BBC censorship

Robin Shepherd has written an excellent article that focuses on the silence related to “Palestinian Authority’s decision last week to celebrate the worst terrorist atrocity ever perpetrated inside Israel (the 1978 bus massacres which left 38 dead including 13 children) by naming a central square in Ramallah after its perpetrator, Dalal Mughrabi. That was a statement of values and intent, glorifying mass terrorism and signalling to Israel and the world that the Palestinians can never be trusted to abide by civilised norms. It tells you everything you really need to know about Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians and why peace with them has proved elusive for more than six decades.”

Of all the media outlets, all apart from the New York Times effectively censored the news item by not covering it.  This certainly included the BBC.   Shepherd provides 5 examples of Arab rejectionist stances that if publicised would undermine the BBC’s anti-Israel stance.  For instance “That President Mahmoud Abbas, the great Palestinian moderate, last week authorised the honouring of the most blood stained terrorist in Palestinian history.”

Shepherd then poses the question – “What would happen to the prevailing BBC narrative if such items were referred to and reported on with the energy that the BBC devotes to stories about “occupation”, “settlements” and “war crimes”?  Answer: it would be rendered totally incoherent. It would be obliterated, and they know it. In order to sustain the BBC narrative on Israel, it is therefore vital that all such references and stories are either expunged completely or reported on so rarely that they have no real impact on the broader picture they are trying to promote.  That is why the Dalal Mughrabi story was ignored. That is why the BBC continues to censor all reference to Hamas’s anti-Semitism from their profile of the group on their website. That is why terrorists are referred to as “militants”. And what applies to the BBC applies in Europe more broadly.

By leaving the general population in a state of near total unawareness about the realities that Israel confronts in its dealings with the Palestinians, even neutral and unbiased observers are bound to come away with the impression that Israel is the guilty party in this conflict.”

Shepherd concludes “This is real censorship. And it works.”

This form of censorship is also consistent with the concept of “Denial of Fact by Omission”.   The BBC should be ashamed by this analysis, but it will be water off a duck’s back,  especially since their funding levels are assured.  When a paper such as the Australian Jewish News is criticised for promoting a certain viewpoint, it would be more than justified to point to the censorship practiced by the BBC.

Pin It

One thought on “BBC censorship

  1. This article by Robin Shepherd is brilliant.

    Regarding the BBC, Melanie Phillilps’ book ‘Londonistan’ states, (p198) “The senior BBC Arabic Service correspondent in the Gaza Strip, Fayad Abu Shamala, told a Hamas rally on May 6, 2001, that journalists and media organizations in Gaza, including the BBC, were ‘waging the campaign [of resistance/terror against Israel] shoulder-to-shoulder together with the Palestinian people.”

    She also highlighted that Hamas is the military wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, and members of the Muslim Brotherhood are consultants to the government in Britain, and considered moderates.