It was premature to assume that was to be the end of the matter. They wouldn’t let it lie. Because this week, a listener, *a British Jew*, emailed in; (15.52) and from the hundreds of texts and emails that they reputedly receive during the programme, this particular one was singled out for transmission. It said that Israelis are always portrayed on the BBC as “eternal innocent victims,” and the Arabs as “irredeemable irrational terrorists”, and wouldn’t it be nice if for a change they had a Palestinian on the programme to explain how hard life was for them.
Would you Adam an’ Eve it? Israelis always portrayed as victims? On the BBC? Did she make a mistake and really mean Jews and the holocaust?
Does proclaiming oneself to be a Jew bestow special dispensation, privilege, authority, meaningfulness, that lets one say something so ridiculous and so inaccurate? And do the programme makers think her idiotic comment was either worthy or necessary to provide an antidote to one little item that was neither critical of Israel nor condemnatory of Israelis that had slipped through the net for once in a million years?
Ah, but was it ever different?
I draw your readers attention to an issue of the Radio Times (2-8 June 1984) where the following exchange occured in the LETTERS page :-
‘I noted with astonishment that in the ‘It’s your world’ phone-in with HM King Hussein of Jordan (13 May R4) there was not a single Jewish Israeli. Were there no such questions or did the producer not allow them to be submitted?’ (Mrs) K.Fischel, London, N3
Response from E.Mardall (Co-producer, ‘It’s Your World’)- ‘We had 7 calls from Israel; two were from an American journalist wanting an interview with HM King Hussein, one from an Englishman, one from a Swedish woman. The other three calls weren’t asking as pertinent questions as those which were being asked from other parts of the world’.
I can guess where ‘other parts of the world’ were. Sod the Israeli questions, we only want soft-ball ones.
So, even almost 25 years ago the BBC were ‘filtering’ their calls to ensure no ‘awkward’ questions were being asked. This of course being before all the Intifadas and such-like.
So it’s not surprising they are still at…only more vehemently.
BBC…propaganda as we see fit.
It was probably a plant.
Hi Sue, sorry I haven’t been on in a few days, having a nice weekend break and didn’t have internet access.
I’m confused as to how this story is bias? Doesn’t this demonstrate the very opposite of the bias claim? ie. that the BBC does report on things from a Jewish/Israeli perspective?
It seems your real beef is with the caller, not the BBC. they can hardly be blamed for the views of one caller whose opinion you disagree with.
It’s sad but true Jews willing to betray Judaism and Israel will always get preferential treatment and publicity for their views. Similar Arabs are murdered in silence.
No this demonstates if genuine that only Jews who betray their heritage are considered house trained by the “bbc” as much more tractable and even usable, donchaknow?
Gus Haynes | 15.03.09 – 8:39 pm |
Gus,
I’m wondering if you have difficulty with reading?
so the beeb broadcast an israeli story, then a palestinian response….. that’s balance isn’t it? Sue – there’s no bias here.
Rich
You obviously have not read the post. The response was not by a Palestinian.
The bias is that out of all the responses the BBC will have received – they chose this utterly absurd one. The response is ridiculous on its face.
The athletes murdered at the Munich Olympics were obviously victims. I bet there were a lot of comments to the effect that the Munich terrorism was one of the first in a long line. But they could not permit tht sort of comment – it contains the T word which is verboten at the BBC.
This just a classic example of a useful idiot Jew being used as a badge which reads:
“My excessive criticism and demonization of Israel over all other nations on earth (along with the exaggeration of the power of the Jewish Lobby) has no connection whatsoever to anti-Jewish sentiment.”
Rich and Gus,
If you can’t be bothered to read these posts properly why do you bother to make comments that reveal that you can’t be bothered to read these posts properly? I mean, why bother? You are the embodiment of the sign – alone on a deserted clifftop – on which is written:
Do not throw stones at this sign.
why do you think I did not read the post properly Sue? my original point here still stands, how is this article biased against Israel, as you seeem to be claiming?
Let me try again, in case you misunderstood (or I articulated poorly first time around):
Why is the fact they singled out the British Jew bias? He pressumably had a different point of view from the rest of the callers, so whats wrong with hearing from him? Again, you are assuming (as many posts here do) that the BBC airing views like this automatically share them.
You are upset with the callers opinion, not the BBC. And yet you post that on this website. It has nothing to do with BBC bias, its simply that you dont like his view. Which is fine, thats your right. But dont post it on a website called bbcbiased and try to make a tenous link about it proving institutional anti-israeli bias.
