Genuine significance

Clearly there have been sufficient complaints about the Amol Rajan interview with tennis player and medical expert Novak Djokovic for the BBC to publish an all-purpose response. Only a churl would suggest that some of the complaints came from the BBC Newsroom. 

Summary of complaint

We received complaints from some viewers who felt Novak Djokovic's interview was given too much prominence and felt it is irresponsible for the BBC to provide him with a platform to air his views against the Covid vaccine.

Our response

The BBC’s exclusive interview is the first time Novak Djokovic has spoken about his position himself, and our news editors judged that the interview was of genuine significance and was of interest to our audience, particularly in light of what unfolded in the build-up of the Australian Open in January. 

Full version here.  Not long til we get an answer as to why the first moves in a possible European war ranked second to a long-heralded easing of Covid restrictions in the eyes of last night's Ten O'Clock team. 

Meanwhile Jake Kanter in The Times has been trying to find out more about how the Djokovic interview emerged.  He says that sports editor Dan Roan had already made progress with his own effort to interview Djokovic, 34, before it was offered to Rajan, the media editor. Roan had discussed the idea with IMG, the tennis player’s agent, and flew to Belgrade to negotiate access. He lost out after IMG engaged Freuds [a pr team] to place the interview. Kanter says he has three sources saying that Freuds had gift-wrapped the interview for the BBC, phoning the corporation’s news division and offering the opportunity to talk to Djokovic