More BBC Bias...

mickyv · Post by **mickyv** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 11:38 am

Western News/MSM blackout on the UN findings apart from sources like this;

https://www.therealnews.com/t2/index.php ... mival=5675

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:59 am

[web]https://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/ma ... t-coverage[/web]

-----
BBC's response is amusing. In summary, (paraphrasing) "yeah, he used to work for BBC, but he's just an Arab-lover now."

Update: In case anyone is interested in reading the source material, you can find the older edition here at Bad News From Israel.pdf (10 MB pdf)

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Fri May 27, 2011 6:39 am

There are some excellent videos on youtube featuring Greg Philo and Tim Llewellyn. In two of the more recent ones featuring Philo, he references a document titled "The Israel Project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary." I found a copy of it which you can download from here.

<iframe width="640" height="510" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wx7NaQsvUnE" frameborder="0"></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="510" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IuK3RDaU_lI" frameborder="0"></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="510" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5c3XYSeyrs4" frameborder="0"></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="510" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wiqOccC4dWg" frameborder="0"></iframe>

modern · Post by **modern** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:38 am

[web]https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... -war/print[/web]

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:21 pm

[align=center]<iframe width="640" height="390" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/afBr10f38TI?rel=0" frameborder="0"></iframe>[/align]

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:31 am

While doing a little spring cleaning, I ran across this e-mail I sent to the BBC regarding this article.

I'm not entirely happy with it as it does delve into rant territory...

I was very disappointed by this article purportedly on the so-called peace negotiations taking place in Annapolis. Almost devoid of meaningful content, it still manages to be biased toward the Israeli subjects while giving short shrift to the Palestinians.

The opening salvo ("Following the Middle East peace conference in the US city of Annapolis, most Israelis and Palestinians yearn for a resolution that will allow them to live normal, peaceful lives.") leads one to think the article will actually discuss the issues of peace, justice, or even Annapolis. But none of them are mentioned. The author admits in the final paragraph that, "We did not speak about Annapolis or the peace process at either meal but I left both thinking..." So despite the introduction, he isn't actually concerned with discussing the opinions of Israelis or Palestinians so much as his own.

What's worse, in between, the author takes time and care emphasizing the small pleasures of living in a (presumably illegal) Jewish "settlement," while his account of Palestinian life focuses heavily on petty details such as what dishes were served and (so briefly you almost miss it) the family's size.

The Israeli "settlement" is full of life and colour. He carefully notes how the Jewish Sabbath is a period of "pause and reflection." He relishes little pleasures such as "cheerful singing," the smile of "a Moroccan Jew with his son on his lap," his [host's] three-year-old daughter playing with a Slinky, and "warm, loving family banter and prayers and [again] singing."

This contrasts heavily to the utter lack of detail he provides of Palestinian life (aside from the previously-mentioned menu and head count). The only personal comments the author makes about his hosts rest heavily on a ten-year-old boy's "delight" at the author's prowess at chess or Uno.

As a story providing depth or insight into conflicting views, this article falls terribly short. But even in the very limited context of providing a window into the lives of Israelis and Palestinians, the author's bias is clear.

Post by **faceless** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:15 pm

you should rant more often Major....

luke · Post by **luke** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:39 pm

did you get a response major? if i get a reply its always the same sort of cookie cutter response where they ignore all the points i've raised and say how great they are

the only person who has ever engaged with me was ann widdecombe!

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 6:18 pm

I'm pretty sure there was no response. But that shouldn't discourage us from continuing to write when shoddy journalism rears its head.

In this case, I feel sorry for the people forced to pay for the privilege of being fed propaganda. One might argue that we in Canada are in a similar boat (albeit to a lesser degree) by the CBC receiving taxpayer funds. But they don't have much trouble covering subjects critical of gov't (regardless of party) and have been quite enlightening in recent years in their coverage of free trade deals, F35 jets, the Omnibus Crime Bill, the G20, etc.

Post by **faceless** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 6:40 pm

[align=center]<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/U8KvGgw-c8M" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[/align]

luke · Post by **luke** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 10:57 pm

major.tom wrote:I feel sorry for the people forced to pay for the privilege of being fed propaganda.

i haven't paid my license fee for about 3 years