Read this: Behind the Information Iron Curtain

BBC sounds music Radio podcasts, this is the media show from BBC Radio 4 hello and welcome this week, I have left on a new broadcasting house and we've come a few flaws down to the BBC Radio Theatre we are broadcasting from an event called BBC World Service presents which is focusing on press freedom reasons why it's under increasing pressure around the world report without their safety without government interference without laws designed to punish them for their work for many though press freedom is elusive the centre for freedom of the media at Sheffield University says all the main indicators about press freedom around the world show it's in decline the reuters Institute for the study of journalism talks of democratic backsliding in some parts of the world and The Economist calculates that more than 39% of the world's population lives under authority.

Rule across this edition of the media show we're going to discuss how States and are major sources of this information.

How technology is changing the threats to freedom of speech and how major Media organisations such as the BBC see their role in responding to this.

It's a lot to get through and we're going to start by understanding how restrictions on the press affect the information that people are able to act and will begin with a situation in three countries that have a long history of Muslim the media Russia China and Iran and with us.

We've got three experts from BBC monitoring it as the name two monitors Media activity around the world follows the Iranian media and Kia if you could thank you so much for coming over me just a regular a normal person if you can say that in Iran what what is there Media diet? What sort of information are they getting anywhere from obviously?

By the mainstream Media the state Media it's a very nuanced picture because yes, there is some kind of free debate accept that there are a lot of red lines of the state imposes on the on the media.

You cannot criticise Islam you can't criticise the founder of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Khomeini you cannot criticise the supreme leader of Iran but within those confined those red lines at the stake and poses on you will see providing you know it is kept within sort of functional discussion, then there some kind of tolerance for for the problems that exist in the country at the social level economics level but weirdos red lines are obviously you exceeded and then you know that you would you could be facing a lot of problem?

Times of the restrictions imposed by the state and how effective are they that you know obviously if you cannot size is supreme leader of Iran but there is he is the ultimate arbiter in the system as well as you know the powerful Sword of irgc Interest then really gets a a true picture of what is really happening now.

Obviously only citizens have bays of working round that but it does have yes, it is now that they can access the cybermedia accept that even the cybermedia itself is subject to constraints that I can come to be going to be a much stronger.

On internet access that's being considered.

Can you explain why or how that would happen? What about 3 years ago? They started to introduce legislation has become an active yet, but it was a select group of lawmakers who are to deliberate over by constraining the total constraining of of the internet so you're on wants to create its own national information network is basically national internet so basically the 12th at 1 to look up to this.

They have to sign up to how to set up offices in your on the apples have to migrate out of this internet.

You will lose the right of anonymity.

So you have to you know.

Where is the 7 degree of self-censorship and I will see the usage of virtual private networks will be criminalised what exactly those are later, but that's a virtual private network that lets you sidestep, Southside blocks and just one so sorry, but there's also a multi-use assessment so if you have a business set up on the internet, then you know you have more of an access to the worldwide net but for ordinary citizens.

We just wants to know what's going on in the world that will be constrained for you.

Have a lower so that is in a bit of a discriminatory movie is a neutral thanks so much.

That's from Iran to China and speak to carry out and he's trying to media analyst of BBC monitoring the same question to you what can and can't people access and china so in China it's very very difficult to get access to.

Media this is long term in the case the internet actually arrived in China in 1989 the same year is the Tiananmen Square protests and ever since then there have been restrictions in place on the internet preventing people accessing information about this event and any of the process that have taken part since the internet is the main area for users to consume use nowadays and then more than 1 billion people on the internet in China and it's very much for case in China that there are equivalent of all the platforms that we use here in the west so instead of you.

Got a Chinese service called by do instead of YouTube for example.

You've got Chinese services that exist the same and all of these have to answer to the Chinese government regulator the out the environment is completely saturated by state Media run or affiliated outlets and if you want to access independent Media so for example you've heard.

Season you've heard about this platform called Facebook if you type in the URL you would get an error message for her for so that's one way that people can't access independent news within the ecosystem in China are people frequently testing the limits very much like I said people can use VPN to do it and it has been the case since the 80s in China that people have had more power to travel overseas, so they've had awareness of this but what's happened? Increasingly is China's been very much becoming a presents overseas outlets like cgt which is China's official broadcast if they've been appearing in other countries, so when people in China go overseas.

They've they access media.

They're able to access media.

That is also state-run.

This is becoming a key trend that I watch in my day-to-day work that that China's growing its presence in international countries to be able to sprouts message.

