BBC Weather and a country called null

Thanks to @moidov for bringing the following to our attention via Twitter.

BBC weather app

Of course the BBC – including its weather department – has long refused to come to terms with the fact that Jerusalem is the capital city of Israel and this latest invention of a location called ‘null’ is therefore entirely in keeping with its existing policy.

And if readers are in need of a reminder of the embarrassingly ahistorical foundations underpinning that policy, here it is:

“The [BBC Trust’s Editorial Standards] Committee noted that while there is no expectation that in a two-state solution West Jerusalem would become Palestinian territory, a UN resolution passed in 1947 has not been rescinded. It calls for the whole of Jerusalem to be an international city, a corpus separatum (similar to the Vatican City), and in that context, technically, West Jerusalem is not Israeli sovereign territory.” 

10 comments on “BBC Weather and a country called null

    • Duncan,
      If you follow the link named “1947 Partition Plan”, situated at the bottom of the article, you’ll see exactly why. The so-called ‘UN resolution’ that the BBC refers to never became a resolution at all: It was never more than a proposal for resolution from the UN. Ironically, the Jews acepted the proposal, but the Arabs rejected it outright, with the result that it was never ratified, and so at the current point in time, has no more legal standing than any other idea that was proposed and then rejected….but the Falastinians & their suporters now have the chutzpah to try to claim it as binding!

      • I do appreciate the response, Yorkie, and I did read and learn from the article in the link.

        However, it seems to me that the international position on East and West Jerusalem is not entirely clear. When a certain view is attributed to the ‘international community’ (as does the Wikipedia article on Jerusalem [] “The international community rejected the annexation as illegal and treats East Jerusalem as Palestinian territory occupied by Israel.” ], one of course takes it with a pinch of salt. It is not as if the ‘international community’ is a single, contiguous group of people with perfect consensus, conveniently situated in one room, so that we can ask them what they think.

        However, the position of the UN, if we accept this as some kind of loose approximation to the above, seems to hold the view not only that the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem is illegal (according to 55th session resolution adopted 1 December 2000), but that any state’s diplomatic mission to Jerusalem in recognition of Israeli control would be in violation of Security Council resolution 478 (1980).

        Likewise, we find many proponents of Israel’s control of Jerusalem, also with a substantial body of rationale.

        Taken in the round, it seems to me that the Beeb is walking a middle path. They do not apportion Jerusalem to Israel, Palestine (or indeed Jordan cf the 1950-1967 annexation). “Null” seems to me to me to be diplomatically parking the controversy, while doing the British thing: talking about the weather.

        I do worry that this estimable blog is sometimes so determined to expose institutional Anti-Zionism, that it sees it where there is none. This tendency is mirrored in some of its readership, who, we find in one comment here, quickly parade their prejudice that I sleep with a copy of Mein Kampf under my pillow.

        • null’ indicates the lack of a value. Imagine this app is generated by pulling info from a spreadsheet; they completely removed the value ‘Israel’ from the column ‘Country’ on the row ‘Jerusalem.’ They did not fill it in with another value, they simply left it blank. this is not an accident, it must have been removed on purpose, as there is no other reason nor any other way for this value to change.

        • Duncan: I can follow your rationale…although you do appear to have a great deal more faith in the both the intent and the ability of the UN to act as an honest broker in relation to Israel than I have, given that it is comprised of a composite of nations, a large proportion of which are run by deeply unpleasant and dishonest governments, most of which (Including the European ones) suffer from significant, and many endemic, levels of anti-Semitic racism in their populace (many also having demonstrated this quite clearly in practical terms during their recent history), and most of which rely on Arab petrochemicals to support their economy…..
          However, I still do not see how the BBC can legitimately cite the 1947 partition plan as the basis for its stand regarding the status of Jerusalem: the claim that the plan has “never been rescinded” seems somewhat specious when it was, in fact, never ratified in the first place.

    • Very reasonable like your other sources – the Protocols of the Elders of Zyon and the Mein Kampf.

  1. The main part of Jerusalem is West Jerusalem – where the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) is situated. East Jerusalem is much smaller, has no significant buildings and no influence on the world stage. The BBC is simply displaying its usual institutionalised Arabist, anti-Israel, bias by not recognising the facts as they are – probably taking into account that the source of its Middle East funds is the Arab world.

Comments are closed.