BBC’s peace plan framing and speculations – part one

As we have most recently seen in BBC coverage of the Israeli election and in an article by the BBC’s US State Department correspondent, the corporation’s framing a US administration peace plan which has not yet even been made public continues.

That framing has included the failure to clarify to audiences that the Palestinian Authority has already rejected the US initiative even before its publication, the failure to clarify that, significantly, the Palestinian Authority does not represent all the Palestinian factions and a total absence of information concerning Palestinian rejection of past peace proposals.

Additionally, BBC audiences have seen the two-state solution presented as “the formula for peace negotiations” but with that term only partially explained: the all-important phrase “two states for two peoples” is consistently absent from BBC presentation.  Instead, audiences repeatedly see the two-state solution defined according to the Palestinian interpretation of it as meaning a Palestinian state on all of the territory occupied by Jordan and Egypt between 1948 and 1967.

Unsurprisingly, the BBC’s framing portrays the success of the as yet unpublished peace plan as dependent upon Israeli actions alone, with the Palestinian side reduced to a passive entity.

That pre-emptive framing continued in two items aired on the BBC Radio 4 ‘Today’ programme on April 16th. Listeners first heard a report (from 37:28 here) from the BBC Jerusalem bureau’s Yolande Knell introduced by co-presenter Justin Webb.

Webb: “Israel’s political parties meet the president today following the election of course. Yolande Knell is our correspondent in Jerusalem. What happens then, Yolande?”

Knell gave an explanation of the process of the president’s consultation with the heads of the parties which gained seats in the recent election in order to decide which party leader will be tasked with trying to form a new government before going on:

Knell: “…it’s extremely likely that it will be Benjamin Netanyahu that’s allowed to form the new government because he did win the greatest number of seats in the new parliament [not accurate – Ed.] and because he has support, we know, from the smaller Right-wing and pro-settler parties, he’ll be able to control the majority seats. And Israelis saying this is most likely to be the most Right-wing government in Israeli history. That was also the boast of the last government too. And of course this new government will be put in place – he’ll have 28 days to decide – Mr Netanyahu – if he can put…how he’ll put his government together…ahm…but this will come at a really important time.”

The item continued with pure speculation based partly on an article in a newspaper.

Webb: “Well an important time because Donald Trump says he has a peace proposal and a peace proposal that is acceptable to…ahm…err…the Netanyahu government potentially. In that case, if that were to be announced relatively soon, what would it be?”

Knell: “Well we’ve been looking for a lot of clues. Ahm…of course the big question is could the US abandon the two-state solution: this long-time international formula for peace that envisages the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel. It’s been written up in UN resolutions and it’s also been the cornerstone of US policy for over two decades now. But we had yesterday the Washington Post reporting that the US proposal probably wouldn’t include a fully sovereign Palestinian state and then the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo giving a series of congressional hearings over the last two weeks and in questioning he didn’t give too much away for sure ahead of the publication of this long-awaited Trump administration peace plan but he did say that…or he seemed to imply that the idea of the two-state solution was bunched in with what he called ‘a failed old set of ideas not worth re-treading’ and he kept talking, as we’ve heard before, about recognising realities.

What’s also been pointed out really importantly is that the Trump administration and Mr Pompeo didn’t speak out against a campaign promise that was made very controversially by Mr Netanyahu in the last days of the election campaign where he promised to unilaterally annex parts of the West Bank where there are Israeli settlements…ah…put them under full Israeli control. And…err…of course settlements seen as illegal under international law but the Palestinians say that would leave them with no contiguous territory for a Palestinian state.”

As we see Knell’s speculative portrayal adheres to the BBC’s standard framing seen to date. The second item on the same topic in this programme will be discussed in part two of this post.

Related Articles:

BBC’s Plett Usher continues to promote her Israel narratives

BBC News amplifies PLO’s interpretation of the two-state solution

BBC News silent on Abbas’ rejection of Jewish state

BBC Radio 4’s peace process tango for one – part one

BBC Radio 4’s peace process tango for one – part two

Why is the BBC’s failure to properly report the Jewish state issue important?

 

 

Advertisements

Inaccuracies in BBC WS ‘Newsday’ report on Israel election

Listeners to the later edition of the BBC World Service radio programme ‘Newsday’ on April 9th heard a five-minute item replete with factual errors and misleading claims.

The item was introduced (from 04:23 here) by a presenter who managed not only to pronounce the Israeli prime minister’s first name in three different ways in 44 seconds but also inaccurately described him as Israel’s “longest-serving prime minister”. In fact, only if Netanyahu is still prime minister on July 17th 2019 will he overtake David Ben Gurion – currently Israel’s longest-serving prime minister.

The presenter also failed to note that whether or not what she described as “imminent criminal indictments” against Netanyahu will be filed depends upon hearings to be held in the coming months. [emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added]

Presenter: “Let’s take you to Israel now…eh…Israelis are going to the polls today as the country’s longest-serving prime minister Benyamin [sic] Netanyahu faces his toughest challenge yet. Plagued with controversies and under the shadow of imminent criminal indictments for bribery, fraud and breach of trust, many are still tipping him to win. Let’s speak now to our Jerusalem correspondent Tom Bateman. Tom, it’s been described as almost a referendum on Benjamin Netanyahu’s rule but now he has a real contender and a challenger…eh…in the former…general – or retired general – Benny Gantz. Let’s talk about Benny Gantz for a minute. What’s he promising and why has he proven such a strong challenger to Binyamin Netanyahu?”

Bateman: “Well Benny Gantz was a chief of the Israeli army. He was actually in position under Mr Netanyahu’s leadership when he was prime minister in this last term.”

Netanyahu’s latest term in office began in May 2015 following elections in March of that year. Benny Gantz retired from army service in February 2015 and so – while Gantz was chief of staff during parts of two of Netanyahu’s earlier terms in office, Bateman’s claim that he was “in position” during “this last term” of Netanyahu’s office is clearly inaccurate.

Bateman went on to promote false equivalence while describing a Hamas rocket attack on a moshav in central Israel last month.