Reference this in Iran that many people are self censoring because they understand the consequences if they if they cross the line absolutely yes, it's the case that when people go on Chinese social media platforms instead of a platform like Facebook or x people would use a platform called weibo nowadays if you if you access a social Media platform like Facebook or like you.

Can you email address but in China you have to give over your ID number your phone number you have to give a lot of personal information and that means that people are aware that they can be held accountable.

They can be found they can be necessary if they posted content but seen as critical of the government and that means that people do actively avoid posting sensitive content and just quickly how much money does trying to spend on content that's aimed at people out of China absolutely billions back in 2009 the government set it set 8.9 billion.

This was 20.

Do you actually expand its overseas present so billions and billions of dollars tens of billions of dollars have been doing this since.

Thank you very much and let's talk about rushing out with Francis star who follows Russia for BBC monitoring Frances Terry was talking about self-censorship.

Is that a similar situation in Russia is that how the Citizens Advice up approach things I think there is a large proportion of the population of unfortunately that is willing to consume the extremely anti-western and Ukrainian narratives that are being pulled out by the state Media the polling we have suggested around two-thirds of people still get to the news from state tv.

Just a few days ago a major propagandas was threatening to find nuclear weapons at the us and sink the British Isles in his words if the best way to deploy a regular troops to Ukraine that said they have been a cold draught of kind of repressive laws, which have been introduced over the last few years and especially since the invoice.

Train just over 2 years ago to essentially make telling the truth a crime especially when it concerns criticising the criminal criticising Russia's actions in Ukraine and of course against this backdrop many people are afraid of expressing their views and self-censorship has definitely increased in that sense and what we see now recently so is the almost consumption of this kind of independent reporting which is considered legal is is becoming a risk of people and what about social media and I think there's been aware that the Russian opposition has been using social media, but is it also something now that she's by the state successfully, but definitely true.

What we've seen.

Historic.ly is figures in your position and independent Media who have been essentially platform from traditional forms of Media such as TV or newspapers turning to social media.

We saw Alexei navalny for example using.

Tube to publish these extremely videos accusing vs.

Officials of of alleged corruption for example especially since the invasion of of Ukraine on tour in particular one of the social media platforms and number of so-called military bloggers or these kind of pre-war voices who are providing these these minute by minute updates of what's happening in Ukraine have really operated on telegram and garnered hundreds of thousands if not millions of views and even though ostensibly social media platforms such as Facebook Twitter and Instagram are blocked in Russia you have officials from the Russian government by using them to put out and amplifies these anti-western messages.

Thanks so much for BBC Morrisons thank you very much indeed for helping us understand the experience of Russia and China and as we understand those restrictions that people in those three countries are living with let's also understand the consequences of those restrictions shoes and trainers from the centre.

Politics at the University of Cambridge and Suzanne you also worked in the Foreign Office for over 20-years in terms of what these three states want to deliver within their countries, how does the general disinformation and also the imposition of censorship help them pursue those goals who wouldn't want to live in who wouldn't want to rule a country with no opposition.

It's a no-brainer.

You can get me the opposition you would do but there's a cost to that.

It's it's costing time and resource to suppress your political opponents and that's resource which could be spent on governing the better.

It's also doing something really should have insidious when your ceiling off your country from outside because I'm waiting took a lot more detail various effects, but one effect of courses is immediately triggers an interventionist response among people in the West who think their human rights of being abused so you end up with them.

The escalator a vicious circle which has this is an oppressive regime therefore.

We must help the people who are fighting it which then Trump's an escalation in that observation.

I make it very beginning is it economically very unhealthy because states need for an investment generally is accepted belief you if you demonstrate that a free press that there's no investigation of financial impropriety of scandals incentivizes anyone to take risks in that country and that leads to more state appropriate in your fancy the military being very involved in Enterprises and things and and again.

It's really unhealthy then for the population because because you're not having that kind of growth free society that people want although evidently at the moment the people in power of those three countries are making the calculation that what they gain from restricting the prayers outweighs what made follow.

That's not so helpful for them.

I just wondering if you observe their attention to the media and restricting it.

Do you think the media is become a bigger part of the equation in those countries that we've been considering then perhaps it might have been 10 or 20 years ago in the world that we looking for his corruption.

So so you have in Trench people with entrenched power that a system of nepotism and corruption all of which a free media with threatening some way because immediately people start asking questions, so so it becomes a dependency and Away in order to protect your position of power and if that was some of the consequences within these countries what about outside what about how the rest of the press within these countries allows these three states to behave in certain ways on the global stage.

