Criticism of the BBC: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:16, 19 June 2007

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason specified. Please add a |reason= parameter to this template. Please help improve this article if you can. The talk page may contain suggestions. (April 2007)

Historically, there has been criticism of the BBC for various policies or perceived biases since its inception^[1] and more recently over its coverage of events in the Middle East^[2] and the way in which it reported on allegations that the British government's case for war in Iraq had been "sexed-up". This last event drew severe flak from the Hutton Inquiry,^[3] although the latter was much disputed in the British press.^[4]

John Bridcut Report

An official report commissioned by the BBC Trust published on 18th June explored issues around impartiality.

The Secret Agent Documentary

On Thursday 15 July 2004 the BBC broadcast a documentary on the far right British National Party where an undercover reporter by the name of Jason Gwynne infiltrated the BNP by posing as a football hooligan.^[5][6] The programme resulted in Mark Collett and Nick Griffin, the leader of the party, being charged for inciting racial hatred in April 2005, for statements which included Griffin describing Islam as a "wicked, vicious faith," Collett describing asylum seekers as "a little bit like cockroaches" and saying "let's show these ethnics the door in 2004." Griffin and Collett were found not guilty on some charges at the first trial in January 2006, but the jury failed to reach a verdict on the others, so a retrial was ordered,^[7] which happened in November 2006, all of the defendants were found not guilty on the basis that the law at the time did not consider those who follow Islam or Christianity to be a single race.^[8]

The BNP believe this was an attempt to "Discredit the British National Party as a party of opposition to the Labour government."^[9]

After the second trial Nick Griffin described the BBC as a "Politically correct, politically biased organisation which has wasted licence-fee payers' money to bring two people in a legal, democratic, peaceful party to court over speaking nothing more than the truth."^[10]

Impartiality seminar

On Friday 22 September 2006 the BBC's Board of Governors held an "impartiality seminar" which was streamed live on the internet. The previous day the then Chairman of the Governors, Michael Grade, explained the thinking behind the seminar in an article in The Guardian newspaper ^[11].

In the seminar there was a hypothetical discussion including senior BBC executives about what they would allow controversial Jewish comedian Sacha Baron Cohen to throw into a dustbin on the satirical television show Room 101. It was imagined that Baron Cohen would wish to throw into Room 101 kosher food, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Qur'an, and the Bible. There was also a hypothetical discussion about whether a Muslim BBC newsreader should be allowed to wear a headscarf.

In the seminar former BBC business editor Jeff Randall claimed that he was told by a senior news executive in the organisation that "The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it." Political correspondent Andrew Marr said that "The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias".^[2] These comments were reported in the UK national press a couple of weeks later. At the seminar Helen Boaden (Director of BBC News) said that the BBC must be impartial on the issue of multiculturalism.

The Mail on Sunday (which was not present at the seminar) claimed that it was "secret" and that a senior executive at the seminar admitted "There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far in the direction of political correctness. Unfortunately, much of it is so deeply embedded in the BBC's culture, that it is very hard to change it".^[2]

Helen Boaden responded to press criticism of the seminar in a post on the BBC's Editors Blog. Peter Horrocks (Head of Television News) also blogged about the question of what was suitable attire for newsreaders in another post on the Editors Blog.

Mark Thompson (Director General of the BBC) reponded to press criticism in an article in the Daily Mail as did Mark Byford (Director, Journalism) in an article ('BBC "not crammed full of soft liberals" says deputy chief') in The Sunday Telegraph.

Arab-Israeli conflict

In the course of their "Documentary Campaign 2000-2004," Trevor Asserson, Cassie Williams, both Israeli nationals, and Lee Kern of BBCWatch published a series of reports The BBC And The Middle East stating in their opinion that "the BBC consistently fails to adhere to its legal obligations to produce impartial and accurate reporting."^[12]

Douglas Davis, the London correspondent of The Jerusalem Post, has accused the BBC of being anti-Israel and even antisemitic. He wrote that the BBC's coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict is "a relentless, one-dimensional portrayal of Israel as a demonic, criminal state and Israelis as brutal oppressors [which] bears all the hallmarks of a concerted campaign of vilification that, wittingly or not, has the effect of delegitimizing the Jewish state and pumping oxygen into a dark old European hatred that dared not speak its name for the past half-century."^[13] Many such accusations came from pro-Israeli groups. For instance, Honest Reporting, a critic of the BBC is funded by the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah.^[14] Similarly, Anglicans for Israel have berated the BBC for apparent anti-Israel bias.^[15]

An independent panel was set up in 2006 to review the impartiality of the BBC's coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.^[16] The panel's assessment was that "apart from individual lapses, there was little to suggest deliberate or systematic bias." While noting a "commitment to be fair accurate and impartial" and praising much of the BBC's coverage the independent panel concluded "that BBC output does not consistently give a full and fair account of the conflict. In some ways the picture is incomplete and, in that sense, misleading."