Bateman: “He oversaw the military operation – the all-out conflict between Hamas in Gaza and Israel – in 2014 so he is an experienced general. He entered the race after…they have to have a three year…ah…period of rest away from the military or politics because former generals in Israel are usually pretty hot stuff when it comes to Israeli politics and they can be very popular. He entered this race and he has put up a very serious challenge to Benjamin Netanyahu who, remember, likes to portray himself as the guarantor of Israel’s security. That has been his number one pitching point to the Israeli public and so to have this former chief of staff to come in and who has said that in his view Mr Netanyahu has not been effective on the security front. There has been a military flare-up again between Hamas and Israel during the election campaign and Mr Netanyahu’s rivals, including Mr Gantz, were quick to jump on that and say that he should have been tougher.”

Presenter: “And Mr Netanyahu has been appealing to the Right-wing voter base. How and…and…will that make a difference in the way that people vote given how close the challenge is?”

Once again avoiding the topic of the effects of Palestinian terrorism on Israeli public opinion and the tricky question of how a two-state solution could come about under Palestinian leadership split between Fatah and Hamas, Bateman promoted PLO messaging on the topic of ‘settlements’.

Bateman: “Well the Israeli public has shifted to the Right over the decades, particularly since the Left in Israel saw its last high-water mark in the 1990s in the Oslo peace accords – the peace process with the Palestinians – which has very much been frozen and in many ways begun to fall apart since then. Particularly the Israeli youth are…many of them vehement supporters of the Right wing and Mr Netanyahu. And I think even during this campaign we have seen him tack further to the Right and in the closing days of the campaign he said that he would phase the annexation of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank, so extending Israeli sovereignty formally over those settlements which have grown in number since he was last elected into office. They’re illegal under international law although Israel disputes this but fundamentally they are seen by the Palestinians as the single biggest obstacle to them establishing a future state. And so what we have seen in this election, I think, with that further appeal to the Right wing is the prospect of the internationally held formula – a two-state solution with Israel and the Palestinians – really moved even further to the margins.”

In addition to Bateman’s promotion of the BBC’s standard partial mantra on ‘international law’ we see that he also promotes the inaccurate claim that the number of what the BBC chooses to call ‘settlements’ has “grown” since Netanyahu was “last elected into office” – i.e. since the previous election in March 2015.

In June 2017 the BBC itself reported that work had begun on what it described as “the first new Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank for more than 20 years”. That community – Amichai – will house former residents of Amona which was evacuated in February 2017. No additional new communities have been built by the Israeli government in the past four years and proposals to legalise outposts built without government consent have not progressed. It is therefore unclear on what evidence Bateman bases his assertion that “settlements…have grown in number” since March 2015.

The item continued:

Presenter: “And I mean we…we talk about Mr Netanyahu of course facing a tough challenge but he’s also, you know, facing…ehm…he’s…he could be removed from office under criminal indictments. Mr Netanyahu still faces charges of corruption. How is that affecting, you know, his campaign and how’s that affecting the support for him?”

Bateman: “Well among his most loyal supporters, I mean they’re…they’re…they’re fiercely loyal of [sic] him. They know about the allegations – some might even believe them – but they really don’t care.”

Presenter: “Hmm.”

Only at that point in the item did listeners hear an accurate portrayal of “what will happen next” in relation to the repeatedly referenced legal cases involving Netanyahu but no information was provided concerning Israeli law in such a situation.

Bateman: “I think it possibly has had some effect and it has allowed Benny Gantz to pick up some votes from the Right wing although most of the votes he has taken seem to be coming from the Left. As for what will happen next, well we’re due at some point later this year – the Israeli attorney general – to give Mr Netanyahu a hearing and then those charges could be formally laid against him so you will then have a sitting prime minister with a formal indictment against him which would be a rare or unprecedented situation in Israeli politics and what may happen over the coming days, if he wins the election he has to put together a coalition government. Perhaps there will be a price to membership of the coalition in that parties and their leaders will have to say that they would support him through that process and not resign from government which would then precipitate a collapse of the government and then potentially another general election.”

Once again we see that the profuse amount of BBC coverage of Israeli affairs and the permanent presence of BBC staff in Jerusalem does not preclude shoddy and inaccurate reporting which misleads audiences around the world.  

Related Articles:

Another Israeli election, another BBC claim of a ‘shift to the right’

BBC News coverage of terrorism in Israel – March 2019

The Israel Security Agency’s report on terror attacks (Hebrew) during March 2019 shows that throughout the month a total of 308 incidents took place: 110 in Judea & Samaria, 15 in Jerusalem and 181 in the Gaza Strip sector.

In Judea & Samaria and Jerusalem the agency recorded 97 attacks with petrol bombs, sixteen attacks using improvised explosive devices (IEDs), two stabbing attacks, one grenade attack, five shooting attacks, one vehicular attack and two arson attacks.

Incidents recorded in the Gaza Strip sector included 64 attacks with petrol bombs, 45 pipe bomb attacks, 17 attacks using IEDs, five shooting attacks, two grenade attacks and five attacks using improvised grenades as well as forty-one incidents of rocket launches and one mortar attack.

Throughout March two people were murdered – one civilian and one member of the security forces – and seventeen people (including 11 civilians) were wounded in terror attacks.

The BBC News website belatedly covered the terror attacks at two locations in Samaria on March 17th in which Staff Sergeant Gal Keidan and Rabbi Achiad Ettinger were murdered.

Rocket attacks on Tel Aviv on March 14th received belated coverage and the rocket attack on Moshav Mishmeret on March 25th in which 7 civilians were injured was also reported, as were additional attacks later in the day and others on March 31st. Several other rocket and mortar attacks throughout the month went unreported.

A vehicular attack in the Binyamin district on March 4th in which two members of the security forces were injured did not receive any BBC coverage and neither did a shooting incident in which a 7 year-old boy was injured in Beit El on March 25th.  BBC audiences saw no reporting on the stabbing of two prison guards by Hamas prisoners on March 24th or a petrol bomb attack on passengers in a car travelling near Elon Moreh on March 21st.

In all the BBC can be said to have covered 36 of the 308 incidents which took place during March while also making vague references to some Israeli reports of IED attacks along the border with the Gaza Strip.