So, I think the link to the flip side which some of our commentator switch off my telly which is how they projecting their own Media externally cos the to r-link so control of size and projection of state media and what they done very cleverly through state Media which which parasitizes and mimics can Western state so it has a kind of credibility around the world and they're using that to build reinforce repeat a grievance narrative that plays very two large segments of the world who have all sorts of reasons to feel that the West has treated them.

I'm just had to develop a common Bond almost completely and that is instrumental lights so you can see for example really concrete examples where where the west needs to have a consensus where it's just losing the sympathy so

Stop at all.

I was just going to Regent I was just getting excited or interested even more interesting what you said.

I just asked you whether you think it's helping to develop alternative send as a power if you like one of the things I did straight away after Russia invaded Ukraine was I started to look at how the voting was going in the UN General Assembly and it's like running scorecard of where sympathies lie and the one that was for me most telling was in April 22 when the general assembly voted on whether to suspend Russia's membership of the human rights council and the best if I remember correctly was 93 and favour of suspension 24 against suspension and 58 abstentions so58 countries couldn't couldn't is the pro democracy lovely and those included a large number of countries that we consider to be democracies who we would think are our friends like India

The whole of the Middle East Saudi Arabia UAE Qatar Egypt Nigeria Bangladesh Pakistan that's where we're not winning the arguments that we think is logical and what does that mean if it's not too obvious and a question? What does it mean for world stability if that's where we're headed for us Western democratic countries whatever you want to call us.

Is that one day? We'll just get voted out I suppose and there's there's a really too and I'm sure about this more obvious example where America suddenly discovered the international telecommunications Union which sits within the UN all that responded before and it basically regulates international communications and has become the body that sort of sets the rules for the internet as a massive shorthand somebody more expert will explain but but it is the secretary-general for.

Is Alexa down the post had been a Chinese citizen and what was clear was that the rules around some of the things around 5G around the platform the internet sat on with being decided according to a Chinese agenda, and America realised quite late and mobilised very vigorously to support us candidates who was then elected and striking competition in September 2022 and the election between an American candidates in the Russian cancers and the American candies actually was a woman one by a significant margin, but it was portrayed as a tassel for essentially the control of the workings of the internet ok, so you're going to stay with us.

So please do if anyone just joining us where brought from the BBC Radio Theatre as part of the BBC World Service event focusing on press freedom and later.

We'll be speaking to the BBC about white once more government funding for the world service.

When will explore how we living with several internet's rather than one world wide web has been restricted in some parts of the world and we been hearing about the impact that has on global power Dynamics more broadly next let's Learn about the extensive efforts to bypass some of these controls on media access and on press freedom.

This is often referred to us circumvent this may be individuals seeking their own Solutions but it can also be Media organisations and tech companies who are offering help to individuals to do this to just said it makes me here and the BBC radio studio is the BBC News cyber correspond.

Hi Joe thanks very much for being with us.

Just give us a bit more detailed definition of circumvention.

Please well, if you're a country and you want to control internet as long as you can do that looks different tools in your in your armoury after all the internet we often think about it is being in the cloud and magical thing that we get on our phones, but it's just wires in the ground and under the sea.

And if you can control the wires you can control the flow of data, so lots of different countries around the world have different ways, so you can throttle website or a service to make it for the data going to inform at services really slow what you can ban certain websites for entire countries or regions or you can stop people having access in those areas and what can individuals do to get around that well it depends on what type of things are doing the way to describe if you if you block an entire country for the internet or a caravan internet.

There's not a lot you can do because you can't get a signal but if you can get a signal and you want to get on a service that isn't allowed in that country you can use pension methods for example VPN virtual private networks or proxies and he's acting away.

So that's a I've got my computer here and I want to access WhatsApp in around or something like that.

I would go onto a VPN and a VPN I would connect to VPN to get to WhatsApp not directly to WhatsApp and I'm saying what's going more and more prominent is news organisations and media organisations like

Are actively offering advice to individuals around the world you may be facing restrictions on how they can get around them? Yeah, that would be when the BBC launched its toll service so another way you can get around is that blockages is going on the Darknet through the toll browser and there are some good news organizations for example of easy that have a mirrored image of their website on the tor browser presumably states of finding new ways aren't they have getting around this so that is the place that that devices from you recognise that as a VPN address and you can banners and that is quite effective for example in China so what was saying is individuals and media organisations are trying to get round the rest and we know so I'll text companies.

I think so you're just back from interviewing will Casper is the boss at WhatsApp WhatsApp to remember is owned by meta will Cathcart has been telling you.

Play people are accessing WhatsApp despite bands in some countries has just recovered your interview.

You'd be surprised.

