Global News Podcast - BBC refuses to pay Trump compensation

Episode Date: November 14, 2025

The BBC has sent a letter of apology to Donald Trump, saying it regrets the way a programme spliced together parts of his speech from the day of the Capitol riots. But the corporation's lawyers have rejected Mr Trump's demand for compensation. The president has threatened to sue the BBC for $1bn over the edited clip. Also: The former Bangladeshi prime minister Sheikh Hasina has denied committing crimes against humanity. New analysis from COP30 has shown that 1,600 delegates from the fossil fuel industry are in attendance. Germany has announced plans for military conscription, in the shadow of the war in Ukraine. And a rocket owned by Jeff Bezos has been launched carrying NASA satellites bound for Mars. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: [e-mail]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. Vanity Fair calls BritBox a delicious streamer. Collider says everyone should be watching. Catch Britain's next best series with Britbox. Streamer claim new originals like Code of Silence. You read lips, right? Anne Linley, based on the best-selling mystery series. Di-I, Linley, take it from here.

And don't miss the new season of Karen Piri coming this October. You don't look, let, please. I'll take that as a compliment. See it differently when you stream the best of British TV with Britbox. Watch with a free trial today. This is the Global News podcast from the BBC World Service. I'm Charlotte Gallagher, and at six hours GMT on Friday the 14th of November, these are our main stories.

The BBC has apologised to Donald Trump for a documentary that spliced together parts of his speech on the day of the capital riots but has rejected his demands for compensation. The former Prime Minister of Bangladesh denies committing crimes against humanity during a deadly crackdown on an uprising last year. Environmental campaigners at the COP 30 climate talk say 1,600 delegates from the oil, gas and coal industries

are in attendance, outnumbering most country's delegations. Also in this podcast, the row between, the Israeli government and the Army radio station. And a rocket owned by the Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos, is headed to Mars. We begin with the story about the BBC itself and Donald Trump's threat to sue the corporation for a billion dollars over a news program broadcast last year. An episode of the documentary series Panorama put together two parts of President Trump's speech on the day of the capital riots. In a way, the BBC itself has said gave the mistaken impression he had made a direct call for violent action. The BBC's Director General and Head of News have resigned.

Mr Trump's lawyers have demanded an apology of attraction and financial compensation, saying they will file a defamation lawsuit if those conditions are not met. On Thursday, the BBC released this statement, laying out its response to President Trump. Lawyers for the BBC have written to President Trump's legal team in response to a letter received on Sunday. BBC chair, Samir Shah, has separately sent a personal letter to the White House, making clear to President Trump that he and the corporation are sorry for the edit of the President's speech on 6th of January 2021, which featured in the programme. The BBC has no plans to re-broadcast the documentary, Trump, a second chance, on any BBC platforms.

While the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited, we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim. Our culture and media editor, Katie Razzle, talked us through the arguments made by BBC lawyers in their letter to Mr Trump's legal team. The first point that they make is that the BBC did not distribute the Panorama programme on American channels. And they point out that when it was on the eye player, it was geographically restricted to viewers in the UK.

Essentially, what they're saying there is, people couldn't have watched it in America or on any of the American channels. So if Donald Trump is claiming it would affect American voters, for example, because it was put out ahead of the election, while they're saying it couldn't have done that. They say he was talking in this legal letter. It was about the injury and overwhelming reputational

and financial harm to Donald Trump. And the BBC is saying in this letter, it didn't cause you overwhelming reputational or financial harm, effectively because you were re-elected. So where's the harm? Then there's this talk about malice, whether it was malicious. What they're arguing the BBC in this legal letter is that the editing of that clip, it was used to convey a much broader point about what happened on the day and how that speech was received at the time. And they're pointing out it wasn't designed to mislead anybody. It was simply an edit made to shorten a long speech

into a shorter, tiny bit of speech and conveyed the way the speech landed. It wasn't done with malice. It was done, they say, by someone who thought they were condensing Donald Trump's message. They're also pointing out that the clip was never intended to be considered in isolation.

