Use you saw an actor, when politicians use it as a catchall phrase to cover political spin, stuff they dont like, then it gets murky. Annabel . I think the term is toxic. It muddles the debate and just the Public Discourse about accuracy. When we organised by public figures but also many organisations to silence dissenting voices, a way to avoid entering any kind of criticism. At the end, it is harmful to the actual problem that we tried trained in here. Jim wells, we put fabricated evidence into fake news, and things that people simply do not like . The one thing i would add is that we do sting which between fake news and teenagers and things like that, and are bitter tussle propaganda, and muddling those two things together is a huge mistake. All right, joe, or you spoke at the white house. Being treated as a bit ofa white house. Being treated as a bit of a joke, white house. Being treated as a bit ofajoke, and white house. Being treated as a bit of a joke, and people are playing with it and sort that sort of thing, isnt it . Donald trumps definition of fa ke isnt it . Donald trumps definition of fake news, the real problem with fa ke of fake news, the real problem with fake news is that his definition of fa ke fake news is that his definition of fake news is that his definition of fake news is that his definition of fake news is fundamentally fake. The problem with fake news is not journalism which sometimes makes errors in the process of reporting and writing and then promptly corrects itself. Good journalistic organisations own up to their errors. Everything one of the awards that the president gave out to Fake News Media were Media Organisations that made factual errors and corrected them. That means the definition ofjournalistic practice and it is. It is a smear that has made the term, and people said in the clip, weaponise. But you are wearing it as a badge of honour, are you . I got a fake news award from the white house why not . Bilawal, thatis the white house why not . Bilawal, that is one side of fake news, but you are part of the world when fake news is disseminated on whatsapp or whatever, and it can have dangerous consequences, cant it . |j whatever, and it can have dangerous consequences, cant it . I think it can have dangerous consequences everywhere. Donald trump is particular concerning, the point is to have the leader of a country demonising press is fundamentally probably. I come from a country where there was a fight to democracy. I am concerned both would be used by politicians of this term to demonise the press and, on the other side. Does that join in pakistan, then . Who aspire to fake news . I wont name names, but attacking and demonising the media, repeatedly repeating faults, fiction, on such a scale. Causes behind in pakistan . |j fiction, on such a scale. Causes behind in pakistan . I think that with everyone else in pakistan, there is no concrete great entered to that question. Who is behind it in pakistan . In my country and other parts of the developing world, the press is far more commercialised, owned by big business that are not limited like they are in the uk, where you cannot own television and a newspaper. So non traditional platforms can actually be a source of rather credible news. So a lot of actors involved, then . Jimmy wales, wikipedia is part of the media explosion, but it is also part of the fake news problem, isnt it . Because there are a lot of it in a ccu ra cy because there are a lot of it in accuracy is on wikipedia. Of course, there are inaccuracies in reading. We are diligently and passionately committed to getting it right. We are committed to getting reliable sources. We have a very open policy of correcting mistakes are coming to us. Of course, doing serious research, doing seriousjournalism inherently involves making mistakes from time to time. But the key is trying to get it right. I think that is fundamental. And if there is no malicious or malevolent intent behind that sort of. Exactly. This fake news problem does not make it into wikipedia because the Wikipedia Community are very sophisticated about evaluating sources. They would see fake news from teenagers in macedonia or whatever the classic example is, and there would recognise immediately that it was not a real newspaper, they would check around, and it doesnt make sense. Anna belkina, we heard their accusations about russia weaponising, and there were so many accusations against rt from various sources, and an you would say it is not the case with nato, theresa may, amanda anna belkina of france, the german government, the american government, they all said that russia is a perpetrator of fake news, and they point the finger at rt. A lot of the accusations against rt, those accusations are false, it must be false. He brought out the statements made by president Emmanuel Macron. Rt has been the target of false information spread about it. You are accusing president Emmanuel Macron of spreading false information . He has repeatedly made false claims that rt has spread false claims that rt has spread false stories about their candidate. But during the duration of the campaign or after, they have failed to provide a single example of such a story. And now. I know, i know you say it was all, they are all false, but they come from so many