Had an interesting time using Google News recently. An hour or two ago I saw an article about Rowan Williams, the Arch-Bish of somewhere, who was quoted saying that Hezbullah was using Lebanese as a human shield. This was accompanied by numerous links reinforcing the fact. Reuters provided the lead article, I think. I also saw this.
Later, trawling the BBC I came across a more than slightly different emphasis:
“Bishop slams UK over Middle East
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams has joined calls for the UK to press for a ceasefire in the Middle East.”
I went back to the Google page and found the emphasis had changed, with the BBC and the Guardian in the vanguard. Now the newsmen were queueing up to condemn the UK for failing to pressure Israel (of course they were mainly just lifting the reports from the Beeb and Reuters, but guess what, the BBC were winning). Examining the time sequence, it seemed the BBC were pivotal in the change of emphasis, and looking at the article the people of Britain will be thoroughly ignorant of the balancing factor in Williams’ speech- there is no mention of the Hezbullah-human shield condemnation. Williams may be a kook, and Reuters may deserve the prefix “al-“, while Google in my view merit no prizes, but the BBC is the swaggering transnational bully that conforms its reportage to the latest axis of UN-French speak.
Update:I still have the original BBC article open on my computer even as the stealth edit has kicked in- radically. Luckily I quoted the intro [ edit: change of headline spins it very differently]. Anyone who can offer screen captures or Google caches and/or give me and others some simple instructions as to how to obtain them will have performed a service.
By now every two-bit media organisation has repeated the BBC mantra. Most current BBC readers will now conclude (unwittingly) that the BBC is adopting a balanced line compared to them whereas in fact much of the media, especially the British local media, has simply been following their BBC ‘leader’. This is classic BBC- spread a radical agenda and then stealth edit their way out of the blame. The question is begged as to why the BBC ran a story for such a short time before changing it radically. They neutered the Reuters line, and then modified their own. Surely they are not responding to a changing news situation but are gerrymandering the headlines for the coming 24 hours.
Presumably the bbc will provide similar info & assembly point info for tomorrow? We wouldn’t like to accuse them of bias now, would we?
“A rally to show solidarity with people in northern Israel – areas of which have been hit by Hezbollah rockets – is being held on Sunday by the Board of Deputies of British Jews.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5205658.stm
Netnewswire, an RSS feed reader that I use on my mac automatically shows the differences between the current version of the story in a particular feed and the previous version (deleted sections have a red background, new sections have a green background.
The BBC unfortunately only has a very short summary of the story in its feeds but even they change often, sometimes several times.
Sorry to go off topic on this thread, but getting the BBC to admit bias is quite an event, and I thought other BBBCers might want to savour the moment with me.
BBC admits bias over reporting from Bethlehem.
The BBC has apologized to a listener for giving a “less than accurate overview” in a piece about Palestinian Christians living in Bethlehem .
Fran W, had complained that an item in the BBC’s Sunday Programme reported by Katya Adler, suggested that Bethlehem Christians are treated by the Palestinian Authority as a “protected minority”.
In fact, Christian and other human rights organizations have reported that the Christian Palestinian minority has suffered substantial abuses of human rights dating back several years.
(See US State Department’s Annual Report on Human rights Practices 2005 http://www.state.go/g/drl/hrrpt/2005/61690.htm#ot )
Fraser Steel, Head of Editorial Complaints at the BBC wrote “I am concerned .. that the item did not do enough to set the experience of Bethlehem … in the context of the general situation affecting Christians in Palestine.
It seems to me this is the kind of information that listeners should have been made aware of …
.. I’d like to take this apportunity to thank you for drawing our attention to the lapse, and to apologise to you for it”
Fran has been concerned about what she sees as lack of balance in the BBC’s Middle East reporting for some time. “Palestinian Christians routinely suffer extortion and intimidation and the Palestinian Authority does nothing. Why can’t the BBC report that?”
The recent independent report into BBC reporting of the Middle East conflict criticized the BBC for not giving sufficient context to their reports, so that viewers and listeners could make informed judgements about news output.
Enjoy.
Re the Rowan Williams interview – the BBC has done a similarly selective take on Kim Howells’ views.
ABout as selective as The Guardian’s headlines right now:
“Britain criticises Israeli tactics”
Britain has broken ranks with George Bush, urging the Americans to ‘understand’ the price being paid by ordinary Lebanese civilians.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
Its an amazing example of wishful thinking amongst the Left, and, of course, along with them, almost the entire bbc editorial staff!
Well done, Fran.
Getting a response like that from the BBC over a complaint, admitting they are at fault, is almost unheard of.
Evidently everyone except Katya Adler and her ‘editors’ at the BBC knows that Palestinian Muslims are oppressing Palestinian Christians.
Fran – See the short trailer of the Pierre Rehov film HOLY LAND: CHRISTIANS IN PERIL
“First saturday, then sunday” (first we kill the Jews, then we take care of the Christians)
Are Israel’s Military Operations in Lebanon Proportional? Is Israel Guilty of War Crimes?