How many people still managed to get through it was a higher fraction than you might think but we can most do is look at some of the countries are blocked and still see your worldwide tens of millions of people connecting to WhatsApp by advisor proxy VPN there are the Wizard of Oz attention here where I don't want a necessarily point to a specific country then say oh look there black is actually than this ineffective because you don't really want to tell that country I should be doing different things you don't want to draw too much attention to what other people just be able to access WhatsApp another services around the world.

What did you make his remarks Joe well? It's interesting WhatsApp occupies a strange part of the Silicon Valley world because it is a giant corporation.

That's part of matter but it is a bit strange Innocence it doesn't do it visit in the same way.

Companies that is a very very secure social network as I'm not just saying that because because we spoke too well.

It is end-to-end encryption which means that only I and the receiver can read my message.

That's partly why the government's around the world hate it because it's so secure and we've seen Lucy bands in North Korea Iran intermittent bands in places like cereal as well and in other countries a throttle will they make it so you can't do voice calls, but it's also Western company.

It's from meta.

So there's that angle as well sometimes.

You don't want to because it has this Western liberal democracy values that it's pretty around the world, but technically saying people are getting around the interventions by the country's.

Yes as you can probably imagine.

I try to push him to get some more detail he wouldn't give me anymore and that's as he says he doesn't want to sort of read write to able to some of these authoritarian regimes.

We had earlier this month that China's ordered apple to remove WhatsApp from the Chinese version of its app store did will have any.

Yes, that was a couple of weeks ago to the figures.

He's talking about the tens of millions won't be counted in that yet, but yes he was very cold this answer he said that it's very American corporate personal important to me that very angry with Apple taking that decision it is a decision the Apple would have been able to choose your own again if you're doing business in an in a country like China China tells you to take that app off the App Store you can't carry on doing business.

If you don't comply with those apple you know it's showing the limits of these companies, but they can just say we have to abide by the laws of the countries that were operating in if you don't then you're Google China for example which used to have a decent business going on in China China started asking some censorship search results Google said no it left and now Google's obviously missed out on what is a

Ironmarket for them you can see a longer version of Joe's interview with Will Cathcart of WhatsApp on the BBC World Service YouTube channel is broadcasting the event organised by the BBC world service in the BBC Radio Theatre and in the audiences my colleague from additional from BBC Russian and funny.

We've been hearing about how people in different parts of the world to get around the restrictions placed on their mediaaccess.

How do people in Russia approaches to access the media that is blocked and one of those is VPN the other one is telegram which is ubiquitous in part of the world are lots of channels and also the amount of message number of words you can put in 1000/2000 words but you can make sure that the gist of the story is coming through YouTube is massively popular and

Buy a position and independent Media to deliver the news to the audiences and also the simple thing email newsletters are very popular in Russia and lots of Media outlets use newsletters in order to bring a vision of the news to the audiences that want them.

Thank you very much indeed you can find 14 from family and his colleagues at BBC russian.com efforts to bridge the information divide and I have to say this one is quite unorthodox family and vouch is a Norwegian tech entrepreneur and you're here Fabian welcome.

You found a website called mailto.

Are you and it allows anyone to send emails as family was going to email the big in Russia want to send an email with information about the war in Ukraine was many as 150 Russians at a time.

It does sound quite bizarre.

How does it work? Well? It works in the way it started off with a couple of pints and we?

So we had like blocking all the best in use and we were talking about how we relate information and I don't remember him, but someone got up with a brilliant idea to send emails the Russian sandwich.

Just like yeah, it's not doable but then we started this little projects.

We work the weekend and on the night to Monday we're kind of emotions one.

Why don't the recipient I can't speak for a Russian by was somebody receiving email like that.

I would immediately think it's a trip by the state as a trapped me and some way it depends on the message our first message was a bit off.

Well.

It was very strict and of course we are nerd so we night.

Play we just get me out of this technical thing working and then it's only need a message.

So it's like type something Google Translate you to go don't believe what you don't worry Ukraine and circumvent and just a very strong and Street message wasn't at all and then we were approached by a professor of pharmacology and medicine which does conflict psychology that's our study and she has Russian and Ukrainian pants so she reached out and said that you got the system working but you need to help with the messages so we reach now and how many messages have you sent and do you get replies for everyone who wants?

Send message just to go into this webpage you press the buttons and you got to go and then we have like kind of measuring of how many weeks because we have of course a couple of email address which we insert out there so we can measure you know we know we delivered 10 million messages to send us and we got 8 messages there.

You know you know it's maybe like 0.7 of the messages with delivered that are actually delivered so we can count and yes to make a bit so I think around 280 million messages now.

