The Beeb started an editors’ blog and opened it up to comments…and now the floodgates have opened about the BBC’s Middle East coverage (which I discussed here).
The accusations of a deeply ingrained pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli bias from the network’s reporters far outnumber the supportive comments. And the latter are as revealing as the former. Both sides detect the bias. Some are happy to hear it, because they feel it gives the Palestinians a fair shake. Most—by a great majority—are not: because the network isn’t reporting the facts but rather its bias.
If this story starts to get more play, editor Jon Williams may end up regretting how he sets the scene—explaining that the BBC maintains a “permanent presence” in Gaza and so it suffers along with the Palestininans whenever they suffer:
Two nights ago, Israeli forces bombed the only power station in Gaza, knocking out power to thousands of homes and offices. Anyone who’s had a fuse blow knows the inconvenience when the lights go out. But factor in 35 degree temperatures, the need for air conditioning, and the loss of water pumping and communications networks, and you begin to have some idea of the difficulties facing everyone living and working in the Gaza strip.
The BBC is the only Western broadcaster to maintain a permanent presence in Gaza. It’s on days like this that the expertise of people like correspondent Alan Johnston comes into its own. He and his colleagues from the BBC’s Arabic Service live close to our bureau in Gaza City, enabling them to draw on the context - and contacts - gleaned from literally living the story.
Then he gets to the heart of the matter: the BBC’s sensitive use of language:
As ever in reporting the Middle East, language - and the choice of words - is incredibly important. Was the soldier kidnapped or captured, were the Hamas politicians arrested or detained?
Our credibility is undermined by the careless use of words which carry value judgements. Our job is to remain objective. By doing so, I hope we allow our audiences on radio and television to make their own assessment of the story. So we try to stick to the facts - civilians are “kidnapped”, Cpl Shalit was “captured”; since troops don’t usually make “arrests”, the politicians were “detained”. Doubtless some will disagree. But that’s, in essence, the heart of the story - two competing narratives.
Commenter after commenter pointed out the abject hypocrisy of this casual, offhand explanation by Williams. For example:
Civilians are “kidnapped”‘? According to who? Why not soldiers?
I would accept your explanation for the use of words were it not for this:
“Iraq general kidnapped in Baghdad”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4411335.stmWhy was the word OK in that instance and not this?
And this:
“Seized Israeli settler found dead”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5125256.stmWhy “seized” and not “kidnapped” there?
Read the entire exchange here. It’s well worth it.
Me, I agree with this guy:
Guys - nobody is asking you to get it 100% right 100% of the time. You can’t. The problem is that I, myself — a strong supporter of peace who believes that the Palestinians should have a state that includes the WB, who is no fan of settlers or settlements, who doesn’t buy PR from either side, but who finds value in both Israeli and Arab news sources — still find that BBC reports about Israel CONSISTENTLY warp reality, excusing terrorism and demonizing Israel. And it’s not your vocabulary. It is clearly plain and simple bias on the part of your reporters.
I find it irritating that I rarely if ever gain any new insights from you about the Israeli or Palestinian situation — just this tired, slanted stuff. Guys, I learn interesting things from Lebanon’s Daily Star, from Yedioth Aharonoth, from Haaretz, and from Asharq al-Awsat. But from the BBC, with its permanent Gaza bureau, I mostly hear propaganda.[emphasis added]
2 comments ↓
[...] BBC editor Jon Williams, he who believes in the Fairy Tale of Two Competing Narratives ™, said last week that the Beeb is careful in choosing its words when reporting on the Middle East: Our credibility is undermined by the careless use of words which carry value judgements. Our job is to remain objective. By doing so, I hope we allow our audiences on radio and television to make their own assessment of the story. So we try to stick to the facts - civilians are “kidnapped”, Cpl Shalit was “captured”; since troops don’t usually make “arrests”, the politicians were “detained”. Doubtless some will disagree. But that’s, in essence, the heart of the story - two competing narratives. [emphasis added] [...]
[...] The BBC refuses to call it kidnapping yet again. Here is the history of Israel’s many terrorist enemies’ deliberate kidnapping of Israelis through the decades: 1972: Members of the Black September terrorist group sneak into the Olympic Village in Munich and take 11 members of the Israeli delegation hostage. All 11 are killed. [...]
Leave a Comment