So the BBC saying it is 12 seconds of an hour-long program and that program followed Donald Trump's supporters and contained lots of pro-Donald Trump messages within it. So they're saying, you can't consider it in isolation. This was a program where we heard a lot from people about why they support Donald Trump and why they follow him and why they wanted him to be president.

And then their last argument in this legal letter is a slightly more technical one, but essentially the threshold for defamation if you're a political figure in the US is really high. And so what the BBC lawyers are saying is under US law, it's sort of put like this, an opinion on a matter of public concern and political speech is heavily protected under defamation. law in the U.S. But essentially the bottom line is they are standing their ground and they're saying you don't have a legal case. We're not giving you any money. Katie Razzle. Let's get the view from Washington now with our North America editor, Sarah Smith. We haven't yet heard from the president or from the White House since the BBC sent that apology. We did hear from him a couple of days

ago when he said he felt obligated to sue the BBC because it had defrauded the public, he said, and you can't allow people to do that. He claimed the BBC had butchered what he called his very calming, very beautiful speech on the 6th of January and made it sound radical. And we heard from his press secretary who said the president now believes the BBC is a leftist propaganda machine who had dishonestly edited that panorama speech and that that was very clearly fake news. The other thing we know is that the president has taken on two media companies in the last few months, ABC News and CBS News. He sued them and he ended up settling those cases.

for $15 million and $16 million each. That was Sarah Smith. The former Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, has denied committing crimes against humanity during a deadly crackdown on last year's uprising that ousted her. She told the BBC her trial in absentea was a farce orchestrated by a kangaroo court. Anvarisan Etirajan reports. A tribunal in Dhaka is due to give its judgment against the former Bangladeshi Premier

and two other officials on Monday. Prosecutors have demanded the death penalty. In her first interview with the BBC, since she fled to India in August 2024, Sheikh Hasina claimed that the trial was destined to deliver what she called a preordained guilty verdict. She said the hundreds of killings during the anti-government demonstrations last year were tragic,

but categorically denied personally ordering security forces to fire at protesters in the weeks before she fled. UN human rights investigators have said up to 1,400 people were killed when security forces used, systematic, deadly violence against protesters. Asked about the discovery of secret jails, holding prisoners who had been detained for years without any legal process, she said she didn't have any knowledge of them. She also called for the ban on her Awami League party to be lifted

so that it can take part in national elections scheduled for early next year. Ms. Asina and other senior members of her former government are also facing trial for corruption in a separate court, charges they deny. And Barisan Etirajan. The COP 30 climate talks taking place in the Brazilian city of Bilem have brought together politicians, scientists and activists from around the world. But they've also attracted more than 1,000. 600 delegates from the coal, oil and gas industries. That's more than has been sent by any

single country apart from Brazil. Our environment correspondent Matt McGraw reports. Well, security is tight here at the cop and everybody who comes in and out has to have a badge. And that badge shows a lot of information, including where you're from, who you work for, what country you're from. Every year, environmental activists analyze the information on badges, And they use that information to work out who are the people who work for coal, oil and gas companies. A little earlier, I spoke to Adrian Salazar from the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance. That's one of the groups that's involved in compiling the data. Now, he says this year sees the highest proportion of fossil fuel delegates at a cop since 2021.

It has increased substantially in the last several years. And because this is a smaller cup in total aggregate numbers, we're also seeing a higher proportion. So about 1 in 25 of participants here are representing fossil fuel industry. Okay, that sounds like a big number when you say it altogether. That's the 1600. But it's only 3% or so of the overall total of people here. You could say 97% of people here are not representing fossil fuel interests. What's so worrying about having 3% of people here representing coal, oil, and gas, or banks associated with that?

What's wrong with that? That's a fair question. I think what we have to look at is the amount of power these corporations and fossil fuel representatives are able to yield in their presence here. And many of them, I think about 599, are on party badges, meaning that they have access to the negotiations. They may be sitting in delegations that are representing countries. And so fossil fuel industry, and this has been the case for years, is in fact colluding with governments in order to influence this process. Well, are they being successful, though?

