BBC - political or apolitical?

tommytwojags

tommytwojags

Well-known member
The BBC, generally respected as an independent global news media outlet, has been accused of nailing its colours to the mast in the Middle East war and has made enemies in the process. For refusing to call Hamas a terrorist organisation and for flatly blaming the bombing of a hospital in Gaza on Israel, despite the lack of supporting evidence, the Beeb has faced a torrent of criticism from the US and has become persona non grata in Israel. The BBC was today accused of lacking moral clarity by former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett who said it should be ashamed for taking the side of Hamas in the conflict. So, has Auntie Beeb overstepped the mark or is it acting within its role as an impartial, non-political news reporter?
 
tommytwojags said:
The BBC, generally respected as an independent global news media outlet, has been accused of nailing its colours to the mast in the Middle East war and has made enemies in the process. For refusing to call Hamas a terrorist organisation and for flatly blaming the bombing of a hospital in Gaza on Israel, despite the lack of supporting evidence, the Beeb has faced a torrent of criticism from the US and has become persona non grata in Israel. The BBC was today accused of lacking moral clarity by former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett who said it should be ashamed for taking the side of Hamas in the conflict. So, has Auntie Beeb overstepped the mark or is it acting within its role as an impartial, non-political news reporter?
Click to expand...

I personally do not doubt the BBC's impartiality but they have gone so far down the road of political correctness and trying to be "right on" in order not to offend people that they are actually offending people with their lily livered yogurt knitting mentality.

They have become terrified of any criticism from tiny minorities which actually means they are not fairly representing the majority as a whole.
 
I saw the interview.
Victoria Darbyshire was very good, she asked legitimate questions about the situation in Gaza.
Moments before she had asked difficult questions of the Palestinian representative.
Nothing to see here as far as I am concerned.
The BBC is a fine organisation with excellent journalists.
 
I dont know how you can say it is 'political' for the BBC to not call Hamas a terrorist organisation. From what I gather they have been consistent on this sort of moral judgement, from the Nazis to the IRA. They aren't doing it out of any sort of support for Hamas, it's part of their founding guidelines. I can see the criticism, as Mac said, that they go over the top with it, and often fail by being too biased towards objectivity. But that isn't political, or taking sides.

I dont know when we started wanting our news outlets to feed our own moral judgements back at us to make us feel all nice and comforted. I want the BBC to tell me Hamas are designated a terrorist organisation by the UK government. I dont want them to declare it themsleves. I want the BBC to tell me the UN and human rights organisations are accusing Israel of committing war crimes, I don't want them to declare it themselves. There are outlets, writers, podcasters etc, who I like and respect and I want to give a more baised interpretation of events, and that can be quite affirming and satifsying and important in media coverage. That's not the role of the BBC. I think apart from one or two issues, the misreporting of the hospital strike for one, whch was an erring by an on-air presenter, their coverage has been excellent and informative.
 
Last edited:
the BBC suffers from its own impartiality policies, to the point where really daft opinions from guests or very stupid or biased journalism is given free reign in the name of impartiality but tends to be false equivalence.

The BBC website is also absolutely full of PR puff pieces. There was one that I saw a few years ago about the psychological effects of time zones on international business travellers, of the ten paragraphs just two were about the psychology of the title subject the other eight was a PR style interview of a unknown and very young "branding consultancy MD" who's agency supposedly worked extensively with US and European corporations. When I checked out her website she had projects under her belt for some largely unknown but very locally trendy small companies.

the BBC is a fine organisation in comparison to others but it still has an awful lot of flaws
 
tommytwojags said:
The BBC, generally respected as an independent global news media outlet, has been accused of nailing its colours to the mast in the Middle East war and has made enemies in the process. For refusing to call Hamas a terrorist organisation and for flatly blaming the bombing of a hospital in Gaza on Israel, despite the lack of supporting evidence, the Beeb has faced a torrent of criticism from the US and has become persona non grata in Israel. The BBC was today accused of lacking moral clarity by former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett who said it should be ashamed for taking the side of Hamas in the conflict. So, has Auntie Beeb overstepped the mark or is it acting within its role as an impartial, non-political news reporter?
Click to expand...
If it's upsetting the extremists it must be doing something right.
 
foggy said:
I dont know how you can say it is 'political' for the BBC to not call Hamas a terrorist organisation. From what I gather they have been consistent on this sort of moral judgement, from the Nazis to the IRA. They aren't doing it out of any sort of support for Hamas, it's part of their founding guidelines. I can see the criticism, as Mac said, that they go over the top with it, and often fail by being too biased towards objectivity. But that isn't political, or taking sides.