And when you're sending these do you think about the fact that maybe some Russians don't want to hear from someone random outside of the country? Yeah? It's it's about that.

They are not rude.

They are more informative and then now much more open than the where in first message and can you put a number on the on the volume of emails to the Head in Russia's Direction because of this project well if they're on 280ml in that we know about we have the other websites that work went and they are maybe doing things are different so it's it's around that number.

How are you feel if someone in another country started bombarding people in your country with advice on and information about what's happening where you live with depends big ass if my neighbour or my kids are my husband if I were the woman receiving these kind of mail.

Kind of killed in the war on rolls into the army.

I think I would be very interested in getting the latest news about what actually going on.

This is a model then thinking of you the moment you're sending millions of emails to rush and you intend to send me an email to two people in other countries to I have been approached by people but it's a kind of thing you know we spent like until now.

I actually getting this platform running so I'm very much based on my which is everything manual work.

You know instead of a I set that kind of thing that we need to work with so yeah, if we have the funding would definitely do thank you very much Steve genius x Fabian not least on the issue of press freedom and

Broadcasters either state funded all publicly funded are part of that equation including of course the BBC so how does an organisation like the BBC's where is journalistic ambitions with the role? It plays how the UK is seen the BBC director-general Tim Davie turn to the issue of the BBC World Service the BBC World Service provides broadcast and digital content in over 40 languages and it's currently funded out of the licence fee that the BBC receives but can be said that it can't carry on like that adding and I quote we will need to discuss a long-term funding solution for the world server the comes from central government budgets by Johnny on the stage of the BBC Radio Theatre is Jonathan Munro BBC News as director of journalism and Deputy CEO so very much indeed for joining us to BBC One's the world service at least to be funded directly from central government budgets.

Why?

Who were the for nearly 100 years and 4/8 years? It was funded by central government and then in the Coalition years when the BBC deal that we've currently working on expired the government propose the new arrangement with the licence fee would pick up almost all the cost of the world service and that of course I meant some significant cuts in the licence for you could do because the licence fee itself was finite-time sword since then a number of things have happened first of all as you've been discussing on this edition of the media.

Show me for the world service from partial free journalism around the world has gone up and up and up and more and more territories have got that at all restrictions secondly inflation affect small businesses were not immune from that at all and and thirdly the need to change what we do because audience behaviours of all today.

They've updated their become more digital has meant we had to drive more investment.

Ultimately we've ended up with a system which was designed to give the public at the funding through the licence fee this actually in effect work against the domestic public regards, because tough decisions had to be made about how you keep that money ring-fenced any mention the coalition government that was led by David Cameron of course now Lord Cameron whose Foreign Secretary and I'm sure you're aware that week Lord Cameron has suggested that apps and mix funding model for the world service would be in his words a fair way of doing it some money coming from the government some money coming from the licence fee.

Do you think that's the better question is do you think that viable we got to make some now because a few years ago the government for your iron.

That's not me.

Don't you? We've got to go to his point and the government directly from some language services which were created newly in the last 8 to 10 years or so and there is some commercial money as well.

Come into the world service because the BBC is allowed to make money to Capital

Journalism outside the UK so it's the principle of mix is long-established what the mix is of course is a very different question but what I'd like to understand his what are the steaks here if they have mental which government we have after the coming election says we've got to go for a mixed-model the funding needs to stay at around this level of potentially even go down is the world service in its current form viable whatever the will service is crucially important and we at the BBC want to retain the world service grow the world service rise the challenges that we've discussed for the world service weather is an English or in 42 languages who knows that might be more languages in the future as need changes every single bit of the world service like every single bit of the BBC is under pressure to make sure that what it does.

It does efficiently and public money wisely and has a return on that investment that's no different from the world service from anywhere else and the world service has had a significant amount of cost cuts in the last few years ago.

The point where if those cuts go much further if whichever government comes in after the election or any decision taken before the election doesn't address this that actually the world service in its current form isn't some the continuing.

What look now look in its current form is a very difficult concept to define because the former has changed does change all the time it involves all the time so will the world look exactly the same now in 5-years time is now almost certainly not we will have entered new things will be doing different things will be reaching different audiences in different ways.

We not looking to freeze the world service and sustained in precise of the same model for decades to come we're looking to have the ability to modernise it to grow it to invest in it and that will mean that we've got to change the funding model over time.

Do you think you're being out gone? We've already heard on this programme about the amount of money that some States have spending on media and outside of their borders, but is not the best case for the world service.

There are billions and billions of pounds.

