Monthly Archives: November 2005

• Adloyada has an important post on what she has said in comments to the BBC’s Israel/Palestine impartiality review. The deadline for submissions is tomorrow.

  One of the BBC pages she cites is this page of statistics about the Intifada. As Adloyada observes, the BBC breaks down the statistics of Israelis killed by Palestinians into civilian and military but all the Palestinians killed by Israelis are placed in one large group. Says the BBC, “There are no figures to show the proportion of Palestinians who were combatants and those who were civilians.” Why, then, are the Israeli dead so divided in the BBC figures? The fact that the Israeli dead are divided into two groups and the Palestinian dead are undivided has two effects. Firstly it means that you see a long line of icons representing Palestinian victims and mentally contrast it with the fact that none of the several lines of icons representing Israelis are remotely as long.

  Secondly, pretty well everyone regards it as less bad to kill soldiers than civilians. So most readers, even those sympathetic to Israel, will discount somewhat the group representing Israeli soldiers. There is no equivalent group of Palestinian combatants to be discounted. That absence is, of course, a consequence of the fact that the Palestinian way of waging war is to wear no uniform. Given that the BBC does see fit to add a little reminder to an article about the Israeli disengagement from Gaza to the effect that that Israeli settlements there were in violation of international law I would have thought that this repeated Palestinian breach of a far more fundamental international law was also worth a mention.

  An even more severe criticism is that the BBC’s statement that “There are no figures” to show the proportion of Palestinian combatants to non-combatants is not true. What the BBC means is “our source provided no figures and we did not care to look further.” Astonishingly, B’Tselem, the “Human Rights Group” (see what Adloyada says about them) who provided this data to the BBC described all Palestinians killed in the Intifada who were not wearing PA uniforms as being “civilians” – in other words even members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad killed while carrying out suicide bomb attacks were described as “civilians.”

  It seems this was too much to stomach even for the BBC, hence their disingenuous statement that there were “no figures.” Of course there were figures: Adloyada links to one analysis telling a very different story to B’Tselem’s, in the Middle East Quarterly. Or the BBC could have checked out the statements made by Hamas, Al-Asqua Martyrs’ Brigade and Islamic Jihad themselves claiming responsibility for suicide bombings. Surely this task would not have been beyond the BBC, seeing as we are always being told what a world leader among news organizations it is.

  UPDATE: Here is more about the statistics of the intifada, including a link to a paper by Don Radlauer of the Institute for Counter Terrorism that provides exactly the sort of figures that the BBC said were not available.

• Right for Scotland reports how John Simpson’s use of the phrase “misguided criminals” to describe the July 7 bombers won a poll for most politically correct phrase of the year. Then the BBC told the Daily Record that the claim that he’d used these words was “nonsense”. Too busy commissioning artwork to search, I guess. (Hat tip: Dumbjon)
• This they call news? Commenter Jack says, “This is the type of thing I’d expect to see in an email doing the rounds, not on this world news site supposedly representing Britain.”

that BBC licence-payers have just coughed up for, and the BBC’s attempts, reported in the Sunday Times, to justify the expenditure:

The BBC was embarrassed last night by e-mails that showed it “invented” a justification for spending £60,000 of licence payers’ money commissioning a Tracey Emin sculpture.

Emin’s Roman Standard sculpture of a bird on a post was bought by the BBC at a time when Mark Thompson, its director-general, was announcing big cost cuts.

Internal e-mails revealed serious doubts within the organisation about spending so much on a sculpture that had no links to the corporation.

An e-mail dated February 22 from senior BBC publicist Janet Morrow to Vanda Rumney, head of communications, gave warning that the commission could create a “sticky situation on the public art front which could blow up”.

Morrow noted that the sculpture “is not connected to a BBC building, nor is it linked in any way to a BBC broadcast or BBC activity — the BBC has purely used licence fee money to create a public sculpture”.

She then said she had “invented” a “plausible line” to justify the commission.

reminded me of the murder in Birmingham last year of the last police officer to die on duty in the UK. Alone among news organisations, the BBC’s pathetic choice of lead story that night was the appointment of Mark Thompson as the BBC’s Director General. Tossers.

Yesterday’s edition of The Times reports that London bomb victim lied about rape history.

Garri Holness, who lost part of a leg in the July 7th Islamist terror attacks in London, formerly known as Gary Linton, is revealed as a convicted rapist, guilty, along with six others, of a brutally violent gang sex attack on two sixteen year old schoolgirls in 1985.

Recalling the prominence afforded to Holness recently by a number of BBC programmes, I looked for their coverage of this story. After searching for it, I found Rape past of London bomb victim.

Not surprisingly (to readers of Biased BBC at least), the story had long since been removed from BBC Views Online’s index pages. When it was featured though, it didn’t make News Online’s front page (home to plenty of trivia at the best of times), and was, instead, hidden in the England section, itself below the UK section. Another case of blink and you’ll miss it, but you can’t (quite) say that they haven’t covered it.

Also not surprisingly, The Times report of the story, though not that much longer than the BBC’s, is sharper and more detailed than the BBC’s passive effort, including such facts as:

• Holness’ gang history as ‘Star’ of the ‘Young Raiders’;

   

• The £50,000 that Holness deems inadequate compensation for his injury, in contrast to the £13,500 compensation for victims of rape (elsewhere, News Online quotes Holness saying “I am going to need financial security for the rest of my life” – losing a leg is bad, but Holness, a musician, apparently reckons it’s a meal ticket for life);

   

• Holness lied to the Daily Mail, claiming that he had been cleared on appeal;

And last, but not least:

• Holness was paid £700 by the BBC to appear in six programmes charting his recovery.

