# Reporters on the BBC and their "understanding" **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 12, 2007, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452 "2007-10-12T10:29:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/1 "2007-10-12T10:29:30Z")
Its a phrase I’ve heard a lot from BBC reporters in Northern Ireland, when they’re reporting on something they often put “it is my understanding” before what they say, most often when reporting on court cases. Is this some sort of legal measure? That they can say “my understanding but not necessarily what happened” if someone takes them up in court about a story. Does any other news network do this? It reminds me of the comedy news quiz “Have I Got News For You” where a regular who had been sued for work done on a magazine put the word allegedly after sentences as a joke (I heard later that this wouldn’t hold up in court in any case) ---
**Author:** ![An\_Gadai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@An\_Gadai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Gadai)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/2 "2007-10-12T14:03:17Z")
I think (but could be wrong) this is usually used in circumstances as you say like court cases where there has been a legal ruling. The full and exact ramifications of a ruling may not be known to the reporter or commentator so it is a legalistic way of saying “to the best of my/our knowledge this means blah”. Reporters are (obviously) trying to provide clarity in sometimes very complex legal matters. ---
**Author:** ![An\_Gadai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@An\_Gadai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Gadai)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/3 "2007-10-12T14:05:45Z")
Edit: Never mind. Brain not working today, sorry. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/4 "2007-10-12T15:24:04Z")
I’ve noticed they do say it a lot, so I guess it is a legal precaution. After all, they are broadcasting to millions of people… The ‘allegedly’ was indeed used on ‘Have I got news for you’. Partly because Angus Deyton got into trouble over using drugs and prostitutes (allegedly 🙂 ), and also because another panelist was ian Hislop, the editor of the scurrillous magazine ‘Private Eye’, which was regularly sued for it’s allegations. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/5 "2007-10-12T15:39:00Z")
My guess is that it’s more a reflex or a habit. I can’t imagine that it would provide any real legal protection, or, rather, that its absence would by itself create a legal risk. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/6 "2007-10-12T16:21:31Z")
“My understanding is…”, “Some people say…” and “It’s generally believed…” are the kinds of sentence openings that are common practice in the United States, especially in the area of punditry and opinion. It allows the speaker to make an assertion without offering any truly hard evidence to back it up, and to chum the waters, as it were. Since opinion is also legally protected speech, these statements are basically rhetorical devices that take the speaker off the hook if he’s wrong. “Allegedly” is a little different. Using that word allows the reporter to repeat legal charges and other accusations so that it appears that “an unproven action is not being treated as fact.” The Associated Press _Broadcast News Handbook_ says that the use of “allege” must be used with great care so that it’s very clear who is doing the alleging; sourcing and attribution are vital here. From a legal standpoint, I was taught that “allege” would likely protect me and my employer from a lawsuit because it would be obvious from the story that the allegations were made by someone else, hence the need for attribution. I don’t have any court cases that would prove that or disprove it. According to my teachers and bosses, using the word “allege” would allegedly protect me and my employer from legal action. 🙂 Robin ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2007, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/7 "2007-10-12T23:38:49Z")
[QUOTE=glee] The ‘allegedly’ was indeed used on ‘Have I got news for you’. Partly because Angus Deyton got into trouble over using drugs and prostitutes (allegedly 🙂 ), and also because another panelist was ian Hislop, the editor of the scurrillous magazine ‘Private Eye’, which was regularly sued for it’s allegations. [/QUOTE] The “allegedly” was used on HIGNFY for many years before Angus got caught frolicking in a trough of pure coke with a teenage prostitute. (errr, allegedly) _raises eyebrow_ _Private Eye_ hasn’t really had to fend in a court of law for a good long time. Corrections in the letters page satisfy most malcontents these days. It’ll be interesting to see who will re-publish the George Osbourne/prostitute/cocaine pictures come election time though. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2007, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/8 "2007-10-14T11:23:50Z")
I believe that under British law by prefacing a statement "in my opinion"you can avoid being sued for libel/slander,as in “In my opinion Tony Blair is a practicing Satanist who delights in torturing small fluffy animals”. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2007, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/9 "2007-10-14T12:28:57Z")
It depends on the nature of the statement that comes after the phrase, “It is my understanding.” Usually it’s just a way to bring up a topic, without definite back up, as mentioned above: “It’s my understand that prosecutors intend to appeal the decision.” When some new information comes out by word of mouth, it makes sense to use the phrase. However, they wouldn’t say, “It is my understanding that Mr. X killed his wife,” unless Mr. X confessed to it, and “authorities” believe him. Before a a conviction in court, they’ll say, “Prosecutors allege that Mr. X killed his wife.” After a conviction, they say, “Convicted murderer Mr. X was sentence to life in prison yesterday for killing his wife…” This is press protocol as much as legal protection. Then there’s the typical opening line in newspapers across the States: “Mr. John Doe poisoned his wife and children, dismembered their bodies, and ran off to Hawaii with a 14-year-old boy babysitter, before kicking his dog on the way out the door,…police say.” (For some reason, they never write, “Police accuse Mr. John Doe of poisoning his wife and children, etc.”) This is not the same as what linguists studying pragmatics call “presupposition” (“Mr. X, have you stopped beating your wife?”), because it’s propositionally different, but it comes close. ---