Since the beginning of the year the BBC News website has reported 5.9% of the Palestinian terror attacks that have taken place (including half of the incidents of rocket fire) and 66% of the total fatalities.

Related Articles:

BBC News coverage of terrorism in Israel – February 2019

BBC News reports rocket attack on TA fifteen hours later

BBC News reports fatal terror attacks over 27 hours later

Improved BBC News website reporting on Sharon rocket attack

BBC unquestioningly amplifies unsubstantiated Hamas claims

Reviewing BBC News website pre-election coverage

An overview of the BBC News website’s coverage of the Israeli elections up until the commencement of polling on the morning of Tuesday, April 9th 2019 shows some unsurprising trends. 

The following articles have appeared on the BBC News website since the election was announced in late 2018.

Israel sets date for elections 24/12/18 discussed here

Netanyahu and the allegations of corruption Tom Bateman 20/2/19 discussed here

Israel elections: Netanyahu challengers Gantz and Lapid join forces 21/2/19

Benjamin Netanyahu: Israel PM faces corruption charges 28/2/19 discussed here

Netanyahu charges: Is Israel PM in more trouble now than ever before? Yolande Knell 1/3/19 discussed here

Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot wades into Netanyahu row over Israeli Arabs 11/3/19 discussed here

Israel elections: Court bans far-right candidate Ben-Ari 18/3/19 discussed here

Israel elections: ‘Fascism’ perfume ad sparks online debate 19/3/19

Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu: Commando turned PM first published in 2013, updated 28/3/19

Benny Gantz: The Israeli ex-military chief challenging Netanyahu 5/4/19 discussed here

Israel election: Who are the key candidates? BBC Monitoring 6/4/19

Israel PM vows to annex West Bank settlements if re-elected 7/4/19

Israel’s election: Five things to know Yolande Knell 8/4/19

How far will Israel shift to the right? Tom Bateman 8/4/19 discussed here

Israel election: PM Netanyahu seeks record fifth term 9/4/19

As has been the case in previous years, the vast majority of the contending lists were totally ignored in BBC coverage. Most of the BBC’s attention was once again focused on the right of the political map with the exception of the Blue and White Party.

The contenders considered by the BBC to be “key candidates” were Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud), Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid (Blue and White), Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked (New Right), Avi Gabbay (Labour) and Moshe Feiglin (Zehut). BBC audiences only saw explanations of the platforms of the five parties represented by those seven people.

Other parties predicted to win at least as many seats as Labour and Zehut, such as United Torah Judaism, Meretz or Shas, received no BBC coverage at all.  Additional parties such as Hadash-Taal, Kulanu and Raam-Balad received only superficial mentions throughout the three months of reporting.

While audiences saw extensive coverage of the legal cases involving Netanyahu, the topic of what concerns the Israeli voter was yet again completely ignored in BBC coverage.

Related Articles:

Reviewing the BBC’s record of reporting on Israeli elections

 

Another Israeli election, another BBC claim of a ‘shift to the right’

On April 8th a filmed report by the BBC Jerusalem bureau’s Tom Bateman was posted on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page under the headline “How far will Israel shift to the right?”.

The accompanying synopsis tells BBC audiences that:

“Israelis go to the polls on Tuesday to choose a new government.

It has come down to a race between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Benny Gantz, a former military chief of staff.

Mr Netanyahu has faced accusations that he fostered racism in the campaign, after he oversaw the creation of an electoral alliance involving a party that calls for the expulsion of most Arabs from Israel.

Our Middle East Correspondent Tom Bateman reports, starting in the divided city of Hebron, in the occupied West Bank.

Within the city of about 200,000 Palestinians, a few hundred Jews live in settlements that are considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.”

Like that synopsis, the report itself – introduced as “Israel’s election and the far right” – made no effort to explain to BBC audiences that Jewish residents of Hebron live there under the terms of a twenty-two year old internationally supervised agreement between Israel and the PLO under which the then Israeli prime minister – one Binyamin Netanyahu – agreed to redeploy Israeli forces from 80% of the city and hand control over to the Palestinian Authority, thus making the city “divided” with Palestinian consent.

Lacking that essential background information, the view audiences got from Bateman’s report was inevitably distorted. [emphasis in bold added, emphasis in italics in the original]

“Last month, settlers celebrated the Jewish holiday of Purim in the divided city of Hebron, in the occupied West Bank. Several hundred of Israel’s most ideologically driven settlers live here, guarded by soldiers, in the city of 200,000 Palestinians.”

Bateman: “I mean on one level it’s just a party, it’s people dressing up and having a good time. But like so many things here, it just takes on a different meaning because this is so contested, this is such a tense place, it becomes about an expression of identity by people who feel that they under siege. For the Palestinians it feels like a complete provocation.”

Having heard from a man in a van that “again and again, every generation, there are nations that are trying to destroy the Jews”, Bateman went on to opine on “religious resolve (whatever that may be) and nationalism”.

Bateman: “That explains why religious resolve and nationalism are so much on display here. Those things are a powerful part of Israeli politics. And in this election, the extremes have been courted by the Israeli prime minister. An anti-Arab party called Jewish Power. They didn’t want to talk to us.”

Having tried to talk to a man in the street, Bateman went on:

Bateman: “His party wants to annex the occupied West Bank and also expel what it calls ‘enemy Arabs’ from Israel. Some of the Israelis dress up as Palestinians. So this lady here is wearing a Palestinian [sic] head scarf and carrying a plastic AK-47.”

Viewers were then told that:

“Benjamin Netanyahu wants to be elected for a fifth term. He faces corruption claims and a serious challenger: former military chief Benny Gantz. Mr Gantz is leading a political alliance in the centre ground. It accuses Mr Netanyahu of dividing Israelis and says he hasn’t been tough enough on security.”

Bateman then refocused audience attentions on Hebron, again failing to provide relevant context such as the consequences of Palestinian terrorism on freedom of movement for both Palestinians and Israelis.

Bateman: “Virtually all of the Palestinians are staying indoors while the parade goes on. Palestinian movement is heavily controlled in this part of the city, especially around the parade.”

Woman: “I feel like their lives are much more relaxed than ours. Apart from that, you can see they can do what they like. They have total freedom in the area and in all the areas that are shut down like this one. We feel sad.”