Going in From Russia and china for example into global journalism which is state sponsored by Moscow and Beijing there's no more powerful argument for the BBC World Service on to know that those particular organisations sponsored by the government's under which they work are advancing their reach of Germans what they describe as journals and I think we would dispute the definition of gender in that case around the world more quickly and where able to because they're out spending all of the organisations that I like the world service.

They we believe in freedom possible journalism and that is not free to talk about but I did want to bring in either ask for now.

Hello Eva your director of the policy think-tank the British foreign policy group and still with us is Suzanne rain from the centre for geopolitics and the use of Cambridge and reflecting on what Jonathan Munro BBC has been saying is here and what do you see the role of the BBC today and BBC World Service encountering?

Nation from authoritarian countries us and benefit of the BBC is it seem to be impartial it's trusted it's repeatedly and consistently beating is the most trusted news outlet around the world and there's real benefits for that in terms of promoting democracy internationally and labelling debate in Nations that otherwise wouldn't have access to start comedian.

That's a crucial part of what they want to do in the world is also benefits to the UK and Times of our soft power and plenty of research done particularly by the British Council on how people that engaged with the UK by the BBC and much more likely to trust the UK those individuals more likely to come as tourists are more likely to be due business more likely to do tray.

It's clear economic benefits as well for the UK so you've BBC as a political tool.

Currently what we are doing in going into countries and courage in the use of free and open media that otherwise people wouldn't have access to we are promoting democracy.

We are promoting freedom of expression values in Athenry important thing for us to do the centre for geopolitics as you listen to the BBC's ambitions to continue.

It's journalism.

Do we not need to acknowledge the fact that some people in the world view those ambitions as hostile.

Just said there is a real risk for us.

If we don't realise that what we put the BBC world services is not necessarily what other people say is if you're running an authoritarian government you're going to assume that everybody else is state Media is also to some extent by the States and and so that's that makes it really difficult when we start talking about projecting soft Power which is this curious euphemism because actually if you work out.

And it's only useful if it does mean that we can achieve some kind of outcome, but we don't really talk about that so much but we have to assume the people that were trying to promote democracy to are actually seeing that is something that is being done to them having said that I completely agree to the points about the necessity to meet the challenge that is being placed on us by the likes of Russia Today Chinese Media Middle Eastern Media which is which is very persuasive and Powerful now in large parts of the world BBC Deputy CEO you're still with us.

We're talking about soft power and the emphasis from the BBC director-general Tim Davie it said recently that the world service is one of the UK's most valuable soft power assets, so he's accepting it is so fat in your view.

What wood is soft power when it comes to.

Because if you go around the world and talk about things that people associate with the UK I think three things come up most most often, A1 is the royal family does the Premier League football and third of the BBC and the BBC's also by a country mile the most recognised Media organisation the world those three letters do an awful lot of heavy lifting for us around the world that the purpose BBC isn't to flexor muscle labelled soft power that may be a benefit to the UK and after all the UK citizens pay for the BBC so that in itself is that is is a beneficial thing but it's not worth for with the delivery of what a cold rather form with the public purposes of the BBC reflecting the world to the UK reflecting the UK to the world etc.

Etc through are impossible journalism and the programming we put out two populations Around the World in English and all the other languages the soft power is a collateral but in a good way.

Have you seen a good week? Do you not feel at all? I'm comfortable about it the idea funding coming direct from government is what you want full funding your boss acknowledging our boss acknowledging at BBC channel is used for soft power some people find that quite and comfortable for soft power the BBC journalism.

Is there for other reasons there may be soft power the result of what the BBC can you see why people might have questions about that that was Susan saying people will say the BBC isn't neutral is there a conflict between impartial journalism and soft power go to to keep explaining to audiences that we're not to use the phrase a state broadcaster with a national broadcaster for the UK and we got a global footprint and the way we interact with the government in the holy different from the way Russia today in an axe with the authorities in in the Kremlin for example the transparency about that relationship is really important not least because weather.

Free money or taxpayers money it's public money coming into the BBC and transparency with the UK audience is therefore critical it's also really important to be able to explain to audiences around the world and governments around the world that the BBC people like me and the colleagues.

I work with my credit Oriel decisions.

We're not held to account by the government or anybody else political for what we do is it appropriate for Janice two-wheeled any power at all if we talking about journalism and then the terms of Paras using the same phrase lots of journalists and lots of others will feel uncomfortable about that exercise power in delivering journalism to Global audiences.

That is a powerful thing to do and it needs to be done therefore with a high degree of sensory response ability on our part that right.

We're not exercising governmental power quasar governmental power.

That's absolutely not a role is not our ambition.

