From the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines, Section 4, Impartiality:
“Presenters, reporters and correspondents are the public face and voice of the BBC – they can have a significant impact on perceptions of whether due impartiality has been achieved. Our audiences should not be able to tell from BBC output the personal prejudices of our journalists or news and current affairs presenters on matters of public policy, political or industrial controversy, or on ‘controversial subjects’ in any other area. They may provide professional judgements, rooted in evidence, but may not express personal views in BBC output, including online, on such matters.”
From the BBC’s Editorial Guidance on Social Networking, Microblogs and other Third Party Websites: Personal Use:
“News and Current Affairs Staff, Blogging and Microblogging
Impartiality is a particular concern for those working in News and Current Affairs. Nothing should appear on their personal blogs or microblogs which undermines the integrity or impartiality of the BBC. For example, News and Current Affairs staff should not:
advocate support for a particular political party;
express views for or against any policy which is a matter of current party political debate;
advocate any particular position on an issue of current public controversy or debate.”
So – a big thank you is in order to Paul Danahar for ignoring all of the above in order to enlighten us all on the subject of the kind of material the man running the BBC Jerusalem Bureau thinks is “worth a read”.
Incidentally, others promoting Roger Cohen’s op-ed around the web include 972 magazine, Jewish Voice for Peace, Ibrahim Hewitt of the Hamas-enabling ‘charity’ Interpal and Iranian lobbyist Trita Parsi.