The T word

A official commission rules that the BBC isn’t biased in its coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further urges that the network should use the word terrorism to label terrorism. CC Reuters, please. And the Iraq desk, too, please.

  • ZF

    This seems wrong to me. The BBC’s own report today (buried artfully in the entertainment section) doesn’t say it’s reporting hasn’t been biased – it appears to conclude the reverse:

    “The BBC fails to always give a “full and fair account” of the Israeli Palestinian conflict but is not deliberately biased, a report has said.”

    “…coverage was not consistently full and fair and “in important respects, presents an incomplete and in that sense misleading picture”, it found.”

    People who have been disgusted with the BBC’s coverage on this subject for years, and who know the BBC and its characteristic evasions (including me on a casual basis and no, I have no direct interest or links to Israel to declare here) generally don’t claim that the BBC’s management has systematically attempted to bias the coverage. Instead (exactly as with the analagous leftist bias in US newsrooms) they just hire lots of people who all think alike and let them do what seems fair to a roomful of people who really dislike both Israel and the United States.

    Burying this story in the entertainment section, by the way, is what passes for a joke inside the BBC. It gives eloquent expression to how laughable they think it is that a report of this nature could ever change their behavior.

  • “official commission”? ok, that sounds credible. (yeah, right.) the beeb is as anti-semetic as it gets.

    maybe the real problem is the c-word. not “cunt” but conflict. sorry grandpa, this isn’t a fight after school over scissors and glue sticks. it’s a WAR and one side believes the other doesn’t have the right to exist under any condition. you can call the tit-for-tat any brand of “terrorism” that you like but you are missing the much bigger picture and sound like someone who has never visited the region. i repeat, it’s WAR.

    if you don’t believe in the state of israel, that’s fine – it’s a completely valid viewpoint – and if that’s the case then let’s dump the land-grabbin’ jews into the sea right now and call it a day. but if they have a case for being there then what you are currently viewing is a modern day war, unlike any other war that was fought by the self-impressed “greatest generation” or the ones before it.

    the british are the reason that region is so fucked yet they still stoke the flames in the worst manner possible. sad that you buy this shit.

    in other news, see this? fuck the bbc.

  • Eileen

    ZF and Trident,

    Please allow me to be brief. You both nailed it.


    And Jeff, I wouldn’t impune you….except to say,… the HELL can you be in league with Al-Guardian, the most base supporter of Terrorists on the face of the GLOBE other than Al Jaterrorists????

    What a contest!

    People are choosing sides, now, in the most important contest the Earth has ever known.

    Jeff? Apparently you’ve decided where your bread is buttered.


    Have a cuppa at the Ritz while you’re there for me, eh?

  • Eileen

    Translation, if it’s even necessary: Al Jaterrorists = Al Jazeera/spit.

  • Eileen

    One more thing, Jeff.

    How in the hell/world can you talk about 9/11…your experiences there, that day…and STILL, EVEN, YET! be in league with Al-Guardian AS WE SPEAK?? Do you even read what they write???

    It just doesn’t compute, Jeff. Have you studied Islam?

    Other than buttering stale, moldy, illbebegotten gains, bread, Jeff, what do YOU gain?

    How do you sleep at night?

  • Ravo

    Has most of the MSM informed the public of this?

    Bin Laden Urges Killing of ‘Freethinkers’

    Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya says,……“Many of them are writers in newspapers, and many of them are actors and broadcasters in the media.”

  • Ravo

    Sorry, the url in my former post takes you to the article’s comments instead of straight to the article. This is the direct url.

  • Glyn

    I’ve been wondering for some time why the BBC is so consistently biased in favor of Israel (obviously the previous commentators would like it to be even more so). I think that it’s ingrained in them to support the British Government’s viewpoint, whichever party is in power, and since the British government strongly supports Israel then so does the BBC.

  • Glyn

    If you read the first comments in this thread from Trident and others, you would think that the BBC had been found guilty of anti-Israeli bias. In fact, that’s the complete opposite of the truth – in fact it stands accused of bias in favor of Israel. Its coverage is said to be “incomplete” and “misleading” including failing to adequately report the hardships of Palestinians living under occupation. In particular, the report highlighted a “failure to convey adequately the disparity in the Israeli and Palestinian experience, reflecting the fact that one side is in control and the other lives under occupation.”

  • Pingback: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » We Media, continued()

  • Steve

    Not systematically biased, Jeff, but the commission did note “stronger evidence of pro-Israeli than pro-Palestinian coverage by the BBC”. Add to that 2004’s “Bad news from Israel” study, which found “a preponderance of official ‘Israeli perspectives’, particularly on BBC 1, where Israelis were interviewed or reported over twice as much as Palestinians” and a pattern starts to emerge.

  • To those of you who view the world in overly simplistic “black” and “white”; “either you’re with us” … “or against us” terms (devoid of any shades of grey), you must have an awfully difficult time interpreting world events. Your “logic” can only lead to the conclusion that United States’ foreign policy at times was anti-Israeli and pro-terrorist. Oh, … and by the way, Middle East terrorism goes both ways.