quarters, nato, russia, nato said it has been dealing with a significant in russian propaganda since 2014. Mark zuckerberg as to announce russias fake news agency. Mark zuckerberg as to announce russias fake news agencylj Mark Zuckerberg as to announce russias fake news agency. I could go on. This is part of the problem. We are conflating terms like propaganda, misinformation, disinformation. They are notably much more subjective and vague than Something Like fake news. And they are used to dismiss and discredit any kind of dissenting, any kind of inconvenient opinion, or even just fa ct, inconvenient opinion, or even just fact, any kind of reporting. But when president ial candidates or his Team Presents without evidence of this kind of accusation of false news, and all the media this kind of accusation of false news, and allthe media in this kind of accusation of false news, and all the media in the this kind of accusation of false news, and allthe media in the us, and the Mainstream Media in the west, they are very happy to point to any kind of statement. Intelligence agencies in germany and france have provided the evidence. We talking specifically about scrutiny of statement by donald trump, but not of people like Emmanuel Macron. Brokers did not see a single example of a false new story with presented. Jimmy wales, com plete story with presented. Jimmy wales, complete and utter denial and rejection. The evidence is from so many different places. Columbia Journalism School at eight team who found multiple examples of misrepresentation, take experts, false stories, outright lies. A team. I mean, it is overwhelming. That is not even an open question. And also, i think it is really important to understand that serious people do not say fake news is new i disagree with. It is not about silencing dissenting views. Uelese the wall street journal and silencing dissenting views. Uelese the wall streetjournal and the New York Times when they disagree on an issue calling each other fake news. It isa issue calling each other fake news. It is a matter ofjealousy standards. I think anna belkina is correct. There is a semantic distinction between propaganda or a news with spin and that is put out there by a state or a News Organisation for some kind of little purpose or a fact which has a basis in fact but is something which is a which is fundamentally aimed at providing wrong information. It is a semantic issue. There is a spectrum between propaganda and spin and totally false, malicious, and created, fake news. I will tell you exactly what was said here. Emmanuel macron said that russia today, also mentioned the sputnik website, have been agents of influence that have on several occasions spread cancer truth about me and my campaign. They believed behaved like ages of misinformation false propaganda. That is what he said. Taken up with him. We have tried. Take it up with him. Absolutely politicians, media outlets, they put out agendas, essentially. But lets not forget what has been said. Theresa may said russia today is state sponsored media. We are sitting on a bbc platform that is state sponsored media. We need to see from their point of view that we dont seem to notice our own flaws and weaknesses in the western set up either. Nice try their Bilawal Bhutto zardari, but however, a have tuesday, well. There. When we get it wrong, we said after we get it wrong. However, i have negative. The bbc is subject to an independent regulator, 0fcom, which is nothing to do with the government. And the bbc makes reports and investigations they criticised the government. You do that on russia today . We absolutely do that. We are regulated by off, as well. All of our programming. And just asjoe described, the process. Just asjoe described, the process. This is the problem. We are moving the goalposts. We are considering moving the goalposts. And this is the problem. Errors that russia today have made, and of course we have made errors, and we have addressed that. We have informed our audience. When it comes to russia today or other alternative voices in the news media, those kind of accusations become a way of ms rivkin denting the nature of what we do. Lets taking question. We have usman from indonesia. Your question, please . Many politicians have overused social media to help win elections. This led to the inclusion of false news media. How much danger does fake news post to democracy . There was a gallup polljust as month that said that 73 of americans believe it is a threat to democracy. Joe . I think it is. I would twist the question of the bed. I think the hyper partisanship in politics, not just i think the hyper partisanship in politics, notjust in the United States, but around the world, and produces the fake news phenomenon as opposed to fake news producing hyper partisanship. We are in a world where people lead identity based political eyes. They are associating with political news in the way the Political Parties are using it. I dont think it fake news is because of the problem to democracy. I think that the proliferation of fake news is one of the most important symptoms. It is a symptom of the decline of shared values and shared sense of truth, actually. Anna belkina . I agree with you. Any kind of false information has a potential to negatively influence