I think that's the Stark contrast with those state actors.

are marching around the world with massive investment in media sectors that we need to be prominent in the early we have my colleague Barry Island from BBC monitoring who is a specialist in China she still with us on the BBC radio, Kerry how BBC World Service have BBC News as viewed by the Chinese authorities years ago if you speak to people and say about the BBC they would speak very positively of it, but nowadays it's very much the case in China that state Media trying to push your message that the BBC can't be trusted and other Western outlets as well, so I see this is part of my monitoring job reports criticising and very much targeting journalist based in Beijing and Shanghai and creating a threatening environment for them and and then immediately national and international scale and very much paints journalists, who are just trying to do their jobs as spreading disinformation about China

Thank you.

It's really one on the impartiality thing which I think is is fundamental to its.

I think I would Park soft power because I think it is not helpful assumes an agenda, but impartiality works best of course when it's absolutely clear that you are reporting across all sides of the political spectrum about a country and the is always the same amount of critical analysis is not put on a position is to an authoritarian regime so for example.

Let's take it on we need to hear from people in very conservative parts of the country who supports be raining government is it is now not least because it helps the decision makers in our country understand when a process whether that's a bunch of people or in a whether that's weather's can work whether it's not going to work and I think sometimes we we have a lot of Wishful Thinking when we because we talk to.

I just want additional point on that we really interested in your view is he's all we broadcasting to these countries or from these countries so one of the things that concerns me is a breakdown in empathy and cross-cultural understanding particularly when Media barriers go up and it's almost as important to hear in the to hear from people over there in places where they can't speak as it is to be broken into them and I really interested in the balance of my mouth for more to overall the strategy is to be in country or in markets where we doing our journalism we can't do that anyway.

You talked about getting all the sides of the political debate and around that would be wonderful objectives for us, but that is not a possibility but I just come back from Delhi where most of our services in India on Made in Delhi or Mumbai at for audiences consume in 600 languages and in English there is as you know.

Going on in India right now and mode is record with the media is a very controversial international issue, so I think you're right that we need to hear from all sides of that debate and argument to give people information that they need on China it's absolutely right that the government there has used the BBC as a battering RAM for Political reasons over the last few years.

I was in bed pretty recently being told that in no uncertain terms by Chinese government minister, but if we're going to go and do your job and report on how the week and minority is treated by the Chinese going to have political incoming and I would always rather do the story and take the consequences than not to do the story just one final point on impartiality for me.

It's often transpose by an intruder possibly people listen to this program with balance.

It's not balance.

It's Julie impartial.

What is the impartiality? That's relevant on a certain issue.

We don't have to be balanced about whether it.

Or not for girls to have a school education Afghanistan that is not a matter of balance if that would doing a product called dance lessons for girls in Afghanistan to have some sort of Homebase education thanks for the BBC World Service impartiality is the the range of these that's relevant on a subject not necessarily equivalent.

Thank you so much.

Well through this hour of the media Show live with you from the BBC Radio Theatre we've been here and descriptions of a world where people have very different experiences of media and a press free in some ways.

All this is a long way for the ideals of the World Wide Web when it's use became widespread in the 1990s of the hopes of an internet that would help people overcome restrictions on freedom of speech wherever they were our world is online, but it's also divided and I'll Joe tidy from BBC News is still here and Joe just to kick this off explain what the term splinter.

The idea of a splinter internet which organisation of the Internet it's where you get lots of different person internet me know where you are and we seem that Accelerate in the last 4 years will the band we talked about earlier at being banned from different countries and I think what's happening in US right now with TiK ToK is particularly interesting because what we seen there is one of the form of bastion's of a free and open internet using national security reasons to ban potentially the biggest one of the biggest house in the world from American customers and of course that will spread there's no way that will just happened in the US that the five eyes Alliance will see that happening everywhere and it all felt so different just a few decades ago, but right now is the idea of one global information environment actually entirely unrealistic.

The white things are going I would say yes, I think you don't have to be a pessimist to see that.

I think I spoke to an expert about this for a piece come out this week and she put it to me that the ideal internet as it was envisaged the visit was a little bit immature and innocent it and it was based on the understanding of how the technology works as I said earlier.

It's all cables and wires and if you control that you can control everything Bill Clinton famous.

He said trying to control the internet is going to be like trying to Dale jello to a wall at the beginning of the when things started spreading and that has proven to be completely wrong because with the right tools you can completely control what people in your country see and do online in the afternoon from the thinktank for the group.