Bateman: “So what’s happened to Israel’s left wing? Well we found some of them in the market in Tel Aviv. […] I followed around the Labour Party leader Avi Gabbay. They can drum up a bit of a crowd in the market here. But the problem for the Labour Party leader is he could be looking at Labour’s worst poll ratings in this country’s history.”

Making no effort whatsoever to give viewers a real explanation of why that is the case, Bateman went on to push the core agenda behind his report.

Bateman: “After a decade in office, Benjamin Netanyahu has changed the conversation in Israel. For example the two-state solution with the Palestinians is off the agenda for either party that can win.”

In other words, Bateman would have BBC audiences believe that disillusion among Israeli voters and politicians alike with the belief that a two-state solution can be achieved is entirely down to Netanyahu having “changed the conversation” since 2009 and has nothing whatsoever to do with years of Palestinian terror attacks against Israeli citizens, Palestinian Authority glorification and rewarding of terror, Palestinian refusal to accept numerous previous offers of precisely such a solution or the Hamas-Fatah split which for over a decade has made any agreement “with the Palestinians” impossible.

Following a conversation with Ayelet Shaked of the ‘New Right’ in which she apparently did not succeed in persuading Bateman that Israeli democracy is sufficiently robust to include a broad range of opinions across the political spectrum, he continued with promotion of unsupported claims from unidentified commentators.

Bateman: “Israel has been taking a look at itself in this election. Some see the move rightwards over the last decade as decisive now. They see ideas that were once on the margins a few decades ago becoming more and more mainstream. Like the possibility of Israel annexing parts of the occupied West Bank.”

Bateman has apparently never heard of the ‘Alon Plan’ proposal of annexation of parts of Judea & Samaria devised by a Labour movement leader shortly after the Six Day War.

Finally, BBC audiences learned that even if Netanyahu does not win this election and even if a centrist/left coalition forms the next government, Israel has – according to the BBC – nevertheless shifted to the right for one reason alone.

Bateman: “Regardless of the result, there has been a marked shift to the right during Benjamin Netanyahu’s time in office.”

Of course this is by no means the first time that the BBC has used coverage of an election in Israel to promote the notion of a lurch to the right. Once again the lack of understanding by BBC reporters of the inapplicability of their own Eurocentric interpretations of terms such as Left and Right to the Israeli political scene is in evidence. But this time Bateman has managed to avoid any reference to Palestinian actions and choices which have made many Israelis more sceptical of their supposed peace partner’s commitment to the process while squarely placing the blame on the shoulders of the Israeli prime minister.  

Related Articles:

Not Right: why did the BBC get the Israeli elections so wrong?

Reviewing the BBC’s record of reporting on Israeli elections

 

Unchallenged pro-Hamas propaganda on BBC WS ‘Newshour’

The March 30th afternoon edition of the BBC World Service radio programme ‘Newshour’ was titled “Gaza marks Israel march anniversary”. Illustrated with an image captioned “The protesters demanded that Palestinian refugees be given the right of return”, its synopsis read:

“Thousands of Palestinians are gathering in the Gaza Strip to mark the anniversary of the start of protests along the boundary fence with Israel.”

Presenter Lyse Doucet began (from 00:25 here) by framing the story in the fashion seen throughout the past twelve months. [emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added]

Doucet: “We start today’s programme in Gaza and the Great March of Return, as it’s called. Today marks one year of weekly protests at Gaza’s border fence with Israel. And Palestinian protesters are at the boundary again, some burning tyres, some using slingshots to hurl stones. And on the other side Israeli troops are massed again, bolstered by tanks and snipers. Nearly 200 Palestinians have been killed in the past year as well as an Israeli soldier. The protests are meant to highlight the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their ancestral homes in what is now Israel. But Israel accuses Hamas of using Gazans as human shields to terrorise Israeli civilians. The anniversary comes in the midst of growing tension between Israel and Hamas, the militant group ruling this sliver of land along the Mediterranean.”

As we see, the BBC’s chief international correspondent managed to tick nearly all the BBC’s framing boxes in her introduction. That framing includes:

  • Erasing the fact that around 80% of those killed during the violent rioting at the border have been shown to be affiliated with various terror organisations – primarily Hamas.
  • Erasing or downplaying the violent nature of the events by failing to provide audiences with a representative view of the number of attacks using firebombs, IEDs, grenades and guns, the number of border infiltrations and the number of rockets and mortars launched throughout the past year. As of March 29th 2019, BBC audiences had heard nothing whatsoever about the use of airborne explosive devices or the activities of Hamas’ so-called ‘night confusion/disturbance units’.
  • Erasing or downplaying the violent nature of the events by uniformly describing them as ‘protests’, ‘demonstrations’ or ‘rallies’.
  • Failing to provide adequate context concerning the stated aims of the events including ‘right of return’ and lifting of counter-terrorism measures.
  • Erasing or downplaying Hamas’ role in initiating, facilitating, organising, financing, executing and controlling the events and euphemising terrorists as ‘militants’.
  • Citing casualty figures provided by “health officials” without clarifying that they are part of the same terror group that organises the violent rioting.

Doucet then brought in Tom Bateman (on a bad line) in the Gaza Strip who, after he had described seeing around a thousand people “close to the fence” who were throwing rocks from slingshots and burning tyres, went on to note the use of tear gas and live ammunition by Israeli forces, claiming to have been “told” of the death of one person and 40 others injured. Doucet then reinforced the framing:

Doucet: “So it’s not just a protest but it’s a risky protest.”

Having wound up her conversation with Bateman, Doucet brought in Yolande Knell who was situated on the other side of the fence near Kibbutz Nahal Oz. Despite that rare visit by a BBC correspondent to one of the Israeli communities which have been severely affected by the ‘Great Return March’ violence throughout the past year (the last one was in July 2018), BBC World Service radio audiences once again did not hear a word from any of its residents.

Informed listeners – obviously not the majority – would have noticed Knell’s allusion to Hamas’ ability to control the level of violence according to its own interests and the fact that she is aware of what she termed “night time protests” – about which BBC audiences had previously heard nothing at all.