I dont know when we started wanting our news outlets to feed our own moral judgements back at us to make us feel all nice and comforted. I want the BBC to tell me Hamas are designated a terrorist organisation by the UK government. I dont want them to declare it themsleves. I want the BBC to tell me the UN and human rights organisations are accusing Israel of committing war crimes, I don't want them to declare it themselves. There are outlets, writers, podcasters etc, who I like and respect and I want to give a more baised interpretation of events, and that can be quite affirming and satifsying and important in media coverage. That's not the role of the BBC. I think apart from one or two issues, the misreporting of the hospital strike for one, whch was an erring by an on-air presenter, their coverage has been excellent and informative.
Click to expand...
Excellent post that sums it up very well.

I was listening to Radio 4 the other day (shameful, I know), and they they were interviewing a Pole who said that prior to the break up of the Soviet Union they had to rely on the BBC to tell them what was going on in their own country.

The quality of investigative and news reporting is still very high. The quality of management decisions that affect the availability of resources to protect those editorial standards is questionable.
 
Last edited:
basilrobbie3 said:
Excellent post that sums it up very well.

I was listening to Radio 4 the other day (shameful, I know), and they they were interviewing a Pole who said that prior to the break up of the Soviet Union they had to rely on the BBC to tell them what was going on in their own country.

The quality of investigative and news reporting is still very high. The quality of management decision that affect the availability of resources to protect that editorial quality is questionable.
Click to expand...
Yes, good post.
 
Some good points made. I wonder though whether the Beeb is damaging its own reputation and the safety of its journalists by offending Israel and the US, particularly by definitive conclusions on the identity of the hospital bombers. I notice that they are very careful to state that Hamas is recognised by the UK and others as a terrorist organisation, without themselves saying they believe it is. It will be very difficult for the BBC to operate from war zones if it is seen as biased against the host country.
 
They've disgraced themselves over Hamas, and this seems to be part of a wider pattern of deeply ingrained antisemitism: The BBC’s deep-rooted prejudice is fuelling the poison of anti-Semitism

The thing is mistakes happen once, maybe twice. When they happen multiple times they are not mistakes. They are institutional fault lines which reveal bias and deep-rooted prejudice. And this takes us to the heart of the issue.

Again and again, the BBC seems to have a problem when it comes to the Jewish State and by extension the Jewish community. The organisation has form. Just one recent example is its inaccurate reporting of an anti-Semitic attack on a coach in London that was taking a Jewish group, including schoolchildren, to celebrate the festival of Hanukkah.
 
It's apolitical, always has been, except at board level, where it's massively political.

BBC journalists generally try to lead the organisation in avoiding kowtowing to whichever government is around at that time, which it rarely does*, it therefore tends to piss off whichever government is around and they use their media friends, those who do kowtow to whichever government is around, to attack the BBC, leading those who support whichever government is around to claim it's biased, because people seem to have trouble thinking for themselves.

This has happened since at least the days of Thatcher.

Does the BBC make mistakes? Of course it does. We will miss it when it's gone? Of course we will. It's part of the democratic fabric of this country and those who seek to destroy it also seek to end democracy as a real concept and rather just pay it lip service.





*A recent example of it trying to kowtow to whichever government is around at the time is when Tory favourite and current Director General Tim Davie tried to admonish Gary Lineker for having an opinion contrary to the current government, for shame. This obviously went very badly for the current Director General and he was, as the kids say, owned by Lineker.
 
Lost Seasider said:
They've disgraced themselves over Hamas, and this seems to be part of a wider pattern of deeply ingrained antisemitism: The BBC’s deep-rooted prejudice is fuelling the poison of anti-Semitism

The thing is mistakes happen once, maybe twice. When they happen multiple times they are not mistakes. They are institutional fault lines which reveal bias and deep-rooted prejudice. And this takes us to the heart of the issue.