Because, you know, we say there's 1,600 of them here. But over the last number of years, we've had a recognition that coal is going to be phased out or phased down in Glasgow. Two years ago in Dubai, we had an agreement on a transaction. transition away from fossil fuels, these lobbyists are not doing such a great job. They have been engaged in a PR battle to slow down the transition of the economy. And you're telling me, because it's 2025, they've changed their minds, I don't think so. That was Adrian Salazar speaking, who's part of the coalition called kick big polluters out.

Now, that group wants to see all these fossil fuel delegates. who are connected to coal, oil and gas, ejected from these talks. However, I think that's never going to happen. The cop, for all its flaws, is open to everyone and will likely remain that way. Matt McGraw. Germany's government has agreed a new military service plan to boost troop numbers as Berlin aims to create Europe's strongest conventional army. The plan, which politicians will vote on later this year,

it comes amid the looming threat posed by Russia and other security concerns. But many Germans are wary of the country re-arming and inching towards conscription. Our correspondent, Jessica Parker, sent this report from Dortmund. I'm just walking through an army training base in West Germany where we've been watching recruits do a variety of exercises. And it comes as the German government, governing parties have struck a deal on military service. Now, what they're planning to put to parliament is that 18-year-olds would be sent a questionnaire about their willingness, their ability

to serve. 18-year-old men would in future also have to attend a physical to see about their fitness, things like that. For now, the government is not introducing a mandatory element of conscription, not making young people join the army, but they've left that door open if they don't get enough recruits to boost numbers through volunteers. But it's a big moment for Germany because due to its role in the past as an aggressor in Europe, in that post-war period, there's often been this sense of a shyness, a military meekness, not wanting to show military might. It feels like that is partly changing, although plenty of people in Germany, You're still pretty worried about what they see as rearmament and expanding Germany's military.

More troops is only part of the picture, as Germany looks to step up its role in European security. Last week I spoke with Armin Pat Berger, the boss of German defence giant Reinmetal. Chancellor Merz has talked about wanting Germany to have Europe's strongest conventional army. That's going to require manpower, but it's also going to require hardware. Is that realistic? It is. It is realistic. I think Germany could get to that position.

The German government makes very clear decisions that we have to grow strong on vehicles, on ammunitions. We have to have our own satellite competences. We do much, much more on the electronics and artificial intelligence on the defense than ever before. And they invest. They will reach that target. do you think Germany could have Europe's strongest conventional army? In five years. In five years. Many people, including in Germany, fear rearmament, remilitarization, can lead to war, as Germany's own history has shown. How do you respond to those fears? Because obviously, your company is making a lot of money through rearmament. We have democracy. I'm very happy

to have this democracy. And what I see at the moment is that more than 70% of the people, people in Germany say that we have to do more to defend our country, to defend Europe and to help NATO. Looking at some of what Chancellor Merz has spoken about, about the state of peace or war, is it your sense that we're in a cold war in Europe at the moment, experiencing even a hybrid war? It doesn't matter how you call it at the end of the day. The only thing is what for me important, we are not in a very peaceful time. The reason is also very clear, because we see. see every day that there are some smaller attacks from some countries or only from one country which is testing us if we are prepared or if we are not prepared.

Do you fear a future conflict involving Germany? I have no glass ball. Nobody knows that. The army says and also the government says we have to prepare ourselves that we are strong enough that nobody is attacking us. Report by Jessica Parker. Still to come in this podcast. I have a little terrier that's eight inches off the ground and has a sort of round, fluffy head. His jaws really wouldn't survive, I don't think, having to sort of scavenge and predate in the wild.

How dogs evolved from prehistoric wolves to our cuddly companions. Every day for 75 years, the Israeli military's own radio station has broadcast news, music, and talk programs to thousands of listeners. Israeli Army Radio has become one of the most popular stations with soldiers and civilians alike. But the defense minister, Israel Katz, has announced. it'll be shut down on March the 1st next year. He said Army Radio was established as a voice for IDF soldiers and their families, not in his words as a platform for opinions, many of which attack the IDF and its soldiers. Nakman Shai is a former editor-in-chief of Army Radio

and later served as a member of the Israeli Parliament. My colleague Tim Franks asked him what he made of Mr Katz's decision. There is another big camp of Israelis, I would say, at least half of the Israeli public that like the station very much and would like it to continue with the broadcasting. It's odd, though, isn't it? I mean, to have a sort of an army of the Israeli army broadcasting to the nation. That's a very unique radio station.

