Academics question BBC Gaza coverage
JVL Introduction
As many question the BBC’s coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza, three academics tell OpenDemocracy why they don’t think the broadcaster is impartial.
Their conclusion, in the words of Mike Berry from Cardiff University’s School of Journalism, Media and Culture, is that lack of historical context, and differential use of language in relation to Palestinian and Israeli victims have been “a long and consistent feature of BBC reporting.”
Below the OD article we have posted a video report from Declassified UK on important news not shown by the BBC.
NWI
This article was originally published by Open Democracy on Fri 17 Jan 2025. Read the original here.
Can we trust the BBC on Israel-Gaza? These media experts don’t think so
Loading article text…
I don’t think that any amount of studies demonstrating the BBC is not impartial with regard to its reporting of Israel’s war on the people of Gaza will shift its position.
Whilst I am not urging or encouraging people to take direct action against the BBC by declining to pay their licence fee on the grounds that it is failing in its responsibility to the licence payers who fund the organisation, to report the news impartially, it may be of interest to note the following.
The BBC recently claimed that it was funding approximately 750,000 ‘free’ licences, but the question is how many of these is it funding voluntarily and how many is it funding by default? Many older people who previously had reached the age of 75 and found themselves eligible for a ‘free’ licence, declined to buy a licence when this privilege was withdrawn by the BBC?
The response of those at the BBC responsible for collecting the licence fee has so far been to decline to pursue the matter through the courts, presumably on the grounds that it would not look good for the Corporation to put a stream of recalcitrant individuals of 80+ years in the dock.
I dare the BBC to make their News and Current Affairs output subscription only!
The same could be said for other MSM broadcast platforms – national and regional.
The most glaring bias is Israeli ‘hostages’ – Palestinian ‘prisoners’.
Some of those ‘prisoners’ are as young as eight-years-old. So much for signing and ratifying the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Utterly meaningless!
Don’t get me started on the deaths!
It is always important to ask this question:
What is the agenda of the people or organisation telling me this?
The Guardian recently ran a detailed article about the Azov battalion.
But the most interesting thing about it was it did not say that it is a neo-Nazi organisation. I do not believe that this omission was accidental.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/10/ukraine-combat-unit-azov-recruit-english-speaking-soldiers
I long ago stopped getting my news coverage from BBC.. . The whitewash of Israel is of long standing.. the lies broadcast about Corbyn and antisemitism in the LEFT.. the condemnation of Zelensky & his RW policy and listed in The Pandora papers BEFORE Russia invaded and he was suddenly ” the Golden Boy”.. and Every thing to do with Brexit.. I could go on & on & on & on…….
Thank you, JVL, for the article identifying low standards within BBC reporting. Sadly similar sloppiness and built-in bias exists throughout mainstream media.
In reply to Tony. The Guardian article may not have used the term Neo-Nazi, but ot did mention far right influence in the Azov battalion. For more information on Azov and the far right in Ukraine, it helps to seek out the views of leftists participating in the struggle to defend independence, such as this one:
https://commons.com.ua/en/far-right-ukraine/
This article does well at summarising well-evidenced critiques of BBC reporting on Israel/Palestine since the beginning of this century, and particularly since Oct 7th 2023