Again and again, the BBC seems to have a problem when it comes to the Jewish State and by extension the Jewish community. The organisation has form. Just one recent example is its inaccurate reporting of an anti-Semitic attack on a coach in London that was taking a Jewish group, including schoolchildren, to celebrate the festival of Hanukkah.
Click to expand...
Have you ever thought about being impartial yourself at all?
 
Good thread with some informative and balanced responses which I agree with, especially by foggy.

Outliers like Lost Seasider, who view life through some conspiratorially contorted lens, will never accept that which is apparent to most rational people. That is, that the BBC is (for the most part) a fantastic and (relatively) impartial organisation.

We shouldn`t let the perfect be the enemy of the good because of a few mis-steps here and there.

It is one of Johnson`s great shames (well, a top 50 one) that he appointed the fool Dorries to undermine it...
 
spudgun said:
Outliers like Lost Seasider, who view life through some conspiratorially contorted lens, will never accept that which is apparent to most rational people. That is that the BBC is (for the most part) a fantastic and (relatively) impartial organisation.
Click to expand...

No, I just don't see how anyone can describe the murder of 1,500 Jews as anything other than terrorism, and its refusal to do so is deeply shameful.
 
Lost Seasider said:
No, I just don't see how anyone can describe the murder of 1,500 Jews as anything other than terrorism, and its refusal to do so is deeply shameful.
Click to expand...

That was a disgusting and terrible act of terrorism IMO.

How would you describe the killing of over 4000 Palestinians, the vast majority of which are civilians, since operations in Gaza started? The BBC hasn't called that state sponsored terrorism either.

The BBC treads a narrow path between the two warring factions and doesn't take sides in the conflict. That is how it should be and that is what the Israeli spokesman today was seemingly objecting to. He wanted the BBC to be a tame organisation who will parrot Israel's line. They won't do that and they shouldn't.
 
Last edited:
I have to admit, because the BBC themselves didn't call Hamas terrorists I just don't know what to think. Their wall to wall coverage of their atrocities isn't quite enough, nor is them quoting other authorities who designate them as terrorists. Without the BBC telling me what to think, I'm at a loss. Are they good or bad? I can even feel an urge to start participating in anti-Semitic hate crimes. Again, I just have no idea whether this is right or not. If only the BBC would tell me!
 
foggy said:
I have to admit, because the BBC themselves didn't call Hamas terrorists I just don't know what to think. Their wall to wall coverage of their atrocities isn't quite enough, nor is them quoting other authorities who designate them as terrorists. Without the BBC telling me what to think, I'm at a loss. Are they good or bad? I can even feel an urge to start participating in anti-Semitic hate crimes. Again, I just have no idea whether this is right or not. If only the BBC would tell me!
Click to expand...

Yep, it certainly speaks to an insecurity in those who perhaps doubt their own ability to indulge in a little critical thinking.

Good job they have GB News and the Daily Mail to help them...:)
 
foggy said:
I have to admit, because the BBC themselves didn't call Hamas terrorists I just don't know what to think. Their wall to wall coverage of their atrocities isn't quite enough, nor is them quoting other authorities who designate them as terrorists. Without the BBC telling me what to think, I'm at a loss. Are they good or bad? I can even feel an urge to start participating in anti-Semitic hate crimes. Again, I just have no idea whether this is right or not. If only the BBC would tell me!
Click to expand...

I'm sure you know better than someone with 23 years experience in broadcasting, including 8 at the corporation itself:

It might seem hard to imagine that the BBC could embarrass itself more than its sickening refusal to recognise the beheading of babies, the rape of teenage girls and the kidnapping of disabled children as terrorism.
 
Lost Seasider said:
They've disgraced themselves over Hamas, and this seems to be part of a wider pattern of deeply ingrained antisemitism: The BBC’s deep-rooted prejudice is fuelling the poison of anti-Semitism

The thing is mistakes happen once, maybe twice. When they happen multiple times they are not mistakes. They are institutional fault lines which reveal bias and deep-rooted prejudice. And this takes us to the heart of the issue.

Again and again, the BBC seems to have a problem when it comes to the Jewish State and by extension the Jewish community. The organisation has form. Just one recent example is its inaccurate reporting of an anti-Semitic attack on a coach in London that was taking a Jewish group, including schoolchildren, to celebrate the festival of Hanukkah.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that your main problem is that you make your mind up before you know the facts, only read "news" output that reinforces your own innate prejudices and then condemn anything that doesn't fit within the very narrow paradigm that YOU created.