Please bring you into pick up on what Joe is saying if we build on Joe's description of a splintered internet balkanized internet if you will where does Silicon Valley fit into this is Silicon Valley Motor

To address some of these challenges just depends on the company itself ultimately tech companies at the moment have more influence than many states and these conversations and actually many Media outlets and afraid to think about how algorithms are all trying algorithm is more effective than editing now and more has more impact than the average editor because in reality company massively, what media is producing and what actually gets out there in the under Media that you can see me for this definitely role for tech companies to play in regulating the sphere or not regulating the question is do you want to and what we talking earlier about WhatsApp and its interest in certain markets will mean that it doesn't want to regulate what it wants to comply with certain rules and regulations so tech companies in the States interests or individual citizens interest in these conversations first the worst response to walk States which are hostile to it are doing we've already been.

3 in the last hour when you consider both the governmental response the industry's response the media response is the west responding to a degree that will be able to cope with what's being sent.

It's way massive disinformation it in wedi impacted elections in Europe in the United States and will do in a year of elections have significant impacts ultimately take is moving very quickly and arrivals are investing heavily in a lot of this and we already seen the conversations here about something nervous about in the UK about some of those Investments don't have that nervousness and information of War I don't know if you think that's hyperbole or not but do you think there is a security dimensions of what we've been describing in the last night.

I mean absolutely if you take this information for example the way that China and Russia influencing the conversations being had in the UK for example that is destabilising to our democracy spreading disinformation.

All that does is made Nations Focus in words have lots of internal conversations and not think about the international regulation.

It was a broader picture as well which is about multilateralism in general which is not fit for this increasingly multipolar world that we're seeing and actually institutions like the UN NATO all of those haven't yet adapted to the colour of these new conversations and the rise of emerging and developing countries and actually take it just one area where that's prism challenging for the University of Cambridge you're still here and what would you is all online world actually simply mirror and it hasn't actually managed to move beyond borders.

No, it's definitely move beyond one of the things.

That's so interesting is because because it is everywhere is Jameson a whole lot of opportunities particularly for people who are disrupting and destabilising and that's around you saw it really.

Early with Russian activity before it's actually Russia America shot Russia off and I was talking to a colleague who works in the US tech business you said if we had realised all we needed to do to stop all those anti-vaxxer messages on during the pandemic was to switch Russia off we would have done it.

He said the minute.

We totally took their decision 80% of the content vanished so so that's a concrete example of a model for the future.

That is that was going to reverse this friend where the hope is down so I can listen question because of course we the west with the unregulated with non census area and what you're saying when you're talking about how China's approaching it.

How many ml approaching it Russia has obviously posted what they're saying is yes up to appoint, but we're going to regulate it and you could argue.

Just like you would regulator financial markets as that you would regulate big farm.

Where allowing this massive experiments with our democracy with people's lives and Minds in a way that other states are saying we have limits and we're going to control so I think that's quite an interesting challenge because it brings up serious ethical things about feeding speak to us first amendment but but we are suffering the effects of it which is breakdown of trust show tidy from BBC News listening to this.

I'm thinking while discussing the internet something that we thought would possibly increased freedom of speech but actually hearing some of the reasons why in some ways is worked in the opposite direction your Bruce I think this is a very controversial point but is there such thing as too much internet because we seeing in countries that we discussed in of the idea of censorship and bands and shut down but if you look at the internet not as this ideal of free tools have given to the Citizens years and years ago, but as something that you can use to control people and to make Society

Better could you argue for example saying that in the west of mentioned tiktok, but also in the UK and elsewhere.

There's a real push now to try and protect children online and more moderation is being asked on all social networks, so really I think everywhere is is looking at the internet differently now.

I used to but in terms of how is regulated it's definitely being regulated at the state level at a national level rather than international level absolutely taking place around big tech he who is leading the way now on bringing these Giants to because of course they have largely us companies run away with it the last 20 years and now people have asked questions about whether or not that it's good for Society and whether or not the date has been protected with those kind of things he was the last tour on this edition of the meteor shower because our time is up.

Thank you very much Andy Joe tidy BBC cyber correspond 5-minutes love from BBC Russian news and rain from the centre of year politics at Cambridge University and

Director of the British foreign policy group of journalism and deputy CEO for now from me from Katie for all of our guests and everyone here in the BBC Radio Theatre thanks for listening and bye.

I'm Helen Lewis what links family WhatsApp dramas.

I found stuff after someone made a particularly ignorant comment Russian propaganda and a woman who married in AI 100% I would never go back to humans ever ever again.

No idea all examples of instant messaging is changed the world find out more by joining me for my new BBC Radio 4 Series Helen Lewis has left the chat subscribed.

on BBC sounds