What International Law Really Says
Biodegradable | 22.07.06 – 7:31 pm
Good article – compellingly readable.
gordon-bennett – Peace Now, are generally thought of as leftish so its even more poignant. Pity the BBC insists on sticking to its Stalinist, SWP position.
Biodegradable
This looks grim but compelling. Thanks for the link.
Peace Now, is among the most rattled of the leftist crackpots in israel. 13 Years of Palestinian terrorism, have done them in.
I doubt they could raise more than 400 supporters across the entire country. They are small, pitiable, and ignored in israel.
Market Participant | Homepage | 22.07.06 – 10:43 pm
But does that (assuming you are right) invalidate what they wrote in this article?
That’s the point.
Just 10 things the BBC is not telling you:
1 Hizbollah is being crushed in Lebanon. They are losing about 10-20 for every Israeli soldier. Hiz is fighting hard but has no answer to the IDF and IAF. They are losing badly.
2 Shin Bet killed 70% of Hizbollah’s key leaders in the hit on Beirut. Nasrallah was injured and is living in hiding with a cellphone. He is a dead man walking.
3 Hizbollah has started using entire villages as human shields. They are storing weapons and launching rockets from schools and mosques. This is why Howell’s criticism of Israeli tactics was just plain stupid.
4 Israel’s deployment of Patriot systems was not to deter Katyusha’s, as reported by the BBC, but WMD tipped Fajr missiles and other long range weapons being launched from Lebanon and also Syria.
5 Most Mid East states, as well as the western powers, have given Israel as much time as they need to clear Lebanon of Hizbollah root and branch. This ‘week’ that the BBC keep going on about is a myth and the conceit that only the US and UK are supporting Israel is a lie.
6 Life in Beirut is actually proceeding normally, especially in the northern part of the city. Shops, restaurants and business are all open. You can actually see this from BBC’s reports, which show traffic moving nicely in the distance. This is because Israel is targeting Hizbollah in the south.
7 More than 200,000 Israeli citizens have been displaced.
8 Israel is actually implementing a UN respolution calling for the disarmament of Hizboollah.
9 The vast majority of Lebanese, particularly those in the government, support the removal of Hizbollah and are furious that the group started this trouble.
10 The overall strategic objective, being the degrading of Iran’s foreign policy ambitions on the Mediterranean, is being achieved in very short order. Syria is doing nothing and Iran is all talk, no action – as usual. This is hugely significant for the western powerrs and middle eastern states.
Why I have to bring this news to you and the BBC is not says volumes about the quality of reporting by this once famous institution – which is why I watch the SKY coverage.
I don’t know… this type of abuse is just maddening. A lot of people are being mis-informed by the self-indulgent agendas of what are supposed to be journalisim professionals… Being an Xgen’r I used to wake up to American NPR and read a lot of BBC during the 90’s.. Now I can’t stand it. Thank god there are alternate voices. You folks don’t know how relieved I was to find you out here talking about what seems time and again a simple and unmitterated abuse of public influence by the BBC. I lisented to a world service report last week where the interviwer couldn’t do anything but re-assert (with slighty different nuance)questions to a Lebanon women who refused to support the notion of “disprportionate” reponse and steered her away from comments on why Hezbollah had started such a mess. These nuances, loaded questions and out-of-context emphasisis amount to LIES…!? There is no honour to the institution of news journalism in these organizations… just a blind faith devotion to shedding (their own collective group-think)western-guilt by apologist slant after apologist slant. It really baffles and upsets me. The BBC abuse their brand recognition and public funded mandate with the self-idulgent activist rot that appears to nuance and undermine some of the most salient aspects of fact!
Thanks for being there folks… Isn’t if frustrating when poeple can’t admit or play-fair on some of the most crucial points in a story?
It means a Ton that Hezbollah hides in the rank and file of the general pulblic. It means a great deal that Fascist middle east terrorists use innocents as sheilds and hide in holy places. These facts help bore out the real moral character of the antogonists in this conflict. And these facts (if you ask me) should reside at the beginning of any discussion of what is “right”, is “wrong” or more importantly disproportionate.
Southwestern U.S. Yank:
I am slowly but surely trying to wake my American friends up to the bias of the BBC, which they think is the bees knees in impartial world news.
With just a few small pointers they soon realise that they have been hoodwinked, and they soon realise that not everyone in the UK are anti-American moonbats.
How do ordinary people like myself who despise the BBC and its anti British agenda make any form of protest, especially when im forced to pay a licence fee tax every year or end up in prison?. Like most people do you just put up with it since its only 120 quid a year or do you do something about it. Im old enough to remember the BBC and other news organisations putting voice overs to the mouths of terrorists like Adams and Maginess in Northern Ireland in the 1980s and I now despise the pro islamic, anti American, anti Israeli hysterical bias that I see on the BBC and most of the media now. I say most of the media as I would consider the likes of Channel 4 with that Odious John Snow and Sky News to be just as bad as the BBC. Its at least good to have outlet like this to have a good rant at the BBC, keep up the good work.