Knell: “…Hamas officials in Gaza indicating…that they would put pressure on the protesters to turn up but then to stay calm and not to go so close to the fence as they have done previously.”

Knell: “…we know what its [Israel’s] demands would be – among them to stop the night-time protests that have taken place along the fence as well and also the incendiary balloons that have caused so much damage. Balloons and kites sent into Israel.”

Doucet then chose to uncritically amplify the recent UNHRC report while once again concealing the fact that around 80% of those killed during the ‘Great Return March’ rioting have been shown to have links to terror organisations – primarily Hamas.

Doucet: “And as you know, Yolande, the UN has said…has accused Israel of directly targeting civilians using excessive force. What kind of forces are lined along the border today?”

Following a rambling response from Knell, Doucet moved on.

07:17 Doucet: “So what’s it like to live in Gaza in the midst of this tension and deepening economic hardship for its 2 million residents? The UN often expresses alarm over a territory mired in grinding poverty and unemployment without access to even the basics of life: adequate health, education, water and electricity. Much of Gazan anger is directed at Israel but there were also protests against Hamas this month – rare protests – and they were forcibly suppressed. I’ve been speaking to one Gaza resident, Dr Mosheer Amer who is the professor of discourse analysis and linguistics at the Islamic University of Gaza.”

Presuming that before inviting him onto the show, the programme’s producers had checked out the record of the professor from a university co-founded by Hamas leaders whose political stance is plainly evident in articles and on social media, it is obvious that they had no problem with the fact that listeners were presented with a totally one-sided, context-free near monologue over the next five minutes.

07:53 Amer: “There is I think quite a strong resolve and determination to continue on the Great Return marches because I think that there is a large position among Palestinian civil society that this is effective in raising awareness internationally of the predicament that they’re facing over the past 12 years especially in Gaza. But there is also a feeling of, you know, sadness over the loss of civilian lives.”

Doucet: “What is life like? Are you – if I can ask – are you a father? You have children?”

Amer: “Yes I am a father of children, 2 kids, and it’s a difficult life. I’m a university professor so I think my condition is a little better than the other ones but I still get close to 30% of my salary. That is barely the minimum for, you know, having a good quality of life. But overall the situation is really difficult. We’re talking about restrictions on travel and movement in and out of Gaza. We have the electricity between 4 to 6 hours a day which is really appalling. I mean you cannot imagine that it is only on 4 to 6 hours electricity per day. And then you have to adjust all your life to this condition. And this is not just a month or two or three months: it’s been going on for quite some time. And then we have the overall economic conditions and the health conditions in Gaza hospitals. So in all aspects of life the situation is really dire and really unbearable and that’s why you see thousands – hundreds of thousands [sic] – of Palestinians flocking to the eastern side of Gaza to raise their voice, to say that enough is enough and we can no longer stay in, you know, this kind of a slow death rhythm of life.”

None of the ‘Great Return March’ events have seen more than 50,000 participants (and most have seen significantly fewer) but Doucet made no effort to correct Amer’s claim of “hundreds of thousands”. Neither did she bother to clarify to listeners that Gaza’s perennial electricity crisis and the standard of its healthcare have nothing to do with Israel.

Doucet: “What do your young students tell you? What sense do you get of them and how they think about their future?”

Amer: “Well there’s a sense, a large sense of desperation actually because I mean I’m teaching university students majoring in English and in media and journalism and there’s a very strong sense of despair because you know there is a high unemployment rate – so over like 60% among the Gaza population – so you can’t expect a student to study 4 years and then he or she ends in, you know, not working. What am I studying for? There is no goal. I mean what kind of job I’m going to find after I work. There is no prospect for a better future in Gaza. And this is because of, again, the situation that the Gaza population have found themselves in because of this 12-year siege on Gaza and the repeated wars and this kind of abnormal state of life that we’re living here in Gaza.”

According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics the general unemployment rate in the Gaza Strip in 2018 was 52% – not “over like 60%”. Doucet made no effort to challenge that inaccuracy or the false claim of a “siege” on the Gaza Strip.

Doucet: “And this…recently there were I think quite unprecedented protests against Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip. Is this anger also rising?”

Amer: “I think this is anger rising at everybody, including the Palestinian Hamas and Fatah and everyone. And there is quite a strong division amongst the Palestinians and there is sort of a trading of finger-pointing at Hamas and at PA’s President Abbas. But I think we have to put this in the context of the severe life conditions that the Gazans find themselves in because of the punitive measures that [are] imposed by the PA and also because of certain policies, economic policies, that the Hamas government here has imposed which aggravated in a sense the kind of suffering that people are facing. But the root cause actually behind all of this is the Israeli siege of Gaza. The policies and the measures adopted by the Israelis to keep life to a bare minimum. Gaza cannot live, it cannot die. And this is what we see that this kind of a slow death. Life is sucked out of Gaza and we have people really living a very difficult life.”

Again failing to challenge Amer’s promotion of the “siege” falsehood and plainly uninterested in hearing more about “economic policies that the Hamas government here has imposed”, Doucet went on:

Doucet: “You…do your own children or children of friends of yours – when I say children, even teenagers – do they go to the protests today?”

Amer: “My kids are like 5 year-olds, you know, and 4 year-old so they’re very…they’re very little. You know, and I wouldn’t take them to that protest at the moment. But I think that my friends’ families, their children have gone; they’re a little bit older. When we think about the Great Return March it’s sort of includes all peoples from all walks of life and also from all sort of socio-economic backgrounds and also from all ages, men, women and young children and adults and so on. So it’s not only restricted to what we see in the images; these sort of 18, 19 years old teenagers.”

Having failed to explain the context to Israel’s security measures that include a partial blockade on the Gaza Strip – and without even one mention of Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians – Doucet closed that five minutes of unchallenged propaganda there, leaving BBC World Service audiences even worse informed than before.   

Related Articles:

BBC Radio 4 portrayal of the ‘Great Return March’ anniversary – part one

BBC Radio 4 portrayal of the ‘Great Return March’ anniversary – part two

BBC News sticks to year-old formula of reporting on ‘Great Return March’

 

 

 

 

Critics slam pro-BDS article from BBC quoted NGO writer

Those of us who follow the BBC are more than familiar with the corporation’s long-standing practice of promoting the views of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) without disclosing their political agenda (let alone funding) in breach of its own editorial guidelines.

