6,786
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12:
Line 12: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
British Broadcasting Corporation (view source)
Revision as of 10:05, June 18, 2007
, 10:05, June 18, 2007→Bias
==Bias==
==Bias==
The BBC has often been accused of bias against [[United States]] and [[Israel]],<ref>http://www.bbcwatch.co.uk/index.html</ref> and because of these complaints of bias, an internal investigation was conducted on the BBC's coverage of the [[Arab-Israeli conflict]]. However, after the investigation was completed, BBC officials decided to withhold the 20,000-word report of the investigation, compiled in 2004 by senior editorial adviser Malcolm Balen. Steven Sugar, a Jewish critics of the BBC, attempted to get access to the report under the 2000 Freedom of Information Act, but was denied by the [[United Kingdom]]'s High Court. The information commissioner, Richard Thomas, backed the BBC's decision to block access to the report, but the information tribunal ruled on appeal in August, 2006, in favour of Steven Sugar. Still, the BBC argued at the High Court in London that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction over the case, and the High Court ruled in favour of the BBC on April 28, 2007. The BBC maintains that the internal investigation found no deliberate or systematic bias. Conservative MP David Davies commented: "An organisation which is funded partly to scrutinise governments and other institutions in Britain appears to be using tax-payers [sic] money to prevent its customers from finding out how it is operating. That is absolutely indefensible." and called the BBC's actions a "shameful hypocrisy". It has been estimated that the BBC has spent around £200,000 - £300,000 on the case so far.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2044130,00.html</ref><ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=444074&in_page_id=1770</ref><ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2067542,00.html</ref>
The BBC has often been accused of bias against [[United States]] and [[Israel]],<ref>http://www.bbcwatch.co.uk/index.html</ref> and because of these complaints of bias, an internal investigation was conducted on the BBC's coverage of the [[Arab-Israeli conflict]]. However, after the investigation was completed, BBC officials decided to withhold the 20,000-word report of the investigation, compiled in 2004 by senior editorial adviser Malcolm Balen. Steven Sugar, a Jewish critics of the BBC, attempted to get access to the report under the 2000 Freedom of Information Act, but was denied by the [[United Kingdom]]'s High Court. The information commissioner, Richard Thomas, backed the BBC's decision to block access to the report, but the information tribunal ruled on appeal in August, 2006, in favour of Steven Sugar. Still, the BBC argued at the High Court in London that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction over the case, and the High Court ruled in favour of the BBC on April 28, 2007. The BBC maintains that the internal investigation found no deliberate or systematic bias. Conservative MP David Davies commented: "An organisation which is funded partly to scrutinise governments and other institutions in Britain appears to be using tax-payers [sic] money to prevent its customers from finding out how it is operating. That is absolutely indefensible." and called the BBC's actions a "shameful hypocrisy". It has been estimated that the BBC has spent around £200,000 - £300,000 on the case so far.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2044130,00.html</ref><ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=444074&in_page_id=1770</ref><ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2067542,00.html</ref>
During a 2006 internal "impartiality summit", BBC executives said they would happily broadcast an image of a [[Bible]] being thrown away, but would not do the same with a [[Koran]]. At the summit, the BBC's Washington correspondent Justin Webb also accused the executives of being anti-American, saying they treated the nation with scorn and derision and no moral weight.
On June 15, 2007, BBC drew criticism for apologising over calling Jerusalem the capital of Israel.<ref>http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1181813036973&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull</ref>
On June 15, 2007, BBC drew criticism for apologising over calling Jerusalem the capital of Israel.<ref>http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1181813036973&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull</ref>
Details of the BBC's bias were further exposed in an official report<ref>'''Revoir, Paul''', ''BBC comes under fire for institutional Left-wing bias'' [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=462679&in_page_id=1770&ct=5 Daily Mail] june 18, 2007</ref> - in preparation since 2005 - which found that the BBC:
*has an "institutional Left-wing bias"
*promotes anti-Christian sentiment
*promotes anti-American sentiment
*allows schedules to be "hijacked by special interest groups promoting trendy issues"
*over-represents homosexuals
*over-represents ethnic minorities
*fails to reflect the views of the [[British]] public on issues such as [[capital punishment]]
*fails to reflect the broader views of British people
*allows itself to be used by "sinister" campaign groups
*finds it difficult to understand there may be alternative views of the world
Jornalist Paul Dacre, in his January 2007 Hugh Cudlipp Memorial Lecture, said that "the BBC is, in every corpuscle of its corporate body, against the values of conservatism, with a small "c", which just happen to be the values held by millions of Britons." He also accused the BBC of being hostile to the "traditional Right, Britain's past and British values, america, Ulster Unionism, euro-scepticism, capitalism and big business, the countryside, Christianity and family values."
==External Links==
==External Links==