BBC Bias….??

The BBC has come in for some criticism this week with An Phoblacht in its column called media view reporting on Blackouts and Blanket bans and quotes Bairbre de Brun over the BBC’s refusal to broadcast a humanitarian aid appeal for the people in Gaza.


over on you tube the use of this picture in a BBC report

has also brought up the issue of BBC bias
with comments like these

That picture of three italians giving fingers should not have been shown.This small news story is going to cause racial unrest and then God knows what will happen.And this should be on record that BBC were the ones who started this.This is the kind of inflammatory journalism should be avoided at all times.When the germans lost the great war they came up with a propaganda that they had been ‘stabbed in the back when they were not looking’ and blamed the jews.


I wonder if thats what the BBC and other media outlets like Sky,Daily Express are trying to do.Looking for a scapegoat.The british nation is being turned against the minorities by these ‘Inflammatory Journalism’ by these media outlets.This bring back memories of how the Nazis used propaganda machine to turn the whole nation into masness.I wonder if thats whats going to happen.THIS NEWS STORY IS GOING TO CAUSE RACIAL UNREST.

Continuing with the theme of bias David Vance sees the corporation in a tricky situation over its reporting of the current strikes and points out

It has to be a tricky one for the multiculti-EU loving BBC and true to form I see that the line currently being peddled is to place all responsibility with the management of those companies concerned but this obscures the central fact that the companies are lawfully employing EU citizens, it just so happens this is in preference to UK citizens.

Is there a case for BBC bias or is it simply a case of not pleasing all of the people all of the time?

  • William

    I thought it ironic that BBC Director-General’s reason for not showing the aid appeal advert was that ‘they didn’t wish to be accused of bias’. This from an organisation that was totally biased in their reporting of the conflict in Gaza. Anti-Israel…is it any wonder they had to move Geurin to Africa??? Hamas insurgents….whatever happened to the word, ‘terrorist’…

    The parroted the Hamas line that ‘1200 were killed’ and the number of those who were children, until a Italian journalist burst that bubble and reported the true figures at less than half that number.

    No that the Israeli bombing has ceased, there isn’t a mention from the MSM, including the BBC about the ‘punishment shootings’ being meted out to Fatah members by the good little boys of Hamas.

    However, Kathleen, don’t you also think it rich a complaint being made by Ms Brown? After all, she helped in the 30+ years of terrorism here in Northern Ireland, by her activities [known and unknown] in support of Sinn Fein / IRA.

  • willis

    William

    Do you ever bother with something as basic as research?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/30/hamas-reprisal-attacks

  • CW

    The fact that Israel banned all foreign journalists from Gaza during the bombings has a lot to answer for.

  • willis

    Anyhoo

    Having dealt with William.

    On to the substantive pointsssssss.

    Jeez Kathleen you do give us a lot to get our heads around, but liked the composition.

    Is the BBC biased?

    Yes.

    And to be fair it knows that it is.

    The single best thing the BBC could do is release this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Balen_Report

    As far as I am concerned

    Public Money = Disclosure.

  • Driftwood
  • barnshee

    In Norn Ireland cheerleaders for murder gangs do not help the poor benighted Palestinians. The essential justice of their cause the horrendous treatment meted out to them by Israel and the USA gets lost.

    The attitude “if thememuns support them they must be bad”. colors attitudes to the despicable behaviour of the Israelies and the “Sides” In NI take sides

    Shut up and send money

    http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/en/7336.htm

  • willis

    Driftwood

    Rod Liddle – unbiased?

    Consider this

    n other words, the issue is sufficiently divisive and partisan domestically for the BBC to be extremely wary about handing over its editorial control for five minutes to a bunch of charities (which are also, in the main, somewhat parti pris). It is not comparable (as some have insisted) to the issue of Darfur and even less so to natural disasters (such as the 2004 tsunami) about which the BBC has welcomed films from the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) before.

    OK Rod

    Please explain why it is not comparable to Darfur.

    ‘fraid not

    This is what passes for reasoned argument in the Speccie.

    Biased against understanding.

  • credit crunch

    William has a point.
    The Israelis were daft and wrong not to allow western journalists into Gaza, but that hardly excuses the BBC and others running unquestioningly with Hamas-controlled film footage, statistics and reports.
    The BBC even had a Palestinian producer running around reporting and filming for them.
    Even if this guy had wanted to, it would have been more than his life was worth to give anything but the official Hamas line to the outside world. It was he who first interviewed the Nordic surgeon (aptly called Mad somebody or other) who, as it turned out, had previously praised the 9/11 attacks on New York. So much for objective reporting.
    Most of the pieces to camera from British BBC reporters in Jerusalem during Gaza were nothing less than opinion pieces slatting Israel.
    Thompson is probably trying, vainly, to redress the balance a bit.

  • Liddle says the PLO and Hamas share a view of Israel. That in itself shows how little understanding of the situation he has.

    Riddle me this though if the BBC is pro-Palestinian. Why have Palestinian policemen killed in conflict with Israelis since 2000 been consistently described first as gunmen, then as militants, when in fact they are policemen?
    The tone of the coverage varies.