You're not the only one posting on here who does it. Whether it's out of naivety or cynicism is hard to assess.
 
Lost Seasider said:
I'm sure you know better than someone with 23 years experience in broadcasting, including 8 at the corporation itself:

It might seem hard to imagine that the BBC could embarrass itself more than its sickening refusal to recognise the beheading of babies, the rape of teenage girls and the kidnapping of disabled children as terrorism.
Click to expand...
What do you mean 'know'? I get this is your favourite trick, to find someone who writes in the Daily Telegraph and declare it an unarguable, authoritative voice, but the OP asked a question and people want to debate and discuss their views on the matter. If you need my credentials, I studied journalism, have worked in journalism and broadcasting, though I hardly think that matters. I have an opinion on the matter. Stop trying to shut down debate by doing a copy and paste job from the Telegraph and declaring nobody else knows anything to differ.
 
foggy said:
What do you mean 'know'? I get this is your favourite trick, to find someone who writes in the Daily Telegraph and declare it an unarguable, authoritative voice, but the OP asked a question and people want to debate and discuss their views on the matter. If you need my credentials, I studied journalism, have worked in journalism and broadcasting, though I hardly think that matters. I have an opinion on the matter. Stop trying to shut down debate by doing a copy and paste job from the Telegraph and declaring nobody else knows anything to differ.
Click to expand...
I'm allowed an opinion as well, and my opinion is that the BBC has an anti-Jewish bias, that it demonstrates on a regular basis.

The fact that you were quick to condemn Israel for the hospital attack, but then demand absolute proof that it was Hamas when multiple independent experts appear to agree that it was shows where your sympathies lie.
 
Lost Seasider said:
I'm allowed an opinion as well, and my opinion is that the BBC has an anti-Jewish bias, that it demonstrates on a regular basis.

The fact that you were quick to condemn Israel for the hospital attack, but then demand absolute proof that it was Hamas when multiple independent experts appear to agree that it was shows where your sympathies lie.
Click to expand...
I don't share your view at all. The BBC is damned from all sides. I think they made a faux pas about not naming Hamas as terrorists but other than that, I think they do their best. And, I would add, that's from a left winger who has railed against Kuenssberg on many occasions.
 
Last edited:
Lost Seasider said:
I'm allowed an opinion as well, and my opinion is that the BBC has an anti-Jewish bias, that it demonstrates on a regular basis.

The fact that you were quick to condemn Israel for the hospital attack, but then demand absolute proof that it was Hamas when multiple independent experts appear to agree that it was shows where your sympathies lie.
Click to expand...
'You aren't qualified to disagree with my Daily Telegraph article' isn't an opinion, it's shutting down debate for whoever disagrees with you. As is your inevitable attempt at portraying me as on a 'side'.

There's a good debate to be had about the BBC. It's a vital public institution and one that should be held to account. It seems you've just ran into this thread like a bull on a china shop. I think there is a lesson to be learnt from the original reporting of the hospital attack, and I probably need to learn some of that myself, and I am. All I have done since then is point out that it seems illogical to criticise others for doing that with Israel, and then do the exact same with Hamas. That's the correct lesson. I do happen to suspect this came from within Gaza and was not from Israel. I do not know that for sure. There is fantastic reporting, including from the BBC, working to add more verification. I find no difficulty condemning Hamas's terrorist attacks and Israel's use of White Phosphorus, bombing a UN refugee school, and bombing safe routes, regardless.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
I don't share your view at all. The BBC is damned from all sides. I think they made a faux pas about not naming Hamas as terrorists but other than that, I think they do their best. And, I would add, that's from a left winger who has railed against Kuenssberg on many occasions.
Click to expand...
What about the Jewish school children who they falsely accused of making anti-islamic comments, when they were on the receiving end of racist abuse?

The fact that these "faux-pas" seem to occur regularly indicates to me that they're a symptom of an ingrained bias to the left, with the accompanying "pro-Palestinian" (Hamas) bias, that seems to be a feature of the left.
 
basilrobbie3 said:
Excellent post that sums it up very well.

I was listening to Radio 4 the other day (shameful, I know), and they they were interviewing a Pole who said that prior to the break up of the Soviet Union they had to rely on the BBC to tell them what was going on in their own country.