notjust political processes but any kind of Public Discourse overall. However, there have already been several studies in the us and in europe and show even though people might be exposed to fake news, well, to false stories and false information, in the grand scheme of things, they still make their decisions, their political decisions, on the basis of factual information, factual reporting, which is encouraging for all of us. It does not mean that we should be complacent. But i think this is where the issue lies. Jimmy wales, a report on 28 countries showed that 65 of people get their news online or via apps like whatsapp and so on. So the potential for fake news wreaking havoc issued, is that . Is huge. It is huge. Trust of social media has declined. People are beginning to be aware of the problem. Something that goes by you in social media may not be valid. That is the point. Do people really believe this story about pope francis endorsing donald trump as a candidate is true . That was given out by macedonian teenagers. People are intelligent. They think pope francis supports migration and is left of centre and so on. So, people should be more credited . More than a Million People shared that on facebook. More than a Million People thought it was interesting enough. They believed it. It is unclear if they believed it. It is unclear if they believed it. In most cases, if someone shares something, a want friends and their community to see it and understand. If people share it, do you think they believe it is true . Yeah, or are they think it is either alarming enough or confirming enough of something they feel in the moment. How much did they bother reading it. One of the things which is ha rd it. One of the things which is hard for people who are news junkies to keep in mind is we immediately see that and say that is ludicrous, there is no way the pope supports donald trump. By people who are not as it news consumers, by the way, people in free societies have the right to not do that, but it should be quality information. We have to look at why they are compelled to read and share those stories in the first place. The big reason for that is that for many years if not decades, a large part of the audience in the us and europe felt underserved by their own news media. They did not see that as reflecting their reality. They turned to alternative voices, some like rt, but others, not. Untilthe Mainstream Media takes a more critical look at why this kind of environment was created in the first place, there are even reporters and columnists from the New York Times themselves to have reflected on the wakeup call of the president ial election, until there is wakeup call of the president ial election, untilthere is a wakeup call of the president ial election, until there is a very honest effort to address this issue and not discouraged legitimate alternative voices from the news discourse, the problem will persist. A very good point for the Mainstream Media that it is a challenge, really. Citizens and media go where they want. The Mainstream Media failed to give citizens and readers what they wanted. So you also do share some of that responsibility. We have a mission to try and reach as many people as we can with our journalism. But i think we have to understand that a large part of the reading public want information that is confirming their bias and political belief. The New York Times on the bbc are not committed to providing information confirming bias, we give journalism. Providing information confirming bias, we givejournalism. In providing information confirming bias, we give journalism. In a hyper partisan environment, you will have people constantly search for sources of news and information that confirm their prior political beliefs. They will fail to find that in the most credible news media and will seek it elsewhere, but it is not our responsibility to provide them with fa ke responsibility to provide them with fake or misleading use simply to confirm political bias. The Mainstream Media, many people say they are responsible, failing to regulate standards in the Mainstream Media, helping the proliferation of fa ke media, helping the proliferation of fake news. I guess i would not agree with that. Not for the New York Times, but. I cannot speak for every element of the Mainstream Media. I think the mainstream every element of the Mainstream Media. Ithink the Mainstream Media for the most part does its best to try to improve itself, it makes mistakes over time, the journalistic process is inherently imperfect, but we are committed to fact based well reported journalism. That is how we get our audience. We have a substantial audience. But you cannot look at the entire world of news and information and blamed the pad is an biased view that circulates a mine ona biased view that circulates a mine on a failure by media. On line. Another message from rebecca mackinnon, an advocate for privacy. Your question. My question relates to the previous question, but deals with Business Models. We know now from studies what has happened over the past year that disinformation campaigns appearing on social media we re campaigns appearing on social media were really the result of people very skilfully using the features and services that social media companies, facebook and others, provide to advertisers and digital markets. The question is the overdependence on social media for advertising, especially advertising technology, tracking people all over the internet, enabling very targeted messaging to specific types of people, to what extent is that an existential threat to democratic discourse. Lets keep with that. Do we need to rework the Business Model . That is what the macedonian kids did to get lots of hits for advertising. Jimmy wales. The advertising. Jimmy wales. The advertising only Business Model has been destructive for journalism. Advertising only Business Model has been destructive forjournalism. 