If you missed the show, or would like to watch it again, take a look at the full video here and let us know what you think. Do you agree with the comments that were made?

First to join Krishnan on the couch were Julian Bellamy, head of Channel 4, and programme maker John Bridcut, who recently wrote a report on impartiality for the BBC. Speaking for the first time on the issue, Bellamy explained why Channel 4 had taken the decision to broadcast the DEC appeal, while Bridcut told the audience why he believed the BBC was right to not air the appeal. Veteran war correspondant Martin Bell was also on hand to offer his opinion on the subject.

In the second half of the show, the debate widened to look at Channel 4 News’ coverage of the Gaza conflict. How easy was it for journalists to remain impartial when Israel had refused them entry into the Gaza strip, and when civilian casualties were so overwhelmingly on the Palestine side? Channel 4 News editor Jim Gray and international editor Lindsey Hilsum were there to answer these questions.

Also featured in last month’s show, a round-up of recent TV news, plus the latest from The TV Show’s tour of Britain with some great viewer vox pops from Swindon.

The next edition of The TV Show will be broadcast in March. If you’d like to get involved in the debate by joining the studio audience please contact thetvshow@princesstv.com.

Do you think UK news coverage been impartial? Do you think it is necessary and right for broadcasters to be impartial when reporting from a warzone? Should viewers have been shown more graphic coverage, highlighting the realities and violence of war?

And on the contentious issue of the DEC charity appeal – do you think Channel 4 were right to broadcast the appeal? Or do you agree with the BBC and Sky News, who feel that promoting the appeal would jeopardise their impartiality?

The TV Show audience will be discussing these points with representatives from Channel 4 News and will have the chance to ask questions about the challenges of reporting the conflict. Please see our Take Part section to find out how you can join the studio discussion, or leave your comments below to take part in the online debate.

Channel 4 News presenter Jon Snow came under a flurry of criticism from viewers after he praised Drudge for revealing Prince Harry’s deployment to the Helmand province. Dorothy Byrne (head of news and current affairs for Channel 4) appeared live on The TV Show to respond to these compaints. She explained that news must always present both sides of a debate, either by talking to guests with different opinions, or – if interviewees have similar points of view – getting the presenter to ask questions from an alternative point of view, as Jon Snow did on this occasion.

Also on the show was David Mannion, editor-in-chief at ITV News. David said that he felt the news blackout was perfectly legitimate. He told The TV Show audience that for many years the media has agreed to delay reports when security is at risk – visits by the Prime Minister to regions at war, for example, are usually reported after the event, rather than in advance or at the time.

Channel 4 News has also generated a great deal of chat on the C4 forums recently. In particular, forum members discussed Krishnan Guru-Murthy’s interview with George Galloway on the day that Fidel Castro announced his retirement, where George Galloway accused Channel 4 of behaving like Fox News (well known for its right-wing editorial stance).

Dorothy Byrne said about this:

“There was an excellent package about Cuba which summarised fairly some key facts about the state of the country. It included the fact that Cuba has some very serious economic problems and is not a democratic country. These were facts Mr Galloway seemed to object to hearing.”

Dorothy also reminded me that, unlike Fox TV in America, the British press, including British television news is required to be duly impartial.

Did you enjoy The TV Show debate? What’s your opinion of Channel 4 News? Please let us know what you think…

In response, I raised this with the production team, who said that the live interview had given presenter Jon Snow a chance to ask some important questions about Iran’s involvement in the conflict in Iraq, as well as the country’s nuclear ambitions. The interview also provided an opportunity for Jon to quiz the president about controversial comments he has made about both Israel and the Holocaust.

Unfortunately however, there was a technical problem on the night which prevented the audio feed of the president’s replies being relayed back to London. A stand-by translator was used but a delay on the satellite from Tehran meant they were unable to finish translating the president’s replies before the pictures of Jon Snow asking his next question arrived. This resulted in an interview that was difficult to follow, as some viewers pointed out.

Although the live translation at the time was problematic, ITN ensured that a full and accurate transcript of all the president’s replies was published on the Channel 4 News website the next day. The availability of this transcript gives viewers a chance to see all of the president’s replies.

If you watched the interview, or have read the translation on the website, I’d like to know what you think about the way it was handled. Have you got an opinion about translation in news?