Promoted and quoted: the BBC’s preferred NGO contributors in 2018

When the New York Times magazine recently published a very long Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) promoting essay by Nathan Thrall of the International Crisis Group (ICG), critics not only took issue with its content but also with the fact that readers were not informed of the relevant background to the writer’s organisation.

“Thrall, who the Times presents as a disinterested expert, serves as director of the Arab-Israeli Project at the International Crisis Group, or ICG, a left-leaning advocacy organization that has received around $4 million from the Qatari government in the just the last year. Qatar’s donations represent around 6 percent of ICG’s total budget. Qatar is not mentioned in Thrall’s 11,500-word piece.

ICG also has raised $1 million in the past several years from the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, a prolific and open funder of the BDS movement in the United States.

Another significant portion of ICG’s funding—more than $5 million in the last three years—comes from the Open Society Foundations, run by liberal billionaire George Soros. Open Society funds dozens of Palestinian organizations that are prominent members of the BDS movement.

ICG’s president is former Obama administration official Robert Malley, another Israel critic who was fired from President Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential election team after he met with the Hamas terror organization. He joined the Obama administration in 2014.”

BBC correspondents based (like Thrall) in Jerusalem have in the past promoted Thrall’s analysis and  in June 2013 the BBC told its audiences that:

“A recent report by the International Crisis Group (ICG) on the impact of international sanctions on Iran found no indication that the sanctions had affected Iran’s regional role.

And the report’s principal author says there is no evidence of any financial support provided to Hezbollah. “There isn’t a single line in the budget that confirms any aid or financial support to Hezbollah”, Ali Vaez contends.” [emphasis added]

Over the years the mutually beneficial relationship between the traditional media and NGOs has flourished with news consumers finding that more and more of their news comes or is sourced from agenda-driven organisations which make no claim to provide unbiased information and are not committed to journalistic standards. 

When political agendas and journalism meet, questions obviously arise concerning accuracy, impartiality and reliability. But, as this latest New York Times example shows, some of the world’s most prominent media organisations – including the BBC – continue to fail to provide consumers of their content with crucial information concerning the agenda and funding behind the voices they choose to quote and promote.

The fact that the BBC has existing editorial guidelines which would tackle precisely that issue but are serially ignored of course raises considerable concern.  

Related Articles:

Nathan Thrall’s Propaganda Welcomed at the New York Times (CAMERA)

 

 

 

 

BBC Radio 4 portrayal of the ‘Great Return March’ anniversary – part two

As documented in part one of this post, listeners to the BBC’s domestic station Radio 4 had been prepared in advance for what the corporation apparently believed was going to be a major news event on Saturday, March 30th with a ‘Today’ programme report from Gaza the previous day by the BBC Jerusalem bureau’s Tom Bateman.

Listeners to the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘PM’ on March 28th had also heard Bateman reporting from the Gaza Strip and that item (from 46:20 here) included the following:

[emphasis in bold added, emphasis in italics in the original]

Bateman: “And inside Gaza itself, a sense of anticipation about the coming protests that will take place on Saturday marking a year since these weekly protests have taken place at the perimeter fence.”

Thus BBC audiences once again got a dose of the corporation’s framing of the ‘Great Return March’ agitprop as “protests” rather than events organised, facilitated and executed by a coalition of terror organisations that have regularly included violent rioting, serious attacks and infiltrations into Israeli territory.

The March 30th edition of BBC Radio 4’s 1 p.m. news bulletin included an item introduced by newsreader Neil Sleat (from 07:46 here) thus:

Sleat: “Thousands of Palestinian protesters have massed on the boundary between Gaza and Israel to mark a year since the start of weekly demonstrations there. Palestinians have been throwing stones and Israeli forces using tear gas to stop them approaching the border fence. Our correspondent Yolande Knell is there.”

Knell: “Across a wind-swept field here lies a wire fence and beyond it there’s a large crowd at one of the Gaza protest sites gathered around a Palestinian flag.  Israeli soldiers have been firing volleys of tear gas to drive demonstrators back. A military spokesman says Palestinians have been throwing stones and petrol bombs and there have been some attempts to breach the fence. Israel says it only opens fire to stop people crossing into its territory and protect its citizens. This is a serious test for the efforts of Egyptian negotiators who’ve been trying to broker calm between Israel and Hamas after an escalation in tensions earlier this week when Palestinian militants fired rockets at Israel and Israel’s air force struck dozens of sites in Gaza. Already this anniversary was due at a sensitive time: just over a week before an Israeli election and after recent economic unrest in Gaza which has put pressure on Hamas.”

In other words, even when the BBC knows that participants have been throwing petrol bombs and trying to infiltrate Israeli territory, it still portrays the events as “demonstrations” and those participants as “protesters”.

The same was the case when part of that report from the BBC Jerusalem bureau’s Yolande Knell was recycled in a later news bulletin aired during the ‘PM’ programme (from 02:18 here):

Newsreader: “Tens of thousands of Palestinians are demonstrating along the boundary fence between Gaza and Israel to mark the first anniversary of weekly protests there. Three people are reported to have been killed, one before the start of the mass rally. Over the past year nearly 200 Palestinians have been shot dead by Israeli troops while one Israeli soldier has died. Yolande Knell reports from southern Israel.”

Knell: “Israeli soldiers have been firing volleys of tear gas to drive demonstrators back. A military spokesman says Palestinians have been throwing stones and petrol bombs and there have been some attempts to breach the fence. Israel says it only opens fire to stop people crossing into its territory and protect its citizens. This is a serious test for the efforts of Egyptian negotiators who’ve been trying to broker calm between Israel and Hamas after an escalation in tensions earlier this week when Palestinian militants fired rockets at Israel and Israel’s air force struck dozens of sites in Gaza.”

Listeners to BBC Radio 4’s ‘Six O’Clock News’ on March 30th heard the newsreader give the following headline at the top of the programme.

“Palestinian health officials say at least two demonstrators have died in clashes with Israeli forces on the anniversary of weekly protests on the Gaza border.”

