Ian Greaves

Against The Grain: UK rap is hijacked by London’s police force for clicks - The Wire London’s Metropolitan Police persecutes UK rap while using it for self-promotion, argues Hugh Morris in The Wire 506

London’s Metropolitan Police persecutes UK rap while using it for self-promotion, argues @hwfmorris.bsky.social in The Wire 506

www.thewire.co.uk/in-writing/c...

The BBC WAC Campaign's full submission to the Government's Charter Review is now online. We argue that policy changes at the Written Archives Centre fly in the face of the values at the heart of the Green Paper: trust, transparency, and the telling of stories. Read here: tinyurl.com/CharterSubmi...

A cheeky little audio cameo there for Humphrey in his outro of a radio weather forecast.

The numpties lost the next three episodes. Three!

The Monitor film of The Allegri Quartet is about to start on BBC Four. It was important to include a programme actually directed by Humphrey Burton and this is one of his first. It's a special one, turning the usual approach to classical documentary on its head. A demystification. Looks great too.

On BBC4 right now, Humphrey Burton and Glenn Gould are arguing furiously about interpretations of Beethoven (from 1966) and I can't imagine anything like it happening on telly today.

Always curious to see forecasts of culture decades later. Sadly the next three episodes are lost.

Humphrey Burton Night is just about to get going on BBC Four. Watch live: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/live...

This is an important thread for anyone who cares, not only about archive research, but BBC accountability.

The White House. A murder of bros.

Drives me mad. I saw someone layering over a sharp yellow t shirt yesterday and I was consumed with jealousy.

Should read 2022. Apologies.

BBC Charter review consultation responses need to be in by Tuesday. If you are thinking to put something in last minute, here’s our report which contains useful international evidence you can draw upon

Good company! Thanks John.

PS if you would like to know quite how reluctant the BBC was to answer questions about the death of the public-facing catalogue, read in particular Annex A of the covering response from January: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/draf...

The Written Archives Centre sign behind protective wire. (c) Ian Greaves

We have more to say about recent changes to services at WAC, but for that you will have to read our submission to the government's open consultation on the BBC Charter Review. We publish tomorrow. Thanks for reading and if you would like to get involved find us at bbcwaccampaign at gmail dot com

We at the WAC Campaign believe access to information is an essential part of Public Purpose 2: “learning for people of all ages”. This surely includes the written archives which facilitate so many projects: books, articles, documentaries, exhibitions, as well as outreach projects in schools.

So, the catalogue was killed off for no very convincing reason other than that it seemed more trouble than it was worth for those higher up at the BBC. The Director of Archives did little to defend her staff. And consequently the BBC is failing to meet its Framework Agreement commitments.

The WAC catalogue project will conclude in Q4 2024/25. Any future import of data will be for BAU purposes. External publication of the WAC catalogue will not go ahead due to focus of work being on BBC business enquiries. FOI release, 19 January 2026. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/draft_catalogue_for_wac_and_docu#incoming-3280799

An undated and comically redacted document in the FOI bundle reveals the shift in priorities at the BBC. This proposal appears to set direction for the reduction in WAC services that no researcher wanted or expected in 2025:

There was absolutely no discussion of cutting back the service, refusing entry to members of the public, ceasing vetting on request and so on. There is therefore no way that the measures adopted could be said to have emerged out of this meeting. (Anonymous)

One of the contributors to the focus group told us:

The aim being to index portions of the holdings and then share these selected portions of this catalogue inventory online, targeting the academic research community who are the main users of the written archive collection. I should stress none of this means any relaxation in the current short extract from earlier email from Noreen Adams, 2 December 2022. The words "main users" are highlighted.

Since that enthusiastic user group session, there has been a move within the BBC to reduce the very service that was so highly praised. In earlier emails the Director of Archives, Technology & Services even said that the academic research community is the main user of the Written Archives Centre.

In reply it was clear there had been no movement in four months, but the review is up and running because selected WAC users receive an invite the *next day* to a focus group meeting in June. This forms part of the final report (see pages 8-11 for an account) www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/rece...

From: REDACTED Sent: 30 March 2023 10:43 To: REDACTED Subject: Catalogue Catch-Up? Hi REDACTED I just wanted to check-in again about the public facing catalogue. SSL have got the test site of the public facing site pretty much working as we like it now. FOI release, 19 January 2026. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/draft_catalogue_for_wac_and_docu#incoming-3280799

But there is no question at all that it was ready for beta testing with users. There’s a somewhat plaintive email exchange in March 2023, also released in the FOI bundle, showing that SSL “have got the test site of the public facing site pretty much working as we like it now.”

