Is anyone else annoyed by the Palestinian bias of the BBC?

Is the BBC Pro Palestinian?

  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Hmmmmm, now you mention it!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
#1
Ladies and Gents,

Regardless of what you think about the conflict my issue is this - As the national News Agency / Broadcasting Corporation shouldnt the BBC remain objective?

Im sure Im not imagining it, but the BBC seems to have a very pro Palastinian bais to it's reporting, this is nothing new. From the tone of voice of the female news readers to the re-running of the same clip of newsreel of a child getting loaded into an ambulance.

What really got me was a headline across the bottom of the screen during an interview with a member of the Israeli MoD, who was actually talking sense about Hamas using human sheilds. The headline said ' ISRAEL HAS GPS COORDINATES OF PALASTINIAN SCHOOLS'

The headline had nothing to do with the interview and also is very 'loaded'. What does that headline suggest? That Israel are using GPS guided weapons on schools? Yes, thats what my Civvy Mrs thought as well. What about if they have the GR so they DONT hit the schools. Surely a Country will know the locations of public buildings within it's own borders!

Anyway, I would be interested to hear what everyone else has to say as my Mrs thinks Im imagining things!
 
#2
You mean like the torrid time given by the BBC News 24 anchor to the Israeli Ambassador to the UN last night?

Followed immediately by her getting very very punchy with the Palestinian Rep?

Yeah , I could really see the bias. :roll:

The UN gave Israel the GPS co-ordinates to 'protected places' , like schools, hospitals, places of worship etc , to try and prevent an Arty strike arriving on these locations.

Much like they did with an OP in the Lebanon, fat lot of good that did, save saving the Israelis the bracketing shells.

Does this need another poll , when it could be in the large Israel thread already existing?
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
#3
I doubt the Palestinians even bother trying to con the BBC anymore, they simply report any allegation or story, no matter how unlikely, as factual.

Nowadays it rather amuses me to see pictures of palestinian people being loaded into ambulances, do a search for pallywood if you don't get my meaning.

The infamous Jenin massacre was the straw that broke this camel's back. I remember the reporters on the ground reporting huge death tolls whilst complaining about being refused access to film the massacre. 8O

I honestly don't think it would be taking things too far to consider the BBC as being the most clearly racist mainstream media organisation in existence.
 
#4
I honestly don't think it would be taking things too far to consider the BBC as being the most clearly racist mainstream media organisation in existence.
I think it would, way and beyond.

The argument as usual is simply "The world's foremost News organisation should be on Israel's side , it would make our PR offensive so much easier"
 
#5
PartTimePongo said:
You mean like the torrid time given by the BBC News 24 anchor to the Israeli Ambassador to the UN last night?

Followed immediately by her getting very very punchy with the Palestinian Rep?

Yeah , I could really see the bias. :roll:

The UN gave Israel the GPS co-ordinates to 'protected places' , like schools, hospitals, places of worship etc , to try and prevent an Arty strike arriving on these locations.

Much like they did with an OP in the Lebanon, fact lot of good that did, save saving the Israelis the bracketing shells.

Does this need another poll , when it could be in the large Israel thread already existing?
Yes mate, this does need another poll, as this is about the BBC not the conflict.

The bias is subtle, and of course Palastinian interviewees are going to get a grilling as well, but just have it in your mind next time you watch BBC News. Bear in mind that the Palestinian Rep to the UN is Fatah (i think) and not Hamas, so is also a 'victim' - how much grilling can a victim of Hamas actually get?

I dont want to get drawn into the rights and wrongs of Israeli stratagy or Hamas tactics (but will gladly chat about them in the other thread)!

I wonder how many minutes have been devoted to 'human story' anicdotes about Palastinians compared to the 10 - 15 % of the Israeli population in range of Hamas on the BBC?

A UN school was hit, it would be interesting if the BBC found out who the casualtites where (as opposed to reporting them as 'Palastinians'), again my Mrs (a good Civvy indicator) automatically presumed they were kids fuelling her anti Israeli sentiment, we all know that if the school was targeted in a deliberate Op, then there was a reason.....

Also, yes I understand about the UN giving Israel key point locations, but my point was that they WAY in which the headline read detracted from the Israeli interviewee and also infered that Israel had GPS coordinates and where using them in their offensive.
 
#6
Well don't look at Sky News right now Shippers, because it's leading there as well...

Sky just interviewed a Jewish English Girl working with the Medical teams in Gaza.

God love and protect you Burd, getting into that mess to make a difference.
 
#8
Anybodywould think that the BBC were raving and providing a load of unsubstantiated b@llocks. Unfortunately for those saying so, they aren't. Nor are the BBC the only news organisation providing the same information.
 
#9
PartTimePongo said:
The argument as usual is simply "The world's foremost News organisation should be on Israel's side , it would make our PR offensive so much easier"
PTP - Not at all! My argument is that the BBC should be impartial. Israel doesnt get things right all the time. Devoting an equal number of minutes and coverage to all sides is what we PAY and EXPECT the BBC to do.

Here is a PERFECT example. The correspondant was on the frontier and reported as being on the 'ISRAEL - GAZA BORDER'. What does that imply (bearing in mind that Gaza or even Palestine is not a Soveriegn state).

Once again, put your 'Civvy Mrs' head on and suddenly Israel is invading a poor ickle country called Gaza full of poorly children and unarmed fishermen taking shelter in schools and civillian areas.