0ne of the most encouraging signs i have seenin of the most encouraging signs i have seen in the last few years is the incredible surge in digital only subscriptions to the New York Times and other quality papers. People finally understand we need to pay for qualityjournalism. The problem with, especially when we have this advertising technology, everywhere i go on the internet i see the same add, adds full boats, because i like boats. Ads, ads for. They think i am having a midlife crisis. Baby the New York Times and the guardian and the ft, thats advertised to them. Now i can be on a message board, reddit, a spammy website, ill see that ad. People are fighting for clicks, which gives the wrong incentive. We need to make any Business Model . Yes. In this environment with highly automated advertising ecosystems, journalism cannot compete with raw clicks. Do you agree . Yes. The Business Model isa you agree . Yes. The Business Model is a fundamental threat to democracy and media, especially in a country like pakistan. Big business houses control the of the like pakistan. Big business houses control the of the space. Do b dotiff hesitate 7 n n 7 7 7 do hesitate to doggt . Hesitate to create they do not hesitate to create fictional news, to run fictional news, on their electronic media. And the quality ofjournalism in pakistan, and let me tell you, we have some of the bestjournalism in pakistan. We have staved off three military aid to the ships with some of those brave journalists in my country. But this commercialisation, with this. And less about the advertisements, but the Big Industries in pakistan with money, and the government, doling out money, acting on television, spinning, propaganda. You think there is more sensationalism. Spinning, propaganda. You think there is more sensationalism. Yes, exactly. And they are not getting the same packages. Annabel . It is pa rt of the same packages. Annabel . It is part of the problem, but not the majority. In my view, false information isjust as harmful if it is created and distributed just off an all for the purpose of political interference as it is when people are trying to make money for the. The issue is again how can we inoculate the audience against this kind of information, regardless of how it is distributed and promoted . This brings up the issue when it comes about the likes of twitter, facebook, and google, either publishers, or are they platforms . Jimmy wales . I think it is to be interesting what facebook is doing. We dont know yet what that will mean exactly. 0n the one hand, i think serious publishers should be happy that maybe it is not all about click baity headlines on social media. But if there is a decline in traffic from facebook, that is meaningful. I do think that the platforms really do need to think and reflect on the role of the information provided to consumers, and not just with information provided to consumers, and notjust with a public spirit, but also just for the quality of the user experience. If people begin to feel like, do you know what, ifind igoon feel like, do you know what, ifind i go on facebook and twitter and get all of this nonsense news i am not sure about. I do not really want to do that, they will stop using facebook. They will say ijust do that, they will stop using facebook. They will say i just want a service to look at photos from my friends. The point is, umm, i think that the platforms need to take this seriously. You think they have not been doing enough . seriously. You think they have not been doing enough . I think they have not been doing enough to the extent that their brands are being tarnished. Umm. That their brands are being tarnished. Umm. You that their brands are being tarnished. Umm. You refer to that their brands are being tarnished. Umm. You refer to them as platforms. That is their fear, being seen as publishers, because they get different rules. being seen as publishers, because they get different rules. I think they get different rules. I think they are platforms. Definitely. If i wa nt to they are platforms. Definitely. If i want to share something with a friend, umm on twitter or on facebook, umm, ido friend, umm on twitter or on facebook, umm, i do not think it is there in any way to assume that facebook is responsible for that content. Facebook are absolutely determined not to be reclassified in the Business Ecosystem as a publisher. That really means they ta ke publisher. That really means they take responsibility for what all of the 2 billion users around the world post, the accuracy of it, the reliability of the information. They would essentially need to hire every available human being in