The BBC is biassed against Trump, in favour of immigrants and abortion and in favour of Israel

BBC presenters shared Israeli perspectives on Gaza 2,340 times, compared to Palestinian perspectives 217 times.

This revelation was not a resigning matter for senior BBC figures.

BBC World is dreadful very often when it comes to the news. I was listening this morning to some young BBC woman called Razia Iqbal explaining that the idea that Epstein was killed is a groundless conspiracy theory. 

The BBC is good but so bad. I don't see any bias against Israel though. I do see bias in favour of feminism, abortion, immigrants, single sex marriage et al.

On the contrary, the BBC have been clearly terrified of offending the powerful pro Israel crowd. 

They have been biassed on the whole in favour of Israel. 

Much more so than the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz! 

The pro Israel bias is probably true of all Western media. When did the British establishment start siding with Israel against the Arabs? They didn't in the 1980s.


Here is an interesting article by Diana Trilling.

<If there is ever an honest accounting of how Israel was able to commit genocide in Gaza, then the reaction of Western elites to the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023 will be regarded as a catastrophic turning point.

It should have been clear that Israel’s response to the atrocities carried out by Palestinian armed groups would constitute an even bigger atrocity. Yet Western leaders behaved as if 7 October was an event out of the blue – as opposed to the latest brutal exchange in a situation where Israel dominates – and continued to provide Israel with the means to kill. Equipped with platitudes about Israel’s right to defend itself, the governments of the UK, the US and the EU turned a blind eye to the vengeful, eliminationist rhetoric emanating from Israeli leaders within hours of the attacks – and then, as the death toll in Gaza soared, the sustained effort to make life there unliveable.
The West’s major media institutions added to the atmosphere of political and cultural censorship that descended after 7 October. They were slow to recognise the destructiveness of Israel’s campaign, and even slower to consider that it amounted to war crimes. They were light on historical context, not least the role of Western powers in aiding Israel’s policies of dispossession and apartheid, and suspicious of Palestinians, who were all too often invited to narrate their own suffering, or apologise for Hamas, but not to offer their own political interpretations of the conflict.

 

....But problems in the BBC’s coverage were visible early on. One, according to several BBC journalists I spoke to, was a failure to anticipate the scale and intensity of the Israeli bombardment, and its implications for every person living in Gaza. An experienced journalist who was on the ground in Israel-Palestine in October 2023 said that the BBC, like many other media organisations, treated the horror of the attacks like “a 9/11 event” – appearing from out of nowhere – and did not properly scrutinise Israel’s developing response.

“It was clear exactly what the tone was from Israel: it was going to be vengeance,” said another journalist who spent much of October speaking to Israeli politicians, military officials and members of the public for several national UK news programmes. “I remember feeding this back and saying, there is a level of dehumanisation happening here, of people who within a couple of days were getting bombed.” Yet some editors and managers at the BBC’s London headquarters were unresponsive, the journalist recalled. “In some of the meetings they were saying: ‘But what else is Israel supposed to do?’”
Even after the destruction of Gaza was well under way, other journalists told me, there was an ongoing nervousness around stories – particularly long-form productions – that could be perceived as critical of Israel.>