The quality of investigative and news reporting is still very high. The quality of management decisions that affect the availability of resources to protect those editorial standards is questionable.
Click to expand...
Don't apologise.

Radio 4 is fantastic.
 
Lost Seasider said:
What about the Jewish school children who they falsely accused of making anti-islamic comments, when they were on the receiving end of racist abuse?

The fact that these "faux-pas" seem to occur regularly indicates to me that they're a symptom of an ingrained bias to the left, with the accompanying "pro-Palestinian" (Hamas) bias, that seems to be a feature of the left.
Click to expand...
You occupy a strange world. I'm left wing. I want peace in a two State solution. I think Hamas are terrorists. I think that Likud are far right populist. I don't have a Middle East agenda that does not involve peace and a safe Israel and a safe Palestine.
 
I think the BBC have as usual been impeccable in their reporting.

I watched them interview both Hanan Ashwari, a veteran Palestinian academic and politician, and the IDF spokesmen ( can't recall his name)

They were both making strong and forceful points, and in both cases the interviewer rigorously challenged what they were saying.
 
I think, overall, it does a decent job. There's plenty of content to read/watch/listen to.

The entertainment industry is very left wing, so most of that side of it, is left wing. Nobody can argue against that.

But the news side of it is mostly balanced.

I do think 24 hours news coverage has reduced the quality of what is produced - there are far too many taking heads, and insufficient investigative pieces.

I'm not sure whether it's fake news, but I read that there Arabic office were very pro-Palastine which if true means it's failed in its recruitment processes.

And it's generally where it get just if my news input from. I don't like Sky or ITV news. Channel 4 is ridiculously left wing, I don't watch GB News because people on here say it's crap - so I'm left with the BBC or YouTube.
 
If people have problems with the BBC’s perceived political leanings, how the heck do they categorise a news conglomerate like Al Jazeera?

Al Jazeera is owned by the repressive state of Qatar. Its news policies represent those of the Qatari rulers and promotes their beliefs. Including the law that makes homosexuality illegal.

It supports Palestinians against Israel. It has promoted organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood and their aligned groups (of which Hamas was an MB offshoot and aligned until 2017). The MB, formed in 1928 in Egypt and still based there, has been designated a terrorist organisation by Egypt since 2013 after its candidate, Morsi, won the Presidential election and chaos ensued. The Persian Gulf monarchies of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates followed suit, driven by the perception that the Brotherhood is a threat to their authoritarian rule.

Al Jazeera's broad availability in the Arab world "operating with less constraint than almost any other Arab outlet, and remaining the most popular channel in the region", has been perceived as playing a part in the Arab Spring, including the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions (from wiki). So much so, that the Arab League wanted it closed down in 2017 when Qatar fell out of line.

So, is Al Jazeera very right wing or very left wing? Is it a TV channel promoting terrorism? Does that make Qatar a terrorist supporter (of Sunni Muslim groups) like Iran with Hezbollah and other Shia terrorists? FIFA obviously did not think so. Al Jazeera is very influential in the Middle East.

Thank goodness for the BBC.
 
Last edited:
I subscribe to more than 1,500 channels on You Tube. More accurate. Various subjects. Some actually tell the truth and highlight reality.
 
Lost Seasider said:
They've disgraced themselves over Hamas, and this seems to be part of a wider pattern of deeply ingrained antisemitism: The BBC’s deep-rooted prejudice is fuelling the poison of anti-Semitism

The thing is mistakes happen once, maybe twice. When they happen multiple times they are not mistakes. They are institutional fault lines which reveal bias and deep-rooted prejudice. And this takes us to the heart of the issue.

Again and again, the BBC seems to have a problem when it comes to the Jewish State and by extension the Jewish community. The organisation has form. Just one recent example is its inaccurate reporting of an anti-Semitic attack on a coach in London that was taking a Jewish group, including schoolchildren, to celebrate the festival of Hanukkah.
Click to expand...
The Chair is a Tory, so go figure.
 
BFC87 said:
I subscribe to more than 1,500 channels on You Tube. More accurate. Various subjects. Some actually tell the truth and highlight reality.
Click to expand...
Some actually tell the truth and some don't. How do you differentiate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top