the world in orderto available human being in the world in order to have any assurance, the way a good publisher would, that what they are publishing on that platform meet their standards. So it is literally impossible for facebook to become a publisher Business Model. At the same time, they are feeling some of the pressure that publishers feel because they do feel a certain sense of responsibility for the most malicious fake news. It impacts the political debate to be that explains why Mark Zuckerberg announced this change in their algorithm. They are stepping back from trying to be or even presenting themselves as a primary provider of news. It means they want to be a social media site, not a primary source for people to consume news. They saw a drop in their income as a result of changing their model. They could disappear. That seems unlikely. But i do think that they could become a somewhat less significant source of news and information, and they would not, at least according to what they are telling us, be that reluctant to be viewed as a less dignity can source of news information. And you . The recent decision of this, how does that impact publications like the New York Times . You often hope it drives traffic to use the blue we think it will impact us somewhat less tha n think it will impact us somewhat less than the ecosystem of true fake news providers looking for click bait. We never got enough add ad revenue from fb anyway. Bait. We never got enough add ad revenue from f3 anyway. Is it time to rework it . I think one danger we need to avoid when discussing the role of these platforms is to not put three american companies, three platforms, essentially in the positions of global censors of news. I have no idea when false information will be taken out of the discourse, and i hope it happens because it is harmful for discourse, and i hope it happens because it is harmfulfor all of discourse, and i hope it happens because it is harmful for all of us, but they should not be deciding one view is better than another, the Washington Post over the New York Times, etc, when publishing reporting. That is a very valid point. Joe said you cannot have enough Fact Checkers to deal with the volume of news to see what is fa ke the volume of news to see what is fake and what isnt. What do you do . Wikitribune is my effort to play a small part. We know that communities can do incredibly positive work, we have seen that with wikipedia. It is not perfect, but great people try to get things right. I want to see if we can bring in a wiki Style Community paired with journalists to get something working together as equals. There is a lot you cannot really do is a thoughtful person of good wheel sitting at home and working in your spare time. You cannot drop everything and chase a story for three days and things like that. At the same time, we know there is a lot of full four people can contribute. In the past, the structure of news websites has not done anything useful. The classic News Community is here is the article and comments with people screaming at each other. Many journalists are afraid of the community because they could publish something and get abuse in the comments. That is not healthy. Those angry people in the comments do not represent all of humanity. The audience. The ministerfor information and technology in bangladesh. I think the listing which panellists for their insight. In my view, there are two tools to tackle fake news. 0ne are two tools to tackle fake news. One is definitely tough regulation. Another is self censorship. So my question to be panel, so what would you suggest for a country like bangladesh . Although there is a strong argument from the government to regulate fake news, but it can damage freedom of speech or the freedom of press . We are seeing the British Government has Just Announced a new unit to rebut the us. We know that france and germany have brought in regulations. Germany in particular has heavy fines for fa ke in particular has heavy fines for fake news. So there are examples for a regulation. But you need to balance regulation, hate speech, and free speech. Balance regulation, hate speech, and freespeech. Exactly. I look forward to see how this goes for it in germany, a country which really focuses on protecting rights. It will interesting to see that this goes for it. That just with the david ash, my fear is undermining the basque, especially in young democracy like ours. Im excited by the anti of things like children, because it will allow credibility and authenticity, as well a strength was at the back. I like this emergence of programmes of checking fa ke emergence of programmes of checking fake news. Perhaps this could develop into a more community driven. I develop into a more community driven. Lam develop into a more community driven. I am comfortable with Something Like. With elections in pakistan this year, and hotly co ntested. Pakistan this year, and hotlycontested. Yes, and we pakistan this year, and hotlycontested. Yes, and we have been historically dealing with fake news election cycles in pakistan and bangladesh, dealing with things in batman. As a component, but i personally do not trust my state to regulate in this. When you you have really detrimental effects and harmful consonants as two elements, then