Reflecting concerns from all sides of the conflict the panel highlighted some identifiable shortcomings and made four recommendations.

Writing in the FT, Philip Stephens, one of the panelists, later accused the BBC's director-general, Mark Thompson, of misrepresenting the panel's conclusions. He further opined "My sense is that BBC news reporting has also lost a once iron-clad commitment to objectivity and a necessary respect for the democratic process. If I am right, the BBC, too, is lost."^[17] Mark Thompson published a rebuttal in the FT the next day.^[18]

Martin Walker of United Press International was sceptical of the independent inquiry in an opinion piece published in The Times.^[19] He believed the report was flawed for two reasons. Firstly, because the time-period over which it conducted (August 2005 to January 2006) surrounded the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and Ariel Sharon's stroke, he believed the Israeli side should naturally get more positive coverage. Secondly the report only looked at the BBC's domestic coverage, and thus excluded output on the BBC World Service and BBC World. At the end of his piece he does note - "It’s amazing that the coverage is as decent as it is, and that most of us in the business concede privately that, for all its flaws, the BBC still does a better job that any other news organisation on Earth." On 10 October 2006, Chris Hastings and Beth Jones of the Daily Telegraph^[20] revealed that "The BBC has spent thousands of pounds of licence payers' money trying to block the release of a report which is believed to be highly critical of its Middle East coverage. The corporation is mounting a landmark High Court action to prevent the release of The Balen Report under the Freedom of Information Act, despite the fact that BBC reporters often use the Act to pursue their journalism. The action will increase suspicions that the report, which is believed to run to 20,000 words, includes evidence of anti-Israeli bias in news programming."

On 24 May 2007 Professor Steven Weinberg, winner of the 1979 Nobel Prize for Physics cancelled a speech at Imperial College, London due to the National Union of Journalists call for a boycott of Israeli products. Weinberg told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz: "I see in the British press and the BBC signs of a very strong anti-Israel bias - a kind of blind hostility that whatever Israel does, it is always in the wrong - so this is not an isolated action of a small group of antisemitic conspirators."^[21]

Israel/Hezbollah conflict

During the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict Israel diplomatic officials boycotted BBC news programmes, refused interviews, and excluded BBC reporters from briefings because Israeli officals believed the BBC's reporting was biased, stating "the reports we see give the impression that the BBC is working on behalf of Hizbullah instead of doing fair journalism."^[22] Some Jewish sources defended the BBC coverage - Francesca Unsworth, head of BBC news gathering, did so in Jewish News, attracting opprobrium from anti-Israeli sources.^[23]

American bias

In October 2006 Chief Radio Correspondent for BBC News since 2001^[24] and Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to "correct" it in his reports, and that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it "no moral weight".^[25][26][27]

Cleaning up

The National Viewers' and Listeners' Association was formed in 1965 by Mary Whitehouse to "clean up" the BBC, claiming that it "was responsible for the moral collapse in the country".

"Dumbing down"

In the past few years, there have been claims that the corporation has simplified, or "dumbed down" its programmes in an effort to reach a broader audience, particularly the Breakfast, Six O'Clock and Ten O'Clock news programmes. The former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, ^[28] claimed that BBC newsreaders "prance around studios", and that he would prefer it if they were to "actually sit at a desk and read the news".

Funding

The fact that BBC's domestic services are funded by television licence fees is criticised by its competitors and others on a number of grounds.^[29]

The Balen Report

The BBC fought to overturn a ruling by the High Court that a member of the public has the right under the Freedom of Information Act of 2000 (FOI) to see an internal report on its Middle East coverage, known as the Balen Report. The report, which is believed to contain about 20,000 words, examines BBC radio and television broadcasts covering the Arab-Israeli conflict, was compiled in 2004 by Malcolm Balen, a senior editorial adviser. Critics of the BBC enquired if the Balen Report includes evidence of bias against Israel in news programming.^[30][31]

On Friday 27 April 2007 The High Court rejected Mr Steven Sugar's challenge to the Information Commissioner's decision.

It has been alleged that the corporation paid £200,000 for this legal action. Critics called the BBC's blocking a FOI request "shameful hypocrisy" in light of the corporation's previous extensive use of FOI requests in its journalism.^[32]

The BBC's press release following the High Court judgement included the following statement:

"The BBC's action in this case had nothing to do with the fact that the Balen report was about the Middle East – the same approach would have been taken whatever area of news output was covered."

References

See also

• BBC controversies
• Media Balance
• MediaLens