  • runciter

    a non-biased comentator

    Claiming that Mr Liddle is ‘non-biased’ does not make it so.

    For example, this sounded quite biased to me:

    “The most voluble protestors have been drawn, in the main, from the anti-Israeli far left. On the radio phone-in shows the many callers demanding the BBC reverse its decision almost always gave the game away by screeching, at some point, ‘Genocide!’ and ‘Zionist oppressors!’, sort of involuntarily, rather in the manner of Dr Strangelove. George Galloway […] asserted that the BBC had shown long-standing and extreme pro-Israeli bias. Is it even remotely possible to believe such a thing without being quite mad?”

  • CW

    Excellent post at 4.39, Barnshee. You’ve hit the nail on the head there.

  • runciter

    The Israelis were daft and wrong not to allow western journalists into Gaza, but that hardly excuses the BBC and others running unquestioningly with Hamas-controlled film footage, statistics and reports.

    These ‘Hamas-controlled’ items are a figment of your imagination.

    The BBC even had a Palestinian producer running around reporting and filming for them.

    A Palestinian reporting on what is happening in Gaza? What were they thinking?

    Even if this guy had wanted to, it would have been more than his life was worth to give anything but the official Hamas line to the outside world.

    Why? Because you say so? Don’t you realise that Hamas were democratically elected in 2006?

    It was he who first interviewed the Nordic surgeon (aptly called Mad somebody or other) who, as it turned out, had previously praised the 9/11 attacks on New York. So much for objective reporting.

    Do you suppose he should have asked the man his views on 9/11 before interviewing him?

    Most of the pieces to camera from British BBC reporters in Jerusalem during Gaza were nothing less than opinion pieces slatting Israel.

    I disagree. Do you have any evidence to support your claims?

  • Billyo

    Well it’s all up for the BBC now. How can the corporation ever hold its head up again after being challenged on bias by that august publication, An Phoblacht?

  • ulsterfan

    Yes indeed. the BBC must be shaking in its boots to be criticised by an phoblacht in the same way the Nazis were annoyed by the “Skibbereen Eagle having its eye on them”

  • That was the Tsar Ulsterfan

  • ulsterfan

    Garibaldy

    You are correct. There’s me thinking this past forty years this noble paper was referring to someone else.
    It is never too late to learn.
    Thanks

  • William

    Willis…you obviously don’t check you supposed links…it didn’t work and didn’t when I was researching the left-wing biased Guardian. And you didn’t deal with me bullshitter…you thought you did.

    The BBC is biased…every Journalist is recruited through the columns of the Guardian…it is a disgrace to journalism and unfortunately we are forced to pay for it….well I haven’t bought a licence since living in England in 1992.

  • I feel the BBC should have allowed an appeal for Gaza to be broadcast – appealing for humanitarian aid is not evidence of bias, it is evidence of humanity.

    I feel it’s a bit rich of SF, however, to be complaining, given that party as recently as October used its political muscle on the board of Foras na Gaeilge to close down a newspaper which had been critical of the party, namely Lá Nua, over the party’s failure to effectively defend the Irish language, despite its stated policy, against attack.

    Censorship has a new name – it’s Sinn Féin.

  • runciter

    The parroted the Hamas line that ‘1200 were killed’ and the number of those who were children, until a Italian journalist burst that bubble and reported the true figures at less than half that number.

    According to the Jerusalem Post:

    “Tony Laurance, who heads the World Health Organization’s office in the West Bank and Gaza, said the information from the Gaza Health Ministry [that 1,285 Palestinians had died] “is likely to be close to accurate.”

    It was “reported on a daily basis by hospitals to the central information center within the Ministry of Health,” he added. That center had identifying details of the casualties in terms of names and ages and places of residents.”

    Note that in the same article, even the IDF are quoted as accepting that this number is accurate.

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1232292939271

  • willis

    William

    I don’t want to be rude here.

    Are you posting in Ulster-Scots? ‘cos it certainly isn’t English.

    The link works fine.

  • Billy

    William

    “The BBC is biased…every Journalist is recruited through the columns of the Guardian.”

    What an intelligent, well thought out argument.

    Almost as good as your scoop – “until a Italian journalist burst that bubble and reported the true figures at less than half that number”

    So obviously the World Health Organisation and even the IDF don’t have as much insight into what really happened as you do – as they have confirmed the figures that you dispute.

    Still – you keep witholding that licence fee – that’ll really shake them!

  • Billy

    Driftwood

    Not too convincing to quote Rod Liddle as “an unbiased source”. In fact, laughable would be a more appropriate description.

    Perhaps, you could use Rush Limbaugh as an impartial commentator on Barack Obama next.

  • S Maguire

    William, re: your reference to Bairbre de Brun as ‘Ms Brown’. I am a bit surprised that with your prominence in promoting Ulster Scots culture you would demonstrate such intolerance of someone else’s chosen expression of their culture. Then again….

  • CW

    Indeed, S Maguire, so in the spirit of lingusitic equality William should refer to her as Babs Broon!