it loses . Something we are not addressing of education. We need to look at how we educate kids in school. We are about sourcing, about bias, about how to Research Check multiple angles and see, and also identify what things look s like. I come back to anna belkina, and the role of government in reliving fake news. In a lot of traditional news platforms such as the press to use broadcasters, these are all pretty heavily regulated in places where we operate. This is to russia today and the bbc, and a daunting additional regulation is the answer. But speaking as a member of the media community, i think that a lot of the solution lies with the news media community. This is not as viable as when someone like donald trump takes this as a badge of honour, but then Emmanuel Macron does it and think, it is a double standard. We cannot excuse some mistakes are not those of others. And if there are mistakes that were today that are pointed out in a constructive debate by the likes of the New York Times, but russias they can point out mistakes in the New York Times, that is the most constructive approach. Joe . The United States under donald trump and the russian government under Vladimir Putin have taken on Political Leadership to some extent to combat what they call fake news, which i think is emblematic of the risk of having the government involved in policing this. The Russian Ministry has a step that they put on pieces of news that they considerfake. Donald they put on pieces of news that they consider fake. Donald trump they put on pieces of news that they considerfake. Donald trump has his fa ke considerfake. Donald trump has his fake news words. These are not people that the Broader Community should be looking to to tell us what is accurate that two and not accurate in the media. What is accurate in the media. What is accurate and what is not accurate. I have little to no faith in government regulation as a way of ferreting out fake news. The only thing that will really work with fa ke thing that will really work with fake news is more use, more attention to quality news, that attraction for quality his own online platforms, and ultimately simply more information that is out there to combat the maliciously fake news. So it is a shot in the arm for the bibra lake the New York Times, which is why your circulation has gone up, do you think, because you been around since the mid 19th century . To reliable brands. I think this is a sound in social media reporting. Over time, we need to continue to re emphasise that. Reporting. Over time, we need to continue to reemphasise that. Jimmy wales . Continue to reemphasise that. Jimmy wales . Particularly in countries where they are fragile democracies ora where they are fragile democracies or a lot of potential problems with pressure from the state on publishers. Strong regulation is dangerous and a bad idea. I also dont think that self censorship is a bad idea. Ithink it dont think that self censorship is a bad idea. I think it is a false dichotomy. I think we need a robust ecosystem. You need to have the independence of journalism to ecosystem. You need to have the independence ofjournalism to speak truth to power but also to ferret out fake news and also to speak out about that. Minister, you have some a nswe rs about that. Minister, you have some answers there, a blueprint to work out your civil servants. Lets take our final question out your civil servants. Lets take ourfinal question from out your civil servants. Lets take our final question from the audience, from a youth activist from uganda. Thank you very much. I am from africa. Probably the biggest victim of fake news. What i wanted to ask is, in a continent like africa, where across the country is there is a strong tribal loyalty to politicians. The point that this does not necessarily mean that people are questioning newsgroup and their latest figure two. Insert narratives, how can you enforce change . Jo konta, i think you said it earlier on, people seek out certain use. Joe it earlier on, people seek out certain use. Joe khan. In certain use. Joe khan. In certain narratives. I dont think it is only applicable people have certain royalty. That this is in the context of africa, but the question is taking you bring about change . think the question is hyper partisanship of politics and news media debate. I think the idea of non partisan facts, even science, it is itself even questioned are subordinated to partisan politics. He will believe what i can your political leader or spokesman said you what to believe about climate change, about the performance of the economy, about what is happening in your own community. The idea of having a truly independent, fact based for democratic discussion has been eroded in recent years. So that tribal loyalty has become a breeding ground. It has become all, rather than less, important. That is an enormous dilemma for a messy media, which is not as major partisan. We cannot, by our nature, truly satisfy the demand for that kind of you know, tribal affiliation and identity based. In the united kingdom, you have the daily telegraph, which is famously tory. If Wikipedia Wikitribune go in direction, we will have at deterioration. I think what is important here is that people like to buy the guardian, for example, because