Gus,
I’m wondering if you have difficulty with reading?
Sue | 15.03.09 – 9:15 pm |
Funny, I was thinking the same. Mr Haynes is very selective with his reading. Funny how we never get Conservatives come on here saying the BBC isn’t biased. When I was a leftie I thought the only real bias was towards the Left and was against it as it was bad for democracy. Now its in overdrive. Must be very uncouraging to know the threat the Gramscian Left feel at this site leading to the end of rigged political ‘debate’ at the BBC that the likes of Mr Haynes feel the need to post here. They could not survive on a level playing field.
encouraging
Funny you mention that, because I’m more of a Conservative than a Labour guy.
And I work with many Conservatives who feel the same way about issues that mnay people here do; yet none of them consider the Beeb to be biased in favour of Labour. Why is that I wonder?
Gus Haynes | 16.03.09 – 7:50 pm |
This is what I said. In new words just for you.
The BBC broadcast a sympathetic story featuring an Israeli. It showed the human side of an Israeli, it showed an Israeli in a situation that you or I could empathise with, it made you imagine you were in the shoes of an Israeli. It humanised this person. A person who was an Israeli.
That was unusual. References to Israel and Israelis by the BBC are habitually accompanied by a negative random fact or myth, added gratuitously, just in case we should forget that Israelis are regarded as evil.
Palestinians on the other hand are habitually humanised, described by name and accompanied by some detail or other, say, a reference to a donkey and an olive tree – added gratuitously, just in case we should forget that the Palestinians are innocent victims.
Do you see why I said at first I thought that the original broadcast was unique?
But it was not unique at all. It was just that although the original broadcast was without the negative fact or myth, added gratuitously just in case we should forget how evil Israelis are, they made up for it at a later date. The next week in fact.
Now, neither you nor I know whether or not the emailer was really a Jew. We have no way of knowing. But the BBC believed the email enough to mention that, probably because they thought it would add impact. Then, they also decided to single it out from all the hundreds of messages they boast of receiving on all sorts of different subjects, and to read it out in full, so that we would, after all, be reminded of how evil the Israelis are, and also how victimised the Palestinians are.
As though that was not enough, the allegations in the email were absurdly inaccurate. “Israelis are always portrayed on the BBC as “eternal innocent victims,” and the Arabs as “irredeemable irrational terrorists”,
I thought to myself, “How could someone make such a statement? This statement is the opposite of the truth!”
Then I thought of a possible explanation. The emailer got confused. Hearing of the holocaust that wiped out six million Jews, you know Gus, the one that they go on and on about to get people to feel sorry for them, she mixed that up with the Israelis. Sometimes that happens you know. People do get confused about that.
By the way, it is rather obvious that you don’t take all that much notice when you leap in so readily to argue, as you refer to the aforementioned emailer as he when the name was Naomi which is usually the name of a lady.
My post was about the fact that they couldn’t allow an Israeli to go unsullied, even once.
Now to me that is bias. But I accept that you disagree, though I am curious as to why you are so keen to defend the BBC even when you neither read the posts thoroughly nor know much about the subjects you take on.
Why is it so difficult for defenders of the indefensible to grasp that the Beeboids used this “British Jew” email to defend against criticism of anti-Israel bias. Never mind how unlikely it is for an actual British Jew to take the time to write in to complain about how Israelis are always portrayed as eternal innocent victims, drone on and on about how awful Israel has treated the Palestinians, and challenge the BBC to have Palestinians on instead, as if they never do. (In fact, I call BS on it simply because no Jew would say that Palestinians have been suffering at the hands of Israelis for “more than 60 years” – or was there a bit of Beeboid embellishment?.) The BBC deliberately chose that to rebut claims that they are biased against Israel. They know it, which is why Coles said he was sure that would “run and run”. As in, “Ooh, the Israel-Firsters will be coming out of the woodwork now, love.”
This was a deliberate provocation by the BBC, betraying the way they – or at least the Beeboids involved in this show – feel about the issue.
Of course, if one agrees 100% with the email in question, it may all seem a bit mystifying.
Fantastic last post Sue.
Thank you Piggy Kosher.
Alas, Gus has moved on to other threads, his wonders to perform.
Sue:
Call me Piggy
Dehumanising Jews, making them conform to a stereotype and ignoring individuality is pure Ministry of Propaganda. Well done bbc, Goebbells would be chuffed that his methods are still studied.