The item itself (from 05:34 here) was presented as follows, with no mention of the fact that “health officials in Gaza” actually means the terror group Hamas.

“Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been taking part in protests along the boundary between the Gaza Strip and Israel. They’ve been throwing stones and petrol bombs and attempting to breach the perimeter fence. Israeli forces have used live ammunition and tear gas. Health officials in Gaza say three protesters have been killed. The demonstrations are marking the first anniversary of weekly protests at the border. From Gaza our Middle East correspondent Tom Bateman has sent this report.”

Bateman: “That’s live fire as the Israeli snipers are aiming towards a group of people that just got right up at the fence. Some appear to be trying to climb it. At the biggest protest site east of Gaza City, Palestinians turned up in their thousands. Most gathered near the smoothie vans and fruit sellers hundreds of meters from the fence. But others got close to it, burning tyres and throwing rocks and petrol bombs. From the other side Israeli troops responded with tear gas, rubber bullets and live ammunition. One of the demonstrators, Bahaa Abu Shamala, said Palestinians were highlighting their historical dispossession and calling for an end to the blockade which Israel says it imposes for security reasons.”

Abu Shamala: “We are here in Gaza. We are oppressed people. We want to feed our children. We want to get rid of this huge trauma that we suffered from the siege that Israel imposed against us for more than 12 years.”

Israel of course does not impose a ‘siege’ on the Gaza Strip at all but Bateman had nothing to say about his interviewee’s promotion of Hamas favoured terminology and made no effort to inform listeners of the years of Hamas terror which have made counter-terrorism measures including the blockade necessary.

Once again failing to inform listeners that some 80% of those killed at ‘Great Return March’ events in the past year have been shown to have links to terror groups, Bateman went on:

Bateman: “In the past year nearly 200 Palestinians have been shot dead by Israeli troops at the fence. An Israeli soldier was killed by a Palestinian sniper last summer. The Israeli army spokesman is Jonathan Conricus.”

Lt. Col. Conricus: “This has after all been a year of thousands of rioters trying to breach into Israel using different types of violence. We’ve had grenades, IEDs, Molotov cocktails. We’ve even had live fire.”

In other words, the only mention of the violent nature of the year-long events heard by Radio 4 listeners throughout eleven hours of broadcasting came from an Israeli official.  

Bateman: “This week’s build-up to the first anniversary saw a significant military flare-up between Israel and Hamas which largely controls the protests in Gaza. Israel is 10 days away from a general election in which security is a major issue. There have been intensive efforts brokered by Egypt to prevent tensions at the boundary slipping out of control. It seems to have largely succeeded for now, despite today’s casualties.”

Although the BBC sent Tom Bateman to the Gaza Strip and Yolande Knell to southern Israel to cover the March 30th events, audiences once again did not hear a word from or about the residents of Israeli communities close to the border fence who have been severely affected by the ‘Great Return March’ violence throughout the past year. Neither were listeners informed that Hamas had ordered schools closed and a general strike on March 30th in order to boost participation in the event.

One year on, the BBC’s across the board and inflexible editorial approach to this story continues to promote the monochrome framing which – while flouting the corporation’s public purpose obligations – denies audiences vital context and information.

Related Articles:

BBC Radio 4 portrayal of the ‘Great Return March’ anniversary – part one

BBC News sticks to year-old formula of reporting on ‘Great Return March’

More context-free BBC reporting on Gaza health services

 

 

 

 

 

BBC News sticks to year-old formula of reporting on ‘Great Return March’

The BBC News website’s March 30th report on the day’s incidents at the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip adhered to the formula seen in coverage of similar events throughout the past year.

Headlined “Gaza protests: Thousands mark ‘Great Return’ anniversary” the BBC’s framing of the story was evident in the use of the words ‘demonstrated’, ‘demonstrators’, ‘demonstrations’, ‘protests’, ‘protesters’ and ‘protest’ no fewer than nineteen times in the 564-word report’s text, headline, sub-headings, links and photo captions. A BBC News Tweet promoting the article also used the term ‘rallies’.

The article opened: [emphasis added]

“Tens of thousands of Palestinians have demonstrated in Gaza to mark the anniversary of the start of weekly protests on the boundary with Israel.

Demonstrators threw stones and burned tyres, with Israeli troops using tear-gas and live rounds in response.”

Readers had to go down to paragraph nine to discover that participants threw more than “stones”.

“The IDF said explosive devices had been thrown over the border fence and Israeli forces had responded with “riot dispersal means” and live bullets.”

As usual the BBC quoted “health officials “without bothering to inform readers that they belong to the same terror organisation that organised the event.

“Three protesters died in the clashes, Palestinian officials say, with another killed earlier on Saturday.”

“Three Palestinian protesters, all teenage boys, have been killed and more than 300 have been wounded, Palestinian health officials say.

The health officials say another man was shot dead by Israeli troops close to the fence overnight.”

Readers were not told that the person “killed earlier on Saturday” had, as reported by the Times of Israel, been taking part in rioting at the border at the time.

“Early Saturday, Mohammed Saad, 21, was killed by Israeli army fire east of Gaza City near the perimeter fence, Gaza’s Hamas-run Health Ministry said, adding he was hit by shrapnel in the head.

A Gaza hospital worker, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media, said Saad was a member of the so-called “night disturbance unit.” Such groups routinely burn tires, flash laser lights and detonate explosives near the fence at night to distract soldiers and disturb residents of nearby Israeli communities.”

Neither were BBC audiences informed that the majority of those described as wounded were, according to the quoted “health officials”, affected by tear gas.

As has been the case throughout the past twelve months, the BBC avoided explaining the aim of the Palestinian demand for ‘right of return’ to readers while once again promoting the notion of “ancestral homes” and Palestinian refugees in a location ruled by Palestinians.

“The protests back the declared right of Palestinian refugees to return to ancestral homes in what is now Israel.”

As has repeatedly been the case since late February, the BBC uncritically amplified claims made in a UNHRC report.

“At least 189 Palestinians and one Israeli soldier were killed between March and December 2018, the UN says.

