"[W]e find that the BBC is in persistent breach of its duties of fairness, accuracy and impartiality when it covers the Middle East.... we consider that our findings are entirely consistent with the findings of systemic problems within the BBC highlighted in the Hutton report published earlier this year."
So concludes Asserson & Williams' report, which covered television documentaries on BBC1 and BBC2 during the period November 4 2000 - June 7 2004. British blogger Norman Geras has the details.
Here are some quick tips for adding simple Textile formatting to your comments, though you can also use proper HTML tags:
*This* puts text in bold.
_This_ puts text in italics.
bq. This "bq." at the beginning of a paragraph, flush with the left hand side and with a space after it, is the code to indent one paragraph of text as a block quote.
To add a live URL, "Text to display":http://windsofchange.net/ (no spaces between) will show up as Text to display. Always use this for links - otherwise you will screw up the columns on our main blog page.
Worth noting, whatever you think of the content of the report, that Asserson and Williams have written the report for an organisation which has a predetermined position on the BBC - that it is biased.
We do not accuse the BBC of deliberately deciding at a senior management level to vilify Israel in this way.
I'm not sure that charge was being made. IMO, the problem is "group-think" that happens to be virulently anti-Israel and thinly covered anti-Semitism.
Andy, Fair point. BBCWatch does have pre-existing concerns about the BBC's bias and fairness.
That said, I invite people to go to Norman's site and follow the links, and make up their own minds re: whether the report was correct in indicating an ongoing problem at the BBC.
Don't miss the Beeb's defense against charges of bias.
It makes interesting reading and soundly chooses to points out the methodology flaws of another study. This is an appropriate response. But it doesn't grapple with the substance of the Hutton Report, or with the study noted above.
Actually, it looks as if they picked the most vulnerable study of bias at the BBC, then tried to answer all of their charges by answering it. That isn't "bizarro world," but if that's the strategy it isn't honest either.
That's how I read it too, Joe. I just find it laughable when a liberal (or conservative) leaning news outlet defends itself against charges of bias in the other direction from the most extreme members of its readership, as if that actually makes its news more down-the-middle.