The bias is SUBTLE.
 
#10
I think it is easy and fashionable for journo's to appear on the underdog's side. Anyone remember the biased reporting during Bosnia and Kosovo (from all news Agencies)?
 
#11
What PTP and others are actually missing, is that this is our taxation funded state broadcasting organisation. If they want to take sides, drop the state funding, dont do it and expect me to remain happy to pay for their biased reporting. I hardly watch BBC news nowadays, as their political views dont concur with mine. Using the likes of Nick Robinson, Andrew Marr and that odious Robert Peston to report on politics in the UK, and the likes of Orla Guerin for the Middle East. A news broadcast should be just that, leave the politics for the politics shows and present a balanced view.
 
#12
Alaarm! said:
PartTimePongo said:
The argument as usual is simply "The world's foremost News organisation should be on Israel's side , it would make our PR offensive so much easier"
PTP - Not at all! My argument is that the BBC should be impartial. Israel doesnt get things right all the time. Devoting an equal number of minutes and coverage to all sides is what we PAY and EXPECT the BBC to do.

Here is a PERFECT example. The correspondant was on the frontier and reported as being on the 'ISRAEL - GAZA BORDER'. What does that imply (bearing in mind that Gaza or even Palestine is not a Soveriegn state).

Once again, put your 'Civvy Mrs' head on and suddenly Israel is invading a poor ickle country called Gaza full of poorly children and unarmed fishermen taking shelter in schools and civillian areas.

The bias is SUBTLE.
That may be true, but Israel has mst emphatically defined that border in controlling access across it for years and blockading the territory.
 
#13
Not at all - I think it's been fairly balanced coverage. But it is good to see the Palestinian side shown occasionally - which you never get over here in the states where Israel can do no wrong
 
#14
I've no idea how this works, but?

Someone fires a mortar or two at you (up to date modern army)

You say, right send something back, that will blow them up.

It then comes to light that the offending mortars were fired from a UN school.

Gotta be a court martial, if fired from a school you must die and not complain!

The BBC, just reporting what has happened, make your own mind's up, don't moan about the reporting!

PTP, i love your post's but what the hell would you do if put in charge of this small and modern country?

Hamas doesn't want peace, next move?
 

Command_doh

LE
Book Reviewer
#15
Its balanced. Its just some people's rose tinted goggles and personal favouritism is being spammed around a lot of threads atm.

And ffs, stop with those 'dogs of the IDF' inserts into every fcuking thread. Admitedly, some of them are attactive, but enough is enough. There's more horses on show there in that spammed link than the Grand National...
 
#16
dannyboy1970 said:
I've no idea how this works, but?

Someone fires a mortar or two at you (up to date modern army)

You say, right send something back, that will blow them up.

It then comes to light that the offending mortars were fired from a UN school.

Gotta be a court martial, if fired from a school you must die and not complain!

The BBC, just reporting what has happened, make your own mind's up, don't moan about the reporting!

PTP, i love your post's but what the hell would you do if put in charge of this small and modern country?

Hamas doesn't want peace, next move?
And of course the IDF can't have possibly****ed up and come up with a convienient excuse...
 
#17
Am I the only one who gets irritated by the BBC's insistence on using the term "Hamas 'militants'"? Pardon me but the Hamas Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigades are a proscribed as a terrorist group by HMG.

The word "militant" implies some sort of legitimacy to their status.

Would the BBC of the 1970s/80s have been able to get away with using the term 'Irish Republican militants' with respect to PIRA?
 
#18
Bigdishything said:
Am I the only one who gets irritated by the BBC's insistence on using the term "Hamas 'militants'"? Pardon me but the Hamas Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigades are a proscribed as a terrorist group by HMG.

The word "militant" implies some sort of legitimacy to their status.

Would the BBC of the 1970s/80s have been able to get away with using the term 'Irish Republican militants' with respect to PIRA?
The language is carefully chosen to meet the BBC's guidelines. As much as Hamas may be a dispicable organisation, it's still the democratically elected dispicable organisation (even if you do allow for the in-fighting between Fatah and Hamas).
 
#19
MikeMcc said:
The language is carefully chosen to meet the BBC's guidelines. As much as Hamas may be a dispicable organisation, it's still the democratically elected dispicable organisation (even if you do allow for the in-fighting between Fatah and Hamas).
Agreed - besides, would be awkward finding the correct word to use if Menanchem Begin was mentioned.
 
#20
MikeMcc said:
Bigdishything said:
Am I the only one who gets irritated by the BBC's insistence on using the term "Hamas 'militants'"? Pardon me but the Hamas Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigades are a proscribed as a terrorist group by HMG.

The word "militant" implies some sort of legitimacy to their status.

Would the BBC of the 1970s/80s have been able to get away with using the term 'Irish Republican militants' with respect to PIRA?
The language is carefully chosen to meet the BBC's guidelines. As much as Hamas may be a dispicable organisation, it's still the democratically elected dispicable organisation (even if you do allow for the in-fighting between Fatah and Hamas).
NO NO NO!!!! That is the point!!! (Dont want to go off thread so will keep this short). Hamas has ousted the legitimate Fatah and moderates from government in the Palestinian territories. yes, they are a popular front, but NOT the legitimate voice of the Palestinian people. They are terrorists.
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top