A UN inquiry says Israeli soldiers may have committed war crimes during the protest marches – a charge Israel rejects.”

“A commission of inquiry was set up by the UN Human Rights Council.

Thirty-five of the 189 Palestinian fatalities were children, three were clearly marked paramedics and two were clearly marked journalists, the commission found.

The inquiry found reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers had shot at children, medics and journalists, even though they were clearly recognisable as such.

Four Israeli soldiers were injured at the demonstrations. One Israeli soldier was killed on a protest day but outside the protest sites, the commission said.

Unless undertaken lawfully in self-defence, intentionally shooting a civilian not directly participating in hostilities is a war crime.”

While failing to adequately clarify Hamas’ role in initiating, organising, funding and executing the ‘Great Return March’ events, the BBC did make a brief opaque reference to the terror group’s ability to control the level of violence according to its interests.

“Hamas had said it would try to keep the crowds a safe distance from the fence, with Egyptian and UN mediators trying to prevent further escalation.

The clashes were limited in scope and fears of a large number of deaths have not materialised. The protests quietened in the evening.”

BBC audiences were not informed that Hamas had ordered schools closed and a general strike on March 30th in order to boost participation in the event.

Hamas was misleadingly portrayed in this report as being designated only by Israel.

“The Israeli government designates Hamas a terrorist group which it says has been seeking to use the protests as a cover to cross into its territory and carry out attacks.”

The violent coup in which Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in 2007 was erased from audience view.

“This day of protests is a serious test of the fragile calm between Israel and Hamas, the Islamist group that runs the Palestinian-controlled Gaza Strip, says the BBC’s Yolande Knell in Jerusalem.”

The terror group’s operatives were, as usual, portrayed by the BBC as “militants”.

“They came after a tense week in which Palestinian militants fired rockets at Israel and Israel’s air force struck dozens of sites in Gaza.”

One year on, the BBC’s reporting on this story has not improved at all and it continues to promote the same jaded themes and euphemisms while denying audiences vital context. A year ago the organisers of this agitprop stated that its aim is to create photo-ops which – in their words – “the whole world and media outlets would watch” and the BBC has played its part in ensuring that would be the case.

Related Articles:

Mapping changes in BBC reporting of Palestinian demand for ‘right of return’

BBC News website unquestioningly amplifies UNHRC’s report

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More context-free BBC reporting on Gaza health services

Since late last July BBC audiences have seen and heard numerous reports on the topic of health services in the Gaza Strip that have focused on portraying pressures on the system. For example:

November 2018, Tom Bateman:

“This is a conflict that has changed even more lives this year. Thousands of Palestinians in Gaza have suffered bullet wounds during protests at the perimeter fence with Israel. It has put intense pressure on Gaza’s hospitals.”

January 2019, Mishal Husain:

Mohammed Abu Mughalseeb of Medecins Sans Frontiers:

“From my experience I think the…you know, from some friends and colleagues in United Kingdom and in France and United States, if they had the same number of injuries received in the emergency department the health system would collapse. No other places in the world can cope with this, with this huge number of injuries.”

On March 29th a report by Tom Bateman that was filmed at a MSF-run rehabilitation centre in the Gaza Strip which Bateman had previously visited last summer appeared on the BBC News website’s Middle East page under the title “Gaza’s disability crisis”.

“Saturday 30 March marks a year since Palestinians began protesting at Gaza’s perimeter fence with Israel.

As the anniversary looms, tensions and military activity on the boundary have been ratcheting up.

According to UN-published figures, in the last year more than 7,000 Palestinians have been shot by the Israeli military, and more than 190 killed.

Last summer, an Israeli soldier was shot dead by a Palestinian gunman.

Israel justifies the use of live ammunition saying it has defended its soldiers and civilians from violent attacks.” [emphasis added]

The report begins:

“These men are in a physical therapy clinic in Gaza.”

Bateman: “Every time you come to one of these clinics, you just get such a feel for how an entire generation has been affected by what’s gone on over the last year. There is a crisis of disability in Gaza now and this clinic where they’re treating people for long-term care, treating bullet woulds, rehabilitation, they still have 200 people coming through their doors every day.” [emphasis added]

With no effort made to clarify to BBC audiences that “what’s gone on over the last year” is the product of decisions made by Hamas and other terrorist groups in the Gaza Strip, the film goes on to showcase familiar messaging from another MSF representative.

Carla Melki: “Actually I will say there is not one of the health systems in the world even in the best, important capital of western parts that will be able to face this amount of injuries. When we get 1,200 gunshot injuries in a few hours any health system would collapse. So on top of it, yes, Gaza’s health system is already pressured. There are not, for example, enough beds for the total population. So obviously the system is not collapsing but it is really under pressure.”

Viewers are then told that:

“Some 7,000 Palestinians were hurt by Israeli bullets in the last year. More than 190 have been killed. Israel says it has acted legitimately to protect its civilians from violent attacks at the border.”

The film closes with a monologue from a person identified as Hashim Abu Maneeh.

Abu Maneeh: “They shot me, they fired an explosive bullet. It broke seven centimetres of my bone. So far I’ve had 11 surgeries, I couldn’t walk for 11 months, couldn’t stand. That can really affect someone.”

Once again we see that while the BBC readily quotes the numbers of Palestinians killed and injured in what it has for an entire year been misrepresenting as “protests”, audiences are yet again denied a view of some of the other statistics necessary for full understanding of this story.

And yet again we see Bateman making no effort to clarify to BBC audiences that the “crisis of disability” he portrays could have been avoided had Hamas (which is of course also in charge of the health system described as “already pressured”) not initiated, encouraged, facilitated and financed this particular terror project dubbed the ‘Great Return March’.

Related Articles:

A context-free ‘Today’ report from the BBC’s Paul Adams in Gaza

BBC radio audiences get whitewashed picture of youth participation in Gaza riots

BBC Gaza ‘documentary’ makes no pretence of impartiality

BBC tries to erase Hamas’ role in ‘Great Return March’ violence

More of the same Gaza framing from a BBC Jerusalem correspondent

‘News at Ten’ continues the BBC’s ‘blockade’ campaign

Former ISM activist medic reappears in BBC Radio 4 ‘Today’ show