I'm sure that if we asked today whether we should start a military radio or army radio, we wouldn't do it. But it started in 1950. It was a different Israel with then David Ben-Gurion was the prime minister and the situation was totally different. But the fact is that it became an extremely popular radio station, which serves and caters to the center of the Israeli population, to audiences of 100,000, of sometimes millions of people.

There is no reason. The reason is not professional, have no doubt. The reason is political, not professional. But you must agree, Nachman, that, I mean, just on principle, I mean, it must be moments of awkwardness for the IDF. I mean, if you've got journalists asking really tough questions of it. Yes, I can remember some situations very, very strange in the past when a young soldier wearing uniform asked the interview the Prime Minister,

but in the past few years they've changed the system them and only civilians are dealing with the political staff, not soldiers, not young men and women in uniform. So they themselves understand the abnormality of the situation. But at the same time, again, the point is that Galeza, the army radio, is a public service. This government has launched a kind of a war on what I believe Israel's basic democratic Institute and freedom of expression and freedom of press is extremely important ingredients and components of freedom of the press. And that's why I believe the decision was made on that

background. That was Nakman Shai speaking to Tim Franks. Scientists say tens of thousands of southern elephant seals have been killed in an outbreak of bird flu on South Georgia, a remote island in the South Atlantic. It's the site of the world's biggest. population of the seals. But researchers estimate that half of all breeding females could now be dead. Our science correspondent, Helen Briggs, has been speaking to my colleague, Janat Jalil. Scientists from the British Antarctic Survey have been looking at populations of elephant seals on South Georgia. These are the largest known species of seal. They have these sort of trunk-like noses, which is why they're called elephant seals. And they spend most of their lives at sea. They

dive really deep into the ocean, spend most of their lives out there on the ocean waves. But then they come to beaches to breed. So South Georgia is a really important breeding ground for these seals. So it's quite remote. It's difficult to actually do research there, but they've been doing drone surveys from the air. And they found this dramatic decline. So they looked at the data in 2022. They know that this avian flu arrived late in 2020. 2023. And then they've seen this massive decline in numbers when they measured them in 2024. So they looked at three large breeding colonies on the island. So if you extrapolate out the colony as a whole, 53,000 is their calculation of missing females across this

entire population of elephant seals. And they're saying that this really could have very serious repercussions for elephant seals for the population for years to come, for decades to come. And Helen, these are absolutely massive creatures. They're up to nearly six metres in length. They can weigh as much as 3.7 tonnes. So why would they be so badly affected by avian flu? So we know that this particular type of avian flu, H5N1, has been around for decades. And it's spreading all over the world. Primarily, it spreads between birds, but now migratory birds are spreading it across the world, so it's gone from North America to South America, and it's got into marine mammals. So we now know that it can affect other wildlife other than birds, and it's

caused mass die-offs of seals and other parts of the world, notably in Argentina, recently, and what's happening here in South Georgia seems to be mirroring that situation. Elephant seals, they're top predators, they're the top of the food chain. So if you have a big decline in them, then it'll affect other species as well because everything is interconnected in this complex web of life. Helen Briggs. Blue Origin, the space company owned by Jeff Bezos, has launched its largest reusable rocket and successfully landed its booster at sea.