None of which, it seems, the BBC deems worthy of bringing to telly-taxpayers attention, and certainly not for any length of time.

P.S. See also today’s update to my post from Monday, below.

, BBC News Online reports that:

Former Humberside Police Authority chairman Colin Inglis has been charged with 14 counts of indecent assault in relation to allegations of child abuse.

News Online goes on to say:

Following the launch of the North Yorkshire Police investigation last September Mr Inglis was suspended from the police authority and the Labour Party.

He was replaced as leader of Hull City Council in May this year.

This story was also reported on the BBC’s Six O’Clock News this evening, though Inglis’ party affilition and former tenure as Hull City Council leader weren’t mentioned, which is odd, since “Tories” (as the BBC unfailingly calls Conservatives) subject to legal proceedings are almost always linked to their party.

Update, 19NOV05:

Catching up with the news after a hectic few days, by way of contrast, The Times’ coverage of this story last Tuesday, Police chairman charged with 14 counts of child sex abuse, begins:

A LABOUR politician who supervised Britain’s worst-performing police force was charged yesterday with 14 counts of child abuse.

No doubt about Inglis’ political affiliation there then! The Times also reports:

The politician, who is openly gay, has consistently denied any wrongdoing, blaming the allegation on a homophobic conspiracy. He cited “dark forces” as the reason for his fall from political power.

– yet more facts that the BBC completely omitted from their coverage of this story. Would any of our BBC readers care to offer their adoring telly-taxpayers an explanation for keeping the public in the dark?

continues with John Simpson’s thesis that the Jordanian bombing proves the Iraq war was wrong!!, and with this pictureof a suicide-dressed kiddy above a caption which says:

‘Palestinian children learn at a young age about the struggle for freedom. To some, the Palestinian martyrs are heroes. Here a child poses for a photograph at a rally organised by militants.’

This from a series about the making of a film about suicide murderers (not sure if it was billed that way, exactly). One to add to the list for Natalie’s post below. (hat tip LGF)

. But I must make time to draw your attention to the BBC’s Israeli-Palestian impartiality review.

the Panel invites written submissions from any individual who would like to comment on the BBC’s coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and will take account of these contributions as part of its process. You can write to the following address:

Israeli-Palestinian Impartiality Review

BBC Governance Unit
Room 211, 35 Marylebone High Street
London, W1U 4AA

Or send an email to israelipalestinian.review@bbc.co.uk

The closing date for receiving responses is 5pm, Friday 25th November 2005.

Well-reasoned, polite letters that give specific instances of bias are the ones most likely to do good.

Thanks to several bloggers and commenters who have pointed this out.

This is not an example of bias. But the BBC do like to display their multicultural virtues and awareness of diverse faiths.

So this cricket report is rather unfortunate.

“Flintoff capitalised two overs later, with a delivery typical of former Pakistan captain Waqar Younis, utilising reverse-swing to beat new batsman Mohammad Yousuf.”

New batsman, eh ? Most people would think 59 Tests, over 4,000 runs and 13 centuries made Mohammad Yousuf quite an experienced player. What could produce such an error ?

The clue lies in the Cricinfo link above, which includes the line “Also known as Yousuf Youhana“.

As Yousuf Youhana, he was the only Catholic batsman in the Pakistan squad until his recent and controversial conversion to Islam – an event reported by, among others, the BBC.

Here is a BBC account of excavations in Gaza.

These were the bones of the ancient Greek city of Antidon. And they were testimony to the extraordinary richness of Gaza’s past.

Not only the Greeks passed this way. The Pharaohs of ancient Egypt, the Persians, the Romans, the Crusaders, the Turks, the British and many others left their mark on Gaza.

Missing anyone?

Now I don’t pretend to know whether Israel should have disengaged from Gaza, but to write a piece on the history of that area and and talk as if Jews were never there is downright sinister. This article describes the history of Jews in Gaza.

Keep reading Alan Johnston’s BBC piece. Napoleon gets a mention, but you won’t find Judah, who “took Gaza with the coast threof” somewhat earlier in history (Judges 1:18). You won’t find Jews mentioned at all.

All you’ll find is this piece of BBC boilerplate:

In line with Israel’s plan to “disengage” [What are the scare quotes for? – NS] from the Gaza Strip, it abandoned the settlements that it had built here in breach of international law.

In case you forgot.

Hat tip: My Right Word.

Villepin “seemed to strike the right note” says the BBC. Suckups. Can anyone confirm the impression I got from a commenter that for a while the link text leading to this story actually said, minus the “seemed”, “Villepin strikes the right note”?

The American Expatriate analyses the evolution of the BBC’s coverage of Wilson’s trip to Niger. This post is extremely detailed and supplies copious links. [UPDATE: There’s a follow up post and the BBC’s Paul Reynolds says in the comments that he’s preparing a response.]

Scott Burgess both defends the BBC against an accusation of pro-American bias …

Yes, you heard. He then, ever impartial, criticises Sarah Montague for misrepresenting Jean-Marie Le Pen in a radio interview.