Why were news media (BBC) not allowed to film and told to stop today

[GingerIvy]

News media (BBC was the one I saw the clip of) were told they had to stop filming today when they were covering the protesters of the disability cuts. Apparently all the media were told that.

Is it to keep the info from the public? Surely they can just move out of that area and film from another spot, right? I'm not media-savvy, but this strikes me as odd. (the BBC person didn't seem impressed either)

[VikingVolva]

Orders from Black Rod.

The standing rules are: “Broadcasting in central lobby must be in the context of an interview with a member or an introduction or commentary on specific business in the House that day. These conditions were not being complied with, so the broadcasters were asked to suspend temporarily.”

And they've been like that for years, if not decades. And they are invariably upheld. The protestors must have known this. They were not being muzzled for their cause. They are being deliberately and knowingly provocative.

[GingerIvy]

It was BBC news Norman Smith, assistant political editor, that was broadcasting a report - someone just approached him, did the "cut" thing across the throat to the camera person and told them they had to stop.

The protesters themselves were not involved in that particular clip - it was the news media and the person (presumably that works there, no idea who it was).

You'd think, then, that the BBC news person would have been aware of it - he seemed surprised (and annoyed).

I asked only because I've yet to see a story regarding the protests in the news. I'll do look around a bit, perhaps I've missed it - lots about Brussels taking centre stage, for obvious reasons.

Thanks for the info though - that at least clarifies it.