announced by the BBC that the Queen would be attending a memorial event at Passchendaele the following day. This too was publicised around the world.

Elsewhere in London, on Wednesday afternoon, the head of BBC1 chose to preview a video which he knew would give a poor image of the monarch. He later found out that the video was a deception, but chose to do nothing to stop this lie circulating across the global news media. It was even being aired the following morning on the R4 Today programme.

Meanwhile, the Queen was travelling to Belgium for what should have been a profound national event. This occasion was eclipsed by the negative story which Mr Fincham had promulgated. Did he not know what the Queen was doing? Surely he must have been told. Does he not appreciate the significance of that event? Shame on him.

Charles, London, England

This does make you wonder how often film is edited to give a completely different impression to what actually happened. The BBC has come a cropper this time because the Queen is involved but would a wronged pleb have any such redress, I wonder?

Janet, London,

The whole affair is either gross incompetence by Fincham and his staff or a deliberateact by the BBc liberals. Whatever Fincham should GO and NOW to limit the damage to and restore some trust in our national news outlet
Regards Mr B. Gresley

Mr B. GRESLEY, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire U.K.

Orf with his head!

The Lancastrian, Epsom, UK

Yes - the answer is simple. Privatize the BBC and get rid of this absurd anomaly of License Fees. If the Tories announced this as a election promise they would win by a landslide. Enough is enough.

Michael Jorden, Sao Paulo, Brazil

Unbeliverable!
Is it freedom of speech that protect people to twist the fact and manipulate people's opinion?
BBC is supposed to be unbaised and faithful to the fact they broadcast. Is it true anymore?

Fred Lee, London, U.K.

Her Royal Higness should have her yeoman warders pay a visit to Fincham and the rest fo the crew responsible. The tourists at the Tower would love to see a live re-enactment of the traditional uses of the grounds and dungeons. That would be brilliant reality programming!

HenryVII, Windsor, UK

I do not see why I have to pay the TV licence "tax" to support this BBC nonsense. Misrepresentation, distortion of the truth and underhand telephone quizzes are just part of the problem with this out of control organisation. It needs a shake up from the top down. If it cannot be relied on then it needs to justify its own existance.

David Price, Wandsworth, London

To even suggest that the Queen would walk out in a huff is beyond disrespectful and until Finch and the editor responsible go I will continue to have no faith in the twisted stories it provides.

Jonathan, Cardiff,

I'm afraid this is just typical of the magazine formats that now dominate TV news. The BBC is one of the worst offenders and we have to pay for it. It becomes the news and no longer just reports it. The only ultimate answer is to privatise all TV.

Andrew Howse, Carcassonne, France

Pathetic is the only word one can describe when talking about the actions of the media. Once respected and viewed with awe. Now disrespected and when you think of the harm they are doing to people. The Queen is 81 years old where is old fashioned good manners. They say what goes around comes around. Shocking and no one believes it was a mistake. Mr.Fincham should go, and if he had any conscience would have resigned. Guess this memo will be put on the back burner too.

izzy, Wirral, England

Martin Bellam

"When something goes wrong ....it is always the BBC who carry the can."

Equally,when I hear the BBC boasting about the "highly acclaimed" this or the "award winning" that ,I can't recall ever hearing the words "which was made by XYZ independent production co. for the BBC"

If you claim the credit for the good ,you can't dodge the flak for the bad.

sandy, n.ayrshire,

What nonsense, You’d think there was some great conspiracy. But the real story is much less interesting. Some editing of clips was a bit sloppy. Then the checking of the narrative was a bit sloppy. Remember no actual programme has aired making any accusation and it does not. No one got hurt, no damage was done. But its much more fun to try and hound someone out of their job. But as our public broadcaster why get rid of someone very very good at their job at such a minor infraction in the long run the broadcaster is the looser to loose the services of a talented broadcasting professional. There was a boob, they said sorry. There are far bigger errors going on in the world, Conrad black, The War in Iraq, Poverty, Hunger, and Injustice.
Ban the BBC from any contact with the Royal family – As the national broadcaster that would be a very bizarre situation and the programme and clips were made and provided by RDF Media an independent company – No BBC staff were involved in the programme or the clips. As for the comments from American contributors how anyone from a country that produces the bile that purports to be fair and balanced news in Fox News has little room to comment on standards in TV!!!

Michael Bolton, Essex, UK

I used to think it was inconceivable to close the BBC down. But if it has no ethos and no self respect, why bother to keep it at all? This has been far more damaging than just a spat with the queen and the Director General should have acted far more decisively. I fear the BBC is in very bad and insecure hands and I would love to be proved wrong.

Jenny, London,

Mr Al Ramy, LA, USA.

Pot-kettle-black are the words that come to mind.

And American media is of course always honest and truthful.

What the BBC has done is inappropriate but how can an American have the gaul to criticise the BBC I do not know. As a British person living outside the UK I am proud of the quality and general trust worthiness of the BBC. Can you say the same for trashy smalltown American networks like ABC, NBC etc that serve up a crass series of smalltown stories on their international programes that would suggest anything occur outside the States is irrelevant, other than a war you started in Iraq!

Mark Johnson, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

To call this affair "error" is absurd. Few outside the U.K regard the BBC as truth or objective. What was done to the Monarch is a tiny serving of what the BBC is dishing daily to countries. Who ever they do not approve get smeared, their honor questioned, their words twisted and their character trashed. Finally british citizens get a tatse of what it feels like to be on the recieiving end.

Al Ramy, L.A, usa

No responsible, experienced journalist would have allowed publication of an item depicting the Queen raging at a photographer. or anyone else, without the the most intense investigation and re-checking of the facts. And even if proved correct propriety would dictate witholding it for detailed discussion with the Palace. Using such an incident to promote a programme is unforgiveable. It smacks of immaturity and incompetence unacceptable in an executive of a public body. It is the Monarch involved here - not some idle, useless 'celebrity'. Replacement of the person responsible must occur to restore faith in the BBC.

Kenneth Dunjohn, East, Finchley, London, UK

This episode of TV showing how disrespectful it can be and without any remorse is typical of the BBC and its totally biased reporting of anything.

The BBC and Ch 4 seem to believe they are imune and can do what they like to whom they like, now the Queen is the target.
Simple answer, ban the BBC and all its correspondents from doing anything with the Royal Family. None of the public would care I know I wouldn`t. The British TV is becoming a disgrace.

KW, wirral, UK

Having worked at the BBC, not in television I should add, I always find it funny that year after year there is more pressure for the BBC to spend more and more money with independent production companies - up to 50% for TV.

However, when something goes wrong, whether on screen, radio, the web, or in a private screening for the media which didn't even hit the nation's televisions, it is the always the BBC, not the independents, who carry the can.

Martin Belam, Chania, Greece