**Author:** ![ianzin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed655f/32.png) [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2007, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/10 "2007-10-14T23:31:25Z")
The ‘it’s my understanding’ phrase is also another way of referring to info from non-attributable sources. It means ‘someone close to the action told me this, but only on the basis that I don’t say where I got it from’. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/11 "2007-10-15T09:47:29Z")
According to [Charlie Brooker](http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/features/screen-wipe.shtml), a lot of the time “on the scene” TV journalists in breaking news items know less than the studio team and are infact being fed info from the studio via earpiece whilst giving an on the spot report/interview with the anchor. So the anchor will be in the position of interviewing someone on a subject that they themselves actually know more about. It’s pretty bizarre. Not really that relevant to the discussion, just something I found [QI](http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/qi/). ---
**Author:** ![chowder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/977dab/32.png) [@chowder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chowder)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/12 "2007-10-15T10:02:04Z")
[QUOTE=Lust4Life] I believe that under British law by prefacing a statement "in my opinion"you can avoid being sued for libel/slander,as in “In my opinion Tony Blair is a practicing Satanist who delights in torturing small fluffy animals”. [/QUOTE] As a matter of fact this is general knowledge. He also has a prediliction for masturbating in a bath full of cold custard while reading “Lesbian Lust in a Lavatory”. Allegedly :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/13 "2007-10-15T10:54:20Z")
[QUOTE=chowder] As a matter of fact this is general knowledge. He also has a prediliction for masturbating in a bath full of cold custard while reading “Lesbian Lust in a Lavatory”. Allegedly :dubious: [/QUOTE] I think you mean the well-known scientific classic “Lesbian Lust in a Laboratory”, actually. Of course this was a follow-up to the very fine “Lesbian Spank Inferno”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/14 "2007-10-15T11:11:23Z")
[QUOTE=glee] I think you mean the well-known scientific classic “Lesbian Lust in a Laboratory”, actually. Of course this was a follow-up to the very fine “Lesbian Spank Inferno”. 😃 [/QUOTE] Featuring the same lesbian film collective? ---
**Author:** ![chowder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/977dab/32.png) [@chowder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chowder)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/15 "2007-10-15T12:32:23Z")
[QUOTE=glee] I think you mean the well-known scientific classic “Lesbian Lust in a Laboratory”, actually. Of course this was a follow-up to the very fine “Lesbian Spank Inferno”. 😃 [/QUOTE] Yes of course I do, silly typo of mine. The latest in the trilogy is, I believe, Gay Girls in Leather ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/16 "2007-10-15T12:39:56Z")
[QUOTE=Szlater] Featuring the same lesbian film collective? [/QUOTE] Yes indeed. It’s wonderful to see **coupling** of like minds! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/17 "2007-10-15T12:45:01Z")
[QUOTE=chowder] Yes of course I do, silly typo of mine. The latest in the trilogy is, I believe, Gay Girls in Leather [/QUOTE] I say, old boy, are you sure you are in on the [in-joke](http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/coupling/episodes/s1ep4.shtml)? ---
**Author:** ![MJinks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/da6949/32.png) [@MJinks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MJinks)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/18 "2007-10-15T13:16:00Z")
[QUOTE=Struan] The “allegedly” was used on HIGNFY for many years before Angus got caught frolicking in a trough of pure coke with a teenage prostitute. (errr, allegedly) _raises eyebrow_ _Private Eye_ hasn’t really had to fend in a court of law for a good long time. Corrections in the letters page satisfy most malcontents these days. It’ll be interesting to see who will re-publish the George Osbourne/prostitute/cocaine pictures come election time though. [/QUOTE] It’s my understanding that Ian Hislop only says ‘allegedly’ in order to trick other contestants into saying something they’ll regret. It offers no legal protection [cite](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/535307.stm). ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/19 "2007-10-15T13:33:34Z")
[QUOTE=MJinks] It’s my understanding that Ian Hislop only says ‘allegedly’ in order to trick other contestants into saying something they’ll regret. [/quote] I’d like a cite for that, because that sounds incredibly malicious. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2007, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452/20 "2007-10-15T14:27:44Z")
[QUOTE=guizot] …Then there’s the typical opening line in newspapers across the States: “Mr. John Doe poisoned his wife and children, dismembered their bodies, and ran off to Hawaii with a 14-year-old boy babysitter, **before** kicking his dog on the way out the door,…police say.” … [/QUOTE] It’s my understanding he allegedly ran off to Hawaii **after** kicking his dog. 😃 [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reporters-on-the-bbc-and-their-understanding/422452.md?page=2)