LSE students union on Panorama: "BBC used LSE students as a human shield"

They were perfectly safe at all times. North Korea is one of the safest places on earth to visit as a tourist since they can't risk any harm coming to tourists. All this fuss from the students is OTT to be honest.

Yeah but is it one of the safest places for a group of tourists harbouring an undercover Western journalist? NK doesn't take kindly to the sneaky types.

Yeah but is it one of the safest places for a group of tourists harbouring an undercover Western journalist? NK doesn't take kindly to the sneaky types.

Must be joking.

Sure the journalists were in danger, but the students weren't. They weren't harbouring them, they just happened to be with them.

Yes, that's the well known one, although they entered covertly without a visa.

It's true, how many tourists do you know that have been arrested there? The answer is none. Undercover journalists, yes, tourists...nope.

There's no risk of crime towards tourists because civilians know if they did ANYTHING to harm them, they'd disappear along with their families.

In my opinion, if the journalist was uncovered, the paranoid, virulently anti-Western military dictatorship government would have no qualms about holding the students hostage as well. They aren't exactly big on human rights.

No but they are big on their image, and holding tourists hostage is not a good look for them. Yeah I know they're sabre rattling with the nuke thing, but the way the Kim's think, that's not a bad thing. Holding westerners hostage, they see that as bad press.

Yeah perhaps they'd want to preserve some credibility. Although I never really had them down as too focused on the long term.

Yeah perhaps they'd want to preserve some credibility. Although I never really had them down as too focused on the long term.

Within their narrow frame of reference, they are, at least to some extent - their sole aim is the survival of the regime and the present ruling circles. What we interpret as 'mad posturing' is in fact seen as a shrewd policy by them, since in the past they have obtained multiple concessions and extra supplies by doing it.

The principal players, China, Russia, SK, the US and Japan, all seem much more determined this time to not give way to their tantrums, so they are more up against the wall; it sounds like things are very bad in every way in the country, with a total lack of productivity, food and trade - the only real employment seems to be the army and weaponry.

A very unpredictable situation and yes, the regime does now appear to have a definite and expiring shelf life - the question is, in what further ways will they lash out?

One could be a complete cynic and wonder if the BBC and LSE acted in cahoots and kicked up a bit of a ****storm so as to publicize both the programme and the university? As if they would stoop so low.

What a silly suggestion. Aside from the dangerous situation the students were put in the reason the LSE is so upset is because this documentary hugely compromises the position of LSE academics, who carry out research all over the world in often politically sensitive areas. Their ability to travel to these countries and work relatively freely is because of LSE's reputation and it's obvious that an event like this could seriously undermines the school's academic integrity.

Is that the same 'academic integrity' that had them arranging a special place for Gaddafi's son, passing him through the course without proper marking and accepting large sums from his Dad?

There's an excellent piece about Sir Peter Sutherland, chairman of LSE, who was particularly strident about this during the week, in today's Private Eye. As chairman of BP, he was full of praise for Gaddafi at his birthplace in Sirte, Libya, in 2007, to welcome the deal BP did with the dictator. He was later warned of the reputational risk to LSE of accepting Libyan money (presumably stolen at some point from the people of Libya) but ignored it.

Sutherland also made his mark at BP by choosing Tony Hayward, later named 'the most loathed man in America' for his bizarre mishandling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Last but not least, the LSE Chairman was a non-Exec on the board of RBS all the way up to its collapse, in which role he did, er, nothing to speak out about the madness at the bank.

Sounds like LSE have a good one there! It's good to hear his views on the BBC's ethics.

I really don't see how any of that is relevant. The fact of the matter is that LSE academics are allowed to carry out research in certain countries solely because the school's academic reputation means that their integrity is taken for granted. Trust is absolutely crucial because a lot of these countries are highly suspicious of independent academic work and events like this seriously undermine the school's ability to carry out legitimate research. Do you think North Korea will allow any LSE academics back into the country anytime soon?

Aside from the dangerous situation the students were put in the reason the LSE is so upset is because this documentary hugely compromises the position of LSE academics

Interesting development.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22196971