BBC criticized... again

Michael Hedges January 26, 2009

British aid agencies decided to mount a campaign to support Palestinians in the wake of Israel’s recent military action. It’s normal to take this kind of appeal to broadcasters who, in turn, would take it to the general public. The BBC will not, at last report, participate.

BBC General Director Mark Thompson declined to allow the broadcast of a film produced by the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) that includes an appeal for financial aid to Palestinians in Gaza. “We concluded,” he said, “that to broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully couched, ran the risk of calling into question the public's confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its coverage of the story as a whole.” Government agencies, aid agencies and newspaper columnists disagreed.

At first other UK broadcasters – ITV, Channel 4 – were inclined to agree with the BBC. Such an appeal breaches journalistic integrity by placing the broadcaster at the center of the story rather than at the periphery as an observer. As critic’s voices clamored, again, for the BBC to relent, ITV and Channel 4, seizing their competitive moment, relented. They will broadcast the DEC appeal sometime Monday.

“It’s a no win situation for the BBC,” said former BBC General Director Greg Dyke who knows something about critical effects.

“The most important thing we can do for the people who are suffering is carrying on reporting it,” said BBC COO Caroline Thomson.  “We've done exemplary work in reporting the suffering of the people of Gaza.”

“If we lose the trust of the audience by appearing...to support one side rather than another, then we will have lost it for the charities themselves as well as everyone else.”

Outside the UK the BBC’s decision and the fury it caused has been, Middle East press excepted, largely ignored. Nobody can imagine CNN International or Radio France Internationale or Deutsche Welle participating in the same. With a global perspective, Mark Thompson made the correct decision to protect brand BBC from the appearance of bias in a particularly sensitive region.

Bias, once demonstrated, is a tough monkey to chew. The BBC’s Jerusalem correspondent Barbara Plett was criticized for pro-Palestinian bias in reporting the evacuation of the dying PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat in 2004. "... when the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound, I started to cry... “, she reported in a live broadcast. A year later BBC head of news Helen Boaden apologized for the “editorial misjudgment.” Plett was reassigned. BBC staff were given sensitivity training.

Bias is the bugbear of journalism. It’s the high-pitch scream accompanying clichés like “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’. The BBC – arguably the most respected global news organization – walks several fine lines each minute of each day. Objectivity always fails to satisfy any issue’s partisans.

One fine line, obscured within the UK, demarks the BBC of “Strictly Come Dancing” and bad jokester Jonathan Ross from the BBC that holds the gold standard for global broadcast journalism. Mark Thompson may have erred in allowing toilet-tooth Ross to remain on the air. But that decision seems to have delighted the BBC’s UK entertainment audience.

Supporting a humanitarian appeal – local to the UK – would well be within the BBC’s public service remit. Appeals for aid to flood victims in southeast England comes to mind. Once beyond the United Kingdom the BBC’s context changes and questions to objectivity should not be given opportunity regardless of delighted partisans.