it confirms a worldview, or someone. Because it confirms a worldview, or someone. That is a left of centre paper in the uk. Although the telegraph and that is fine. I think wikipedia is popular, New York Times, the bbc comedies and probably popular. People do that. They also have an incredibly strong desire for a strong facts that are as neutral as possible. We are coming to time inafew as possible. We are coming to time in a few minutes. At the chamber and its effect on news. Anna burke in a . I think when we talk about credible reporting, and that is what we tried to deliver, this is a way of providing the audience with the widest range of soy is possible. Anna belkina. I think tribal list issues are important. Tribalist. I wonder how President Trump, by engaging in these words, how he is sort of rounding out and painting as pa rt sort of rounding out and painting as part is in the previously seen as objective organisations. Partisan the. Fake news, as imperfect a phrase that might be, to think we can combat it . Will be with you as a long . I think we are all starting to see the issues with it. So not for long. Jimmy wales . I think that fake news will be a sorted out by algorithms. Will be sorted out by algorithms. Will be sorted out by algorithms. Liberty media, we have a lot to do with. It has been around for ages and will be around for longer. Quality media. For ages and will be around for longer. Quality media. Actual fa ke longer. Quality media. Actual fake news is on the decline. The fa ke fake news is on the decline. The fake news is on the decline. The fake news as a political smear is on the increase. That is the threat at the increase. That is the threat at the moment. Thank you to my panel. Thank you to the audience of the World Economic forum. From me, zeinab badawi, and all of the team on our will debate, goodbye. Zeinab badawi, and all of the team on ourwill debate, goodbye. Zeinab badawi, and all of the team on our will debate, goodbye. All of our team on our will debate, goodbye. All of ourteam on on our will debate, goodbye. All of our team on our debate. Here is your latest live update from bbc weather. Friday, tomorrow, and they shall we are looking at the weekend. We will in this forecast. Out there at the moment, there are showers around. Still particularly into parts of england and wales. It has been wet for some of us. North west england in particular. A few of the showers will continue overnight. As you are dotted about through northern parts of scotland. Much of scotland dry and clear. Filed in northern ireland. Any way clear for any filed in northern ireland. Any way clearfor any period filed in northern ireland. Any way clear for any period of time than i could see some frost. We could see the risk of surmise where we have had showers. Here is how friday morning is shaping up. They cold and frosty start for much of scotland, parts of northern ireland. Here there are few for patches to begin with. More cloud to the south. Particularly in england. That will clear lead into the night and into the first private tomorrow to the south. Particularly in england. That will clear lead into the night and into the first private tomorrow from those will see a fair amount of cloud and still the chance, especially in the morning, seeing some showers. By no means everybody will. If you do catch one, it should not last too long. This will be the cloudy ozone as we go through friday. Slowly getting a bit brighter into the afternoon. Elsewhere, it a good deal of sunshine to be had. Light winds as well. Although technically it is the cold est well. Although technically it is the coldest day of the week, with temperatures around 7 nine degrees for many. Scotland will get some sunshine and it will feel pleasant. We will get increasing cloud into the evening and overnight. Rain will move in on friday evening and across western parts of the uk moving into saturday morning. A touch across to the east on saturday. Such a short lived as we take that and some outbreaks of rain is woods. Western parts, particularly east anglia and the south east, light and patchy into the afternoon. It will not amount to much. It is heaviest to the east. In the was declared a bit. It is milder but it is windy. That mother thing continues into the second half of the weekend on sunday. Quite strong winds across saturday night into sunday morning, especially in northern isles, with gales. Exposure to the north of the uk, cows at times. A lot of cloud on sunday, tickets to the west with patchy rain and drizzle. More persistent rain in other areas. It is mild in eastern parts, even milder on sunday. As we mentioned, quite windy. Much more about the on our website through the night. Im rico hizon in singapore. This is newsday on the bbc. The headlines a mixed reception for President Trump in davos. He fires a warning to the palestinians, saying they must accept his decision onjerusalem or aid will be cut. Casey affleck has withdrawn from the oscars due to claims of sexual harassment. Myanmar rejects criticism of aung san syi kyi by a long time friend and veteran us diplomat and drops him from its advisory panel. And well be hearing from chinas oprah winfrey, an empress of reality television, who happens to be transgender
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.