It comes as the Amazon founder is trying to challenge Elon Musk's grip on the market. Anna Aslam reports That's the moment the new glen rocket blasted off from Cape Canaveral in Florida It successfully deployed NASA satellites that will reach Mars in 22 months to measure the planet's atmosphere and magnetic field is the first science payload Blue Origin has launched for a paying customer and the company had another breakthrough too

when nine minutes into the flight the reusable booster powering the rocket, separated and touched down on a floating barge in the Atlantic Ocean. The control room cheered as the 17-story tall booster landed. It's a huge engineering feat and a first-for-blue origins in New Glenn rocket, which has faced severe delays during development. The company celebrated the milestone, but sea landings are a norm for its rival SpaceX, which pioneered the manoeuvre and has completed it 500 times. Analysts say Elon Musk's company has had a more aggressive approach to launches and testing and a blue origin is now adopting a more risk-taking culture to try and catch up in the space race.

Anna Aslam, it's long been thought that dogs developed into the many breeds that exist today, mainly through human breeding, that scientists looking at skulls dating back thousands of years have now found our canine companions began changing shape and form much earlier than previously thought, as they evolved from wolves to domestic dogs. Dr. Carly Amin from the University of Exeter explained that their finds date back to the Middle Stone Age or Mesolithic period. Almost half of the diversity we see in modern dog breeds today

is already present in dog populations by the Mesolithic, which is what we found, which is really surprising, and really starts to challenge the ideas about where dog diversity has come from. Our science correspondent, Victoria Gill, told us more. We know that dog domestication is a big part of the human story. There's evidence of wolves and humans started living alongside of each other 30,000 years ago. But there's still lots of questions about just how that changed us, changed our societies, changed the dog.

And what these researchers have looked at is actually the physicality of the dog by looking at skulls. So they actually carried out an analysis and examination of hundreds of animals. dog and wolf skulls over tens of thousands of years. Some of them were up to 50,000 years old. And what they've seen is that 10 or 11,000 years ago, between 10 and 11,000 years ago, the dog started to change shape. Its head started to change shape. So as dogs were domesticated, they physically changed, but not only did they change, they became very diverse. There was a lot of different sizes and shapes of dogs. So much of the diversity that we see today that we think is driven by lots of very deliberate selective breeding by, you know, the Victorian tastes and

their kennel clubs. Actually, a lot of that was evident thousands of years ago in the Middle Stone Age. And why do we think that happened? It's a really good question. There's loads of theories about why dogs and humans came together. And, you know, being able to see human intent and motivation from the archaeological record is not so easy. But there's theories about how Wolves maybe started living around communities of people because they were scavenging for food. And maybe humans must have had some kind of benefit from that. Dogs might have cleaned up messy carcasses that otherwise would have attracted pests. They might have raised the alarm and barked and howled when there were predators coming by.

So we started to get this kind of mutual benefit. That then developed into wolves becoming the first domesticated animal. They obviously brought us so much benefit as working animals as companions that we started to bring them into our lives and breed them. We can't tell from this study whether people had some kind of intention to actually breed dogs that had a particular shaped head. You know, the way that we do these days where we have a particular breed that we find cute and appealing, we can't see that from the archaeological record.

But what we can see was that was happening. That was happening millennia ago, you know, way before we had any kind of breeding standards that we have today. So something was going on that meant that people and their actions and they're living alongside humans was physically just transforming the dog fundamentally. And the dogs of today are very different from the dogs of thousands of years ago. For instance, I know your dog likes cheesy snacks. Yeah, I don't think he'd survive in the wild. It's interesting, because they were looking at differences in the skull in this study, they see the shape shift from.

kind of wolf, the long, slender-snouted wolf with the powerful jaws that was a predator, into the kind of snubier, shorter-snouted, wider-headed dog. I have a little terrier that's kind of, you know, eight inches off the ground and has a sort of round, fluffy head. So, you know, his jaws really wouldn't survive, I don't think, having to sort of scavenge and predate in the wild. So it just goes to show how much human influence has really driven what dogs are today. That was Helen Briggs. And that's all from us for now, but there will be a new edition of the Global News Podcast

later. If you want to comment on this podcast, all the topics covered in it, you can send us an email. The address is Global Podcast at BBC.co.com. You can also find us on X at BBC World Service. Use the hashtag Global NewsPod. This edition was produced by Peter Goughfin and Stephen Jensen. It was mixed by Martin Baker. The editor is Karen Martin. I'm Charlotte Gallagher. Until next time, goodbye.