A version of these risks were presented to a user group meeting with WAC in August 2025, alongside an additional claim that the IT team had advised that the software was so old it would become obsolete in public very quickly - so it was better not to publish at all. Hmm. No paper trail for that.

There were also a number of key risks identified: * Sensitive or controversial information released to the wider public via journalists or those outside of the academic research community (whether explicitly in catalogue titles or through filling in the gaps via other chains of enquiry) * Increase in FOI requests or requests for material that is time consuming to release (either due to date range or content) that lead to an unmanageable workload for those in WAC teams, plus Press Office, Information Compliance. Deadlines to respond to FOI requests can be challenging. * Increased demand for services: the ability to conduct some searches remotely may increase both the demand for digital delivery and on-site research to view files. (Enquiry Services Review Report, 2023 - redacted version here https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/recent_internal_report_about_bbc/response/3108289/attach/html/3/BBC%20Written%20Archives%20Enquiry%20Services%20Review%20Report%20applied%20redactions.pdf.html

Three years on it's quite a telling read. It shows a prevailing view that an online catalogue would help modernise the service and that it was still an aspiration, but the report was completed in full knowledge that it was effectively dead. It gets some future justifications in early.

But what of the "formal review"? Well, our best guess is that this is what resulted in the Enquiry Services Review Report of 2023 which tells you a great deal about the WAC service at that point and can be viewed in redacted form here: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/rece...

The plans for a public catalogue never really came back. A basic catalogue outline is available at JISC (since 2020) but this is not searchable by name or subject. It contains only broad categories. For further detail you would still have to write to WAC. archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archi...

Hello Leigh Having done some further investigation, this is a project the Written Archives team have been working on since it was approved and sponsored back in 2014 by Tiffany Hall then Head of Technology Distribution & Archives. The aim being to index portions of the holdings and then share these selected portions of this catalogue inventory online, targeting the academic research community who are the main users of the written archive collection. I should stress none of this means any relaxation in the current vetting process for access to the actual documents or the review and vetting of documents prior to researchers viewing them. The team have been checking in with REDACTED reviewing what was proposed to be published. However they have not been seeking formal review and sign off from corporate Governance and our Secretariat. Very much a case of well-intentioned individuals working away on a project for a long time and liaising with the REDACTED team they normally work with. Given this I have called a halt to any proposal to publish until there is a formal review , approval and sign off mechanism in place with REDACTED and Phil. Once this is in place and we have an approved list for publication I will of course update you prior to any publishing. Once this is in place I am confident there will be some catalogue listings we can make public which will chime in with our centenary year at no risk to the corporation. Regards Noreen Noreen Adams Director, Archives Technology & Services BBC Technology Group FOI release, 19 January 2026. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/draft_catalogue_for_wac_and_docu#incoming-3280799

However, the email chain shows that the Director of Archives, Technology and Services opted to put a pause on the whole project. She belittled the staff involved as 'very much a case of well-intentioned individuals working away on a project for a long time'.

The DG’s Chief of Staff does at least have a grasp of the processes involved at a public archive, and he is right to highlight a vetting procedure and the use of a ‘30 year rule’. All pretty standard stuff.

I would have serious concerns about publishing the catalogue as they propose. I would not support it, from what I can see below. My particular interest is of the corporate records, but my concerns are broader than just that. A lot can be determined by the names of the files (which are usually individual board papers) and I would certainly not put it in the public domain in an unrestricted way. My understanding is that the current position is that we vet individuals for their motives before they access the catalogue/index. So, for example, someone says that they want access because they are a researcher, programme maker, etc, and give a reason for why they want to access the catalogue, and then we further assess the request for individual files. I think a lot of due diligence would need to be done just on “my” section of the catalogue, to assess the risks related to all Board of Governors/Trustee/Management Board/Board papers etc. It’s also not clear what time frame is being proposed? If there was some form of the “30 year rule” (or similar) I would probably be more comfortable than if all current records are available. FOI release, 19 January 2026. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/draft_catalogue_for_wac_and_docu#incoming-3280799

A degree of nervousness about corporate records and Royal papers is understandable, but this too is manageable and should not be the primary concern as to whether the online catalogue of a public service does or does not go live. Harrold’s reaction from 16 November 2022: