13 ms·

Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

527 points by mhga 1y ago

Open Letter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEzqT_vJjdab6cOQkFCCXk/edit?tab=t.0 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEz...

Animats 1y ago
Better source: [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/jul/02/more-than-400-media-figures-urge-bbc-board-to-remove-robbie-gibb-over-gaza https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/jul/02/more-than-400-...
- tareqak 1y ago
  The Guardian article does not have a link to the letter itself unlike the Owen Jones page. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEzqT_vJjdab6cOQkFCCXk https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEz...
  - tomhow 1y ago
    Thanks, we added this to the thread's top text.
- tomhow 1y ago
  Thanks, we updated the URL to this from https://www.owenjones.news/p/bbc-staff-were-forced-to-do-pro-israel https://www.owenjones.news/p/bbc-staff-were-forced-to-do-pro....
m1keil 1y ago
[flagged]
jaek 1y ago
Sadly it seems like this is indicative of a broader trend in Public Broadcast in the west. In Australia we've seen similar internal criticism of the ABC of an anti-palestinian bias in reporting[1]. It's deeply concerning that these publicly funded media outlets are being co-opted and manipulated by a foreign power. [1]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/26/australias-abc-staffs-concerns-over-gaza-bias-revealed https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/26/australias-abc-staf...
- jazzyjackson 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    You leapt to at least 3 conclusions in only two sentences. That's talent. 1. "The world" is too broad of an audience to indict. 2. "Anywhere else" does not necessitate the endless support of a rogue state. 3. Israeli statehood is a Zionist matter with a highly mixed opinion among Jews (especially under the current Likud admin).
  - malnourish 1y ago
    You can be very much in favor of Israel the country existing, and even defending itself, while still being opposed to Israel's actions in Gaza. I have not seen credible people call such a stance "being manipulated by the Jews".
- repeekad 1y ago
  I don’t think the country of Israel is explicitly doing the manipulating, I think one country’s allies are just statistically richer and more influential than the other
  - engine_y 1y ago
    Like Qatar?
    - aaomidi 1y ago
      Qatar's riches are not that _unique_. It's just oil. It's a commodity.
      - aianus 1y ago
        Qatar sells natural gas not oil
fyurule 1y ago
[dead]
burnt-resistor 1y ago
[flagged]
- MangoToupe 1y ago
  I'm not sure who owen jones is or why this is relevant. Are you saying the letter is fake?
  - tareqak 1y ago
    From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Jones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Jones > Owen Jones (born 8 August 1984)[2] is a left-wing British newspaper columnist, commentator, journalist, author and political activist.[3][4][5][6] > He writes a column for The Guardian and contributes to the New Statesman, Tribune, and The National[7] and was previously a columnist for The Independent. He has two weekly web series, The Owen Jones Show and The Owen Jones Podcast.
  - totetsu 1y ago
    Owen Jones is a UK political commentator and activist who reaches a large audience via Youtube etc. He has covered the latest Israel Palestinian war extensively and continuously from the start. is that a fair summary?
  - myth_drannon 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - tomhow 1y ago
      You can't comment like this on HN, no matter what it's about. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - myth_drannon 1y ago
        The parent submission is off-topic and spreads Jew hatred (attack on a person because Robbie Gibb is Jew and should be removed from board, similar to Columbia University president Claire Shipman comments). As someone who's grandparents experienced similar attacks during Stalinism because they were Jewish aka "zionists", this is extremely scary and totalitarian. I just don't understand how this is allowed.
yonisto 1y ago
LOL. Well this is how the Israelis see the BBC: https://youtu.be/gHTNuBKtzHc?si=aRYVjkzgj-U-yZIo https://youtu.be/gHTNuBKtzHc?si=aRYVjkzgj-U-yZIo
- tim333 1y ago
  I remember seeming the event that was based on near the start of the war. It's not far off what I saw in the media. Things are a bit different now though.
ralfhn 1y ago
Watch how quickly this disappears from the front page despite getting the most upvotes.
- YZF 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - forgotoldacc 1y ago
    Iran isn't an ally of any country in the west. The west says "Iran is an awful, oppressive country" basically daily. What's new to report there? They're already economically cut off from most of the world. There's not much else for us to do. Israel is an ally of every country in the west. People say "stop criticizing them because you can't do that until you complain about every other problem on earth first!" and it's a very strange, conditioned behavior not seen when problems pertaining to any other country are brought up. And the big difference between Iran and Israel: Israel isn't cut off from the world economically, and in some places (many US states), boycotting them is even illegal. None of my tax dollars or purchases fund the Iranian government. Lots of our money funds Israel against our will. That's why people get angry.
    - YZF 1y ago
      Most of the west is definitely not Israel's ally based on their lack of support. The US does support Israel but this is a story about the UK. The UK does not support Israel and even partially boycotts Israel at the moment. If you're American then your tax money e.g. funds Egypt. Egypt is a dictatorship, no human rights, involved in the Sudan civil war where millions are dying. Not a beep on Hacker News. EDIT: Not to mention the billions of dollars, including indirectly to Hamas, coming from the west.
      - forgotoldacc 1y ago
        The Prime Minister of the UK recently said he supported Israel's attacks on Iran. The UK even helps arm Israel. [1] Not sure what the basis of your claims are but they're quite different from reality. And I apologize in advance to any Egyptian readers out there, but Egypt has a very low reputation these days. I've not once seen a positive comment about the country in these past 10 years. Nobody is flooding in to defend Egypt when their problems are brought up and saying "Before you criticize Egypt, what about..." And if you hold your country to the standards of, as you said, oppressive dictatorships that support brutal wars, that's a low standard and will attract criticism. [1]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/07/uk-sent-israel-thousands-of-military-items-despite-export-ban-study-finds https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/07/uk-sent-isra...
bb88 1y ago
[flagged]
mrheosuper 1y ago
What is pro-Israel pull request ?
- dluan 1y ago
  rewriting history
- Towaway69 1y ago
  PR - public relations or propaganda - sometimes hard to tell the difference.
epja 1y ago
It's worth noting the BBC has also been accused of an anti-Israel bias including but not limited to airing a documentary produced by a Hamas linked individuals[1]. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo
- wzdd 1y ago
  The article mentions this.
  - gruez 1y ago
    Where?
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - epja 1y ago
    Apologies for the oversight. However I feel the author's phrasing "hysterical pro-Israel campaign" to downplay their concerns is telling.
    - selcuka 1y ago
      Well, we should accept that it was a bit hysterical. "Terror chief's son" [1]? Really? Apparently he's the deputy minister of agriculture. Ministers, bureaucrats and civil servants in Gaza are appointed by Hamas [2] [1] https://www.gbnews.com/news/bbc-hamas-propaganda-documentary-chief-son-ordinary-palestinians https://www.gbnews.com/news/bbc-hamas-propaganda-documentary... [2] https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-palestinian-child-centre-documentary-row-holds-bbc-responsible-fate https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-palestinian-chi...
- tareqak 1y ago
  From the article > The only other BBC documentary which focused on the apocalyptic plight of the Palestinian people in Gaza was taken down as a result of a hysterical pro-Israel campaign - because the father of the child narrator’s son had a junior technocratic position in the Hamas administration. Irrelevant, given the narrator’s words were written for him by the documentary producers.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
mondojesus 1y ago
There was a report commissioned into alleged bias at the BBC called the Balen Report. Some people report that it found no bias, but it hasn't been published to this day.
rubberwoodneck 1y ago
[flagged]
- AStonesThrow 1y ago
  [dead]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
engine_y 1y ago
I read the article but not sure which pro Israeli editorials the BBC has published. My experience is quite the opposite with BBC having a clear anti war stance.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- Daishiman 1y ago
  Imagine all the other things they have not published because even with what they've written, it's still pro-Israeli bias.
- jedimind 1y ago
  "Comprehensive new research finds the BBC coverage of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza is systematically biased against Palestinians and fails to reach standards of impartiality. Analysis of more than 35,000 pieces of BBC content by the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) shows Israeli deaths are given 33 times more coverage per fatality, and both broadcast segments and articles included clear double standards. BBC content was found to consistently shut down allegations of genocide." https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased-against-palestinians-in-gaza-coverage/ https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased...
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 1y ago
    The self-described mission of the Centre For Media Monitoring is "Promoting Fair And Responsible Reporting Of Muslims And Islam", so they might be slightly biased...
    - jedimind 1y ago
      According to your own logic I should not even bother providing any evidence when you can simply assume any organization to be biased based on identity alone instead of addressing the evidence they provide, like the BBC operates under a Royal Charter agreed upon with the britsh government, "so they might be slightly biased..." "Instead, the report says, the BBC’s coverage has involved the systematic dehumanisation of Palestinians and unquestioning acceptance of Israeli PR. This has allegedly been overseen by BBC Middle East Editor and apparent Binyamin Netanyahu admirer, Raffi Berg, who is accused by anonymous journalists of “micromanaging” the section." - https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-israel-gaza-media-experts/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-isra...
chvid 1y ago
This goes on all over western media not only the bbc.
- somename9 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - ThrowawayTestr 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - defrost 1y ago
      You're not the only one ... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crime-people-of-interest-police-pearl/105052576 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crim... Fake terror plots became criminal currency for a while in Australia.
    - k4rli 1y ago
      Which part was antisemitic and which part was the conspiracy? The ownership is factual.
      - defrost 1y ago
        What are the 'facts' about ownership "all over western media"?
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
      I can see how it’s read that way but people really do seem to forget that billionaires buy media companies as an investment. It’s not a strictly financial investment, either; they get to shape public opinion with them. How many people know that Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post? How many people know that MSNBC is owned by Comcast? How many people know that Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Post are all owned by Rupert Murdoch? How many UK citizens know that he also owns Sky News and The Times of London? How many people have heard the name Rupert Murdoch? (Everybody knows Elon Musk owns Twitter. Why do people say he bought an election again? How did that happen?) They have a point and it is not anti-Semitic. The people who own the means to shape public opinion are exclusively in the billionaire class.
hliyan 1y ago
I'm starting to realize, very belatedly in life, that we suffer from an end-of-history illusion in politics and political economy. I used to think we live in a golden age because a hundred years ago, democracy broadly replaced monarchies, market economies replaced feudalism and other coercive systems, and with it went many of the old, indirect mechanisms of subjugating large populations (e.g. moral imperatives through the Church, legitimization of rule through concepts such as the divine right of kings, control of education etc). But it seems we've only replaced those mechanisms with more refined versions (manufacturing consent through mass media, surveillance and indirect indentured servitude through student debt, rent and health insurance). We probably have another century of socioeconomic and political evolution to go before we reach a decent end state.
- atq2119 1y ago
  I like your optimism that a decent end state can be reached at all. There are so many ideas that sound good on paper but are bad in practice, and that happen to be convenient for the goals of unscrupulous powerful people. The notion that society as a whole will at some point stop falling for such ideas seems very optimistic to me.
  - Aeolun 1y ago
    Well, we have been improving. I don’t consider it too optimistic we’ll continue to do so.
    - smaudet 1y ago
      Improving at...what exactly? Please don't give some tripe about medecine or something...sure we have some fancy new techniques and the like, but that doesn't matter if those systems aren't generally available or rejected on pseudo-religious grounds. It might be true we have been living longer for a while, but that's a trend of the past 50 years in some areas, not some inexorable progress towards longer lives... Maybe we have lots of food and entertainment. I suppose that is good, in theory. But again, not something of recent history, that has more to do with the availability of large shipping vessels and TV production... The part people may find optimistic is continuing to improve in any appreciable manner, versus some gains made decades ago...
Liquix 1y ago
since key players realized decades ago how much sway news outlets hold over public opinion, a vast amount of them have been co-opted to spread propaganda [0]. at least a dozen countries and probably more (including Israel) are tapped directly into the five/fourteen eyes [1][2] intelligence network, countries which share "raw sigint" [3] with each other and strategically disseminate international propaganda to the alliance's benefit. watching or reading publications from any of these nation's news outlets is intended and virtually guaranteed to paint them all as the "good guys", and any other countries as "bad guys". just like BBC is doing here. this is not a conspiracy, it's all fairly well documented. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement#9_Eyes,_14_Eyes,_and_other_%22third_parties%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement#9_Eyes,_14_Eye... [3] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-...
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- globalnode 1y ago
  murdoch empire, from zero to hero. also broligarchs are falling over themselves to own media companies. it doesnt take an einstein to see whats going on.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
YZF 1y ago
The BBC having 21,000 employees (5500 journalists). Only 100 signed. From my perspective the BBC is extremely anti-Israeli but for some people this is obviously not good enough. They want the BBC to champion their cause. Naturally people supporting the anti-Israeli cause who only get anti-Israeli content will feel that the BBC is "pro" Israel. Nothing could be farther from the truth and Pro-Israeli media looks nothing like the BBC. This is from 2006: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/governors_archive/impartiality.html https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/governors_archive/im... "We were appointed by the Governors to assess whether the BBC's coverage of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict meets the required standards of impartiality." ... "apart from individual lapses, sometimes of tone, language or attitude, there was little to suggest systematic or deliberate bias; on the contrary there was evidence, in the programming and in other ways, of a commitment to be fair, accurate and impartial;" ... "these shortcomings include:" ... "Equally in the months preceding the Palestinian elections there was little hard questioning of their leaders" ... This has been a big criticism of the BBC which is still not addressed: "The term "terrorism" should accordingly be used in respect of relevant events since it is the most accurate expression for actions which involve violence against randomly selected civilians with the intention of causing terror for ideological, including political or religious, objectives, whether perpetrated by state or non-state agencies."
- aaomidi 1y ago
  That definition of Terrorism would make Israel a terrorist state.
  - YZF 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - creatonez 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - YZF 1y ago
dismalaf 1y ago
[flagged]
- Aeolun 1y ago
  > BTW, this article doesn't mention that Gazans are still holding Israelis hostage, nor October 7th... Ah yes, the 7 remaining hostages. But don’t forget that that counter is still zero for Israel only because all the people that could have been taken hostage have instead been killed.
  - dismalaf 1y ago
    It would be alot more than 7 if Hamas didn't murder a bunch.
    - Aeolun 1y ago
      Sure, but they’ve pretty much stopped now (presumably mostly because they ran out). Israel continues to rack up a larger count every single day.
      - dismalaf 1y ago
        [flagged]
myth_drannon 1y ago
[flagged]
gruez 1y ago
Coming from an outsider, the letter is frustratingly vague. The only concrete allegation is the pulling of the documentary "Gaza: Medics Under Fire", but without a statement from BBC explaining why they pulled it, it's basically impossible from an outsider to know whether censorship is indeed happening or not. The rest of the letter basically down to a he-said-she-said over bias/censorship happening. Owen's article doesn't really add much either, seeming to take everything at face value and then using that to slam the BBC. This is all great if you're already predisposed to think the MSM has a pro-Israel bias, but otherwise leaves you at least confused. Is there another source that does a better job at substantiating the claim that BBC has a pro-Israel bias?
- jedimind 1y ago
  "Instead, the report says, the BBC’s coverage has involved the systematic dehumanisation of Palestinians and unquestioning acceptance of Israeli PR. This has allegedly been overseen by BBC Middle East Editor and apparent Binyamin Netanyahu admirer, Raffi Berg, who is accused by anonymous journalists of “micromanaging” the section." - https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-israel-gaza-media-experts/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-isra... "Comprehensive new research finds the BBC coverage of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza is systematically biased against Palestinians and fails to reach standards of impartiality. Analysis of more than 35,000 pieces of BBC content by the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) shows Israeli deaths are given 33 times more coverage per fatality, and both broadcast segments and articles included clear double standards. BBC content was found to consistently shut down allegations of genocide." - https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased-against-palestinians-in-gaza-coverage/ https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased...
  - YZF 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - int_19h 1y ago
      It doesn't matter if the the original cause for the war is just or not if the war involves mass slaughter of civilians, and concealing this fact is deeply unethical. This is true in all other cases that you mention - whether civilians are targeted by the West and its allies in the war against ISIS, or by Ukraine in the war against Russia, that should all be covered objectively, not suppressed. Separately from that, you seem to be conflating Hamas with Palestinians in general. Most people killed by Israel in Gaza are not Hamas.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
aaron695 1y ago
[dead]
swoorup 1y ago
The world has been a sad state of affairs since Covid. People in power need more power for themselves, view the world as a zero sum game, use coercion, deceiving, propaganda to achieve their goals, in this case a territorial expansion. Anyone who opposes the means it's currently being carried out is a anti-.... whatever.
- fossgeller 1y ago
  Imo the world was the same before in terms of corruption and propaganda, it’s mostly us, the common folks, who changed radically. There are only binary states and opinions, either you’re a genocide supporter or an antisemite. Internet discussion on politics have gotten too toxic. Covid brought everyone online and we’ve been stuck in echochambers ever since.
jjangkke 1y ago
"To know who rules over you, simply notice who you are not allowed to criticize" - Unknown
- drc500free 1y ago
  That’s not “unknown”, that’s an antisemitic quote from neo-nazi Kevin Alfred Strom.
  - Aeolun 1y ago
    Do any of those qualifiers make it less true?
    - thrance 1y ago
      "To know who rules over you, simply notice who you are not allowed to criticize: capital owners". There, fixed it. As it stands the quote is supposed to make you "notice" a fantasized jewish cabal that would own the world. In reality, the most powerful sionists in America are christians.
  - sltkr 1y ago
    Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    - drc500free 1y ago
      I don’t think agreeing with a neo-nazi about the foundational tenets of nazism is a good use of that idiom. It’s supposed to be for things like “pickles on pizza are actually pretty good” not “we are all slaves to the Jews who control society.”
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - yieldcrv 1y ago
    Oh that’s hilarious because it has been misattributed to Voltaire and TIL it was from 1993 Wtf, I hate that quote now! Just kidding its still accurate: In the East you don’t criticize the party, in the West you don’t criticize one particular designated genocidal foreign army. Easy enough to follow.
molteanu 1y ago
I still cannot get over the fact that we, in Europe, have banned RT on the grounds that it is a publication sponsored by a "foreign" government and, as such, it cannot be trusted. For one, so many publications here in Europe are financed by the local governments and we have no problem allowing them to function and act in the interest or said governments. Two, it flies in the face of an independent, free individual who can choose what to read and discern what the truth is. By blocking it, you are saying, "You, as an individual, are not able to take your own decisions, you are not able to separate truth from lies and fiction." If, supposing the later is actually the case, then all this "free" media is actually dangerous as it becomes a game of "don't trust them, trust us!" and whoever has the better image, the best marketing and exposure wins over the others.
- notpushkin 1y ago
  As a Russian, I wouldn’t trust anything that comes out on RT. Banning it though is a really bad move – something I would expect from the Russian government itself, not Europe. One of the reasons I’ve become disillusioned in EU recently.
  - memonkey 1y ago
    Most thinking people will try not to take current event reporting at face value. For many Americans, it's easy to accept a lot of things your Mainstream Media Source gives you (including NPR or NYTs), and ironically when one of the current themes is to distrust mainstream media.
    - CoastalCoder 1y ago
      FWIW, I trust NPR reporting to only make true statements. What they're sometimes guilty of (in my judgement) is one-sided reporting. E.g., regarding illegal immigration, providing sympathetic personal stories of illegal immigrants, but not of the persons hurt by illegal immigration. It's also possible they've gotten better about this. I stopped listening years ago.
  - atmavatar 1y ago
wtcactus 1y ago
This is a non exhaustive list of news where the BBC started by blaming Israel of some war crime since the October 7th massacre occurred, and then had to remove, recant or apologize about after overwhelming evidence against it came to light: - Al-Ahli hospital explosion (Oct 2023) - Al-Shifa hospital “medical teams targeted” (Nov 2023) - Summary executions claim (Dec 24) - Aid‑centre shooting attribution (Jun 2025) - Al‑Shifa “raid on medical teams” redux (Jun 2025) Imagine if the journalists weren’t “forced to do pro Israel PR”. BBC needs a proper external investigation on the levels of anti semitism that clearly permeate the ranks of their so called journalists.
- ragazzina 1y ago
  >after overwhelming evidence against it came to light Or maybe they removed articles because of political pressure? Post overwhelming evidence against the fact that the Al-Ahli hospital explosion was caused by an Israel airstrike, for example.
  - wtcactus 1y ago
    Sure, here you go: Not only every expert consulted by every journal agreed that the explosion was not even caused by an airstrike, but they also agreed it was caused by a projectile launched from Palestinian territory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosion?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosio...
    - ragazzina 1y ago
      You are posting, with a straight face, a link that repeats in all its entirety how nothing conclusive can be stated, how no expert has ever given a definitive answer, and you are saying the article affirms the opposite. Are you an LLM?
      - wtcactus 1y ago
        All the consulted experts on the source agree that this wasn't an airstrike. Most of the consulted experts agree that it was fired from inside Palestinian territory. No consulted experts agree this was an airstrike. No consulted experts agree this was fired from outside Palestinian territory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosio...
philosophty 1y ago
[flagged]
theowjul10 1y ago
[dead]
iceKirin 1y ago
When the strong attack the weak, is your neutrality really still "neutral"?
topspin 1y ago
Recent BBC World headlines: Gaza doctor whose nine children were killed in Israeli strike dies from injuries (June 2) Gaza now worse than hell on earth, humanitarian chief tells BBC (June 4) Three journalists among five killed in Israeli strike on Gaza hospital (June 5) Four killed near Gaza aid centre, health workers say (June 8) Dozens of Palestinians killed while seeking aid in Gaza, hospitals say (June 11) More than 20 Palestinians killed by Israeli fire near Gaza aid sites, Hamas-run ministry says (June 16) Israeli forces kill 51 Palestinians waiting for flour at Gaza aid site, witnesses and rescuers say (June 17) Eleven killed by Israeli fire while seeking aid in Gaza, rescuers say (June 18) At least 12 Palestinians killed waiting for aid in Gaza, say medics (June 19) Israeli military kills 23 Palestinians near aid site in Gaza, witnesses and medics say (June 20) GHF boss defends Gaza aid operation after hundreds of Palestinians killed near sites (June 27) At least 81 people killed in Israeli strikes in Gaza, Hamas-run health ministry says (June 28) Israeli military investigates 'reports of harm to civilians' after hundreds killed near Gaza aid sites (June 30) Hundreds of families displaced by wave of Israeli air strikes on Gaza, Palestinians say (June 30) Dozens killed in Gaza as Israel intensifies bombardment, rescuers say (July 3) Israel's strike on bustling Gaza café killed a Hamas operative - but dozens more people were killed (July 4) Now, perhaps these anonymous staff make some distinction between headlines and whatever they mean by "PR," but there appears to be zero hesitation reporting everything the BBC can find on the crimes of Israel, real or imagined. Reading the open letter makes no such distinction, citing "reporting" many times. At least two of the above are directly attributed to "Hamas-run ministry," which is somehow a source for BCC's supposedly pro-Israel reporting. How am I supposed to not see what I'm seeing with my lying eyes? I don't believe I'm capable of this tier of cognitive dissonance.
- kelnos 1y ago
  Just because you can list a bunch of article headlines that seem to not show bias, it doesn't mean there isn't bias. That takes a much deeper analysis.
  - ryeats 1y ago
    It's ~1% click through most just get the news from the headline.
yieldcrv 1y ago
When some of my more privileged Jewish friends are feeling glee, they proudly say their people do control the news Feels kind of gaslighty when we can all perceive that there is a disproportionate overrepresentation of exactly that, but if us gentiles say it is called an “antisemitic trope” not every observation is based on wanting a hurtful outcome against jewish people, but every reaction to that observation seems like thats the assumption. doesnt seem productive though, counterproductive and self fulfilling is what it seems like
ixtli 1y ago
[flagged]
strictnein 1y ago
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html edit: honestly, look at the comment quality on this post. There's a reason that HN should avoid purely political stuff like this.
- tacticalturtle 1y ago
  You can look at the post history of some of the comments here - some of the most prolific commenters in this thread appear to only comment on the Israel/Palestine conflict.
fldskfjdslkfj 1y ago
[flagged]
bofadeez 1y ago
The PR only works on very old people and very low IQ people. It's just brute force at this point. Everyone knows what they're doing. Everyone here can identify the fake comments. They think they're slick but it's just the Streisand effect at this point.
- globalnode 1y ago
  or very badly educated.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- IAmBroom 1y ago
  "Everyone". Basically, you're suggesting that propaganda only works on the feeble-minded and dumb, and "All True Scotsmen" know better than to fall for it. Wow.
  - bofadeez 1y ago
    Like for example, your comment makes no sense. It reads like you got paid to write it. You're not contributing anything at all - just expressing that you feel something that most people would call "exaggerated" and "performative" and "embarrassing"
jwrallie 1y ago
[flagged]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
dietr1ch 1y ago
[flagged]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
EvgeniyZh 1y ago
[flagged]
init7 1y ago
As an outsider, I feel the narrative has totally turned for the rest of the world. Israeli citizens protesting against the genocide and war crimes rekindled faith that it's mostly the top of govts and military industrial complexes pushing for this. Not just BBC, most media ended up out in the open this time around. Or maybe it has always been like this, we are just growing up now and taking notice.
ztrztrezzeru 1y ago
[dead]
surfingdino 1y ago
[flagged]
LeoPanthera 1y ago
It must not be the entire BBC. In the US I listen to the World Service radio news, and they do not shy away from reporting the horrors of war in Gaza. Even their interviews with Israeli representatives are shockingly unfiltered.
rich_sasha 1y ago
Offending or over-accusing sides of this conflict is a very asymmetric risk. Misrepresent Palestinians negatively and you may eventually get an angry, vague letter - with a quarter of signatories doing so anonymously. Misrepresent Israelis negatively and you get very powerful and well-organised protests. BBC is sadly doing the rational thing of staying clear of suggesting Israel may be doing some bad things. It is a Corporation after all and so acts in corporate ways. But this is also the example coming to them from the top. On the occasions where Israel has clearly committed egregious violations, such as shooting at people massed at the aid dispensal locations or the medics who then got buried in shallow graves, Israel gets barely a whimper of criticism from European politicians - and apparently full-throated cheering and support from the US. The ICC arrest warrant is as forgotten as last year's snow. So why are we surprised the BBC doesn't want to stick its head above the parapet?
- dgellow 1y ago
  > So why are we surprised the BBC doesn't want to stick its head above the parapet? Whenever a group publicly criticizes a behavior, you see the rhetorical question “Why are you surprised?”, and that feels dismissive and disingenuous. Yes, BBC has some reasons to behave the way they do, sure. It’s really not relevant to the points being brought. Every actor has reasons to behave. People are critical of the behavior, whatever the actor’s incentives are. Because a behavior feels more logical or rational it shouldn’t be discussed? If you would answer negatively then what’s the point of asking your question? Is it just to express your cynicism of that whole situation?
  - rich_sasha 1y ago
    > Yes, BBC has some reasons to behave the way they do, sure. It’s really not relevant to the points being brought My point is they are responding to external constraints shaped by the broader society - the very same group who seems to put up with Israel's outrageous stunts. To angst about the first but not the second is the illogical bit to me. The BBC is not quite a weathervane, but like so many commentators in this space, is so heavily constrained in what it can do that it's meaningless to focus on the actions, not the constraints. It's like when people are shocked that politicians are not morally superior to the average person in the society that raised them. You sample from a group, you're going to mimick its distribution. So I am not surprised or shocked how the BBC is acting. I am surprised and shocked that the many societies (Europe, America, ME) seems to accept this situation, as a root cause if you like.
b0a04gl 1y ago
[dead]
shantnutiwari 1y ago
The left blames BBC, calling them Tory shills, the right blames them, calling them woke activists. Dont know--seems to me they are doing the right thing.
Protostome 1y ago
And I assume the BBC are completely impartial regarding the conflict.
aristofun 1y ago
[flagged]
- sumo89 1y ago
  Oh look the Israeli tech workers are online. Everyone knows it's a genocide. "Gaza victim narrative", the absolute state of you.
  - aristofun 1y ago
    I’m not Israeli tech worker. Care to refute with facts any of my points? Or all you can do is drop words and call names? Everyone knows this is the only tactics of pro-xamas lunatics - just to scream loud. No facts, no logic, no answers to uncomfortable questions.
spants 1y ago
The BBC recently showed a documentary that was pro-Palestinian and factually wrong. They also paid Hamas affiliates and relations to star in it. I have no idea where the "BBC are pro-Israel" thoughts come from but as a brit - I don't see it.
- IAmBroom 1y ago
  Cite much?
myth_drannon 1y ago
Mandatory sketch of BBC interviews https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHTNuBKtzHc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHTNuBKtzHc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYUL1R4pupU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYUL1R4pupU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gut1jyzwFV8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gut1jyzwFV8
galfarragem 1y ago
War is complex. One party starts with the "moral advantage" — but as soon as conflict escalates, sides look more alike than different. This is war after all. Media is entrenched, disregarding their own side's actions. We've seen it in Ukraine-Russia. And now in Israel-Palestine. F*ck war.

527 points by mhga 1y ago

Open Letter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEzqT_vJjdab6cOQkFCCXk/edit?tab=t.0 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEz...

Animats 1y ago

Better source: [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/jul/02/more-than-400-media-figures-urge-bbc-board-to-remove-robbie-gibb-over-gaza https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/jul/02/more-than-400-...

tareqak 1y ago
The Guardian article does not have a link to the letter itself unlike the Owen Jones page. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEzqT_vJjdab6cOQkFCCXk https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n3926pSPNwXd8j7I716CBJEz...
- tomhow 1y ago
  Thanks, we added this to the thread's top text.
tomhow 1y ago
Thanks, we updated the URL to this from https://www.owenjones.news/p/bbc-staff-were-forced-to-do-pro-israel https://www.owenjones.news/p/bbc-staff-were-forced-to-do-pro....

m1keil 1y ago

[flagged]

jaek 1y ago

Sadly it seems like this is indicative of a broader trend in Public Broadcast in the west. In Australia we've seen similar internal criticism of the ABC of an anti-palestinian bias in reporting[1]. It's deeply concerning that these publicly funded media outlets are being co-opted and manipulated by a foreign power. [1]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/26/australias-abc-staffs-concerns-over-gaza-bias-revealed https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/26/australias-abc-staf...

jazzyjackson 1y ago
[flagged]
- bigyabai 1y ago
  You leapt to at least 3 conclusions in only two sentences. That's talent. 1. "The world" is too broad of an audience to indict. 2. "Anywhere else" does not necessitate the endless support of a rogue state. 3. Israeli statehood is a Zionist matter with a highly mixed opinion among Jews (especially under the current Likud admin).
- malnourish 1y ago
  You can be very much in favor of Israel the country existing, and even defending itself, while still being opposed to Israel's actions in Gaza. I have not seen credible people call such a stance "being manipulated by the Jews".
repeekad 1y ago
I don’t think the country of Israel is explicitly doing the manipulating, I think one country’s allies are just statistically richer and more influential than the other
- engine_y 1y ago
  Like Qatar?
  - aaomidi 1y ago
    Qatar's riches are not that _unique_. It's just oil. It's a commodity.
    - aianus 1y ago
      Qatar sells natural gas not oil

fyurule 1y ago

[dead]

burnt-resistor 1y ago

[flagged]

MangoToupe 1y ago
I'm not sure who owen jones is or why this is relevant. Are you saying the letter is fake?
- tareqak 1y ago
  From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Jones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Jones > Owen Jones (born 8 August 1984)[2] is a left-wing British newspaper columnist, commentator, journalist, author and political activist.[3][4][5][6] > He writes a column for The Guardian and contributes to the New Statesman, Tribune, and The National[7] and was previously a columnist for The Independent. He has two weekly web series, The Owen Jones Show and The Owen Jones Podcast.
- totetsu 1y ago
  Owen Jones is a UK political commentator and activist who reaches a large audience via Youtube etc. He has covered the latest Israel Palestinian war extensively and continuously from the start. is that a fair summary?
- myth_drannon 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - tomhow 1y ago
    You can't comment like this on HN, no matter what it's about. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - myth_drannon 1y ago
      The parent submission is off-topic and spreads Jew hatred (attack on a person because Robbie Gibb is Jew and should be removed from board, similar to Columbia University president Claire Shipman comments). As someone who's grandparents experienced similar attacks during Stalinism because they were Jewish aka "zionists", this is extremely scary and totalitarian. I just don't understand how this is allowed.

yonisto 1y ago

LOL. Well this is how the Israelis see the BBC: https://youtu.be/gHTNuBKtzHc?si=aRYVjkzgj-U-yZIo https://youtu.be/gHTNuBKtzHc?si=aRYVjkzgj-U-yZIo

tim333 1y ago
I remember seeming the event that was based on near the start of the war. It's not far off what I saw in the media. Things are a bit different now though.

ralfhn 1y ago

Watch how quickly this disappears from the front page despite getting the most upvotes.

YZF 1y ago
[flagged]
- forgotoldacc 1y ago
  Iran isn't an ally of any country in the west. The west says "Iran is an awful, oppressive country" basically daily. What's new to report there? They're already economically cut off from most of the world. There's not much else for us to do. Israel is an ally of every country in the west. People say "stop criticizing them because you can't do that until you complain about every other problem on earth first!" and it's a very strange, conditioned behavior not seen when problems pertaining to any other country are brought up. And the big difference between Iran and Israel: Israel isn't cut off from the world economically, and in some places (many US states), boycotting them is even illegal. None of my tax dollars or purchases fund the Iranian government. Lots of our money funds Israel against our will. That's why people get angry.
  - YZF 1y ago
    Most of the west is definitely not Israel's ally based on their lack of support. The US does support Israel but this is a story about the UK. The UK does not support Israel and even partially boycotts Israel at the moment. If you're American then your tax money e.g. funds Egypt. Egypt is a dictatorship, no human rights, involved in the Sudan civil war where millions are dying. Not a beep on Hacker News. EDIT: Not to mention the billions of dollars, including indirectly to Hamas, coming from the west.
    - forgotoldacc 1y ago
      The Prime Minister of the UK recently said he supported Israel's attacks on Iran. The UK even helps arm Israel. [1] Not sure what the basis of your claims are but they're quite different from reality. And I apologize in advance to any Egyptian readers out there, but Egypt has a very low reputation these days. I've not once seen a positive comment about the country in these past 10 years. Nobody is flooding in to defend Egypt when their problems are brought up and saying "Before you criticize Egypt, what about..." And if you hold your country to the standards of, as you said, oppressive dictatorships that support brutal wars, that's a low standard and will attract criticism. [1]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/07/uk-sent-israel-thousands-of-military-items-despite-export-ban-study-finds https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/07/uk-sent-isra...

bb88 1y ago

[flagged]

mrheosuper 1y ago

What is pro-Israel pull request ?

dluan 1y ago
rewriting history
Towaway69 1y ago
PR - public relations or propaganda - sometimes hard to tell the difference.

epja 1y ago

It's worth noting the BBC has also been accused of an anti-Israel bias including but not limited to airing a documentary produced by a Hamas linked individuals[1]. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo

wzdd 1y ago
The article mentions this.
- gruez 1y ago
  Where?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- epja 1y ago
  Apologies for the oversight. However I feel the author's phrasing "hysterical pro-Israel campaign" to downplay their concerns is telling.
  - selcuka 1y ago
    Well, we should accept that it was a bit hysterical. "Terror chief's son" [1]? Really? Apparently he's the deputy minister of agriculture. Ministers, bureaucrats and civil servants in Gaza are appointed by Hamas [2] [1] https://www.gbnews.com/news/bbc-hamas-propaganda-documentary-chief-son-ordinary-palestinians https://www.gbnews.com/news/bbc-hamas-propaganda-documentary... [2] https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-palestinian-child-centre-documentary-row-holds-bbc-responsible-fate https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-palestinian-chi...
tareqak 1y ago
From the article > The only other BBC documentary which focused on the apocalyptic plight of the Palestinian people in Gaza was taken down as a result of a hysterical pro-Israel campaign - because the father of the child narrator’s son had a junior technocratic position in the Hamas administration. Irrelevant, given the narrator’s words were written for him by the documentary producers.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

mondojesus 1y ago

There was a report commissioned into alleged bias at the BBC called the Balen Report. Some people report that it found no bias, but it hasn't been published to this day.

rubberwoodneck 1y ago

[flagged]

AStonesThrow 1y ago
[dead]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

engine_y 1y ago

I read the article but not sure which pro Israeli editorials the BBC has published. My experience is quite the opposite with BBC having a clear anti war stance.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Daishiman 1y ago
Imagine all the other things they have not published because even with what they've written, it's still pro-Israeli bias.
jedimind 1y ago
"Comprehensive new research finds the BBC coverage of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza is systematically biased against Palestinians and fails to reach standards of impartiality. Analysis of more than 35,000 pieces of BBC content by the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) shows Israeli deaths are given 33 times more coverage per fatality, and both broadcast segments and articles included clear double standards. BBC content was found to consistently shut down allegations of genocide." https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased-against-palestinians-in-gaza-coverage/ https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased...
- tgsovlerkhgsel 1y ago
  The self-described mission of the Centre For Media Monitoring is "Promoting Fair And Responsible Reporting Of Muslims And Islam", so they might be slightly biased...
  - jedimind 1y ago
    According to your own logic I should not even bother providing any evidence when you can simply assume any organization to be biased based on identity alone instead of addressing the evidence they provide, like the BBC operates under a Royal Charter agreed upon with the britsh government, "so they might be slightly biased..." "Instead, the report says, the BBC’s coverage has involved the systematic dehumanisation of Palestinians and unquestioning acceptance of Israeli PR. This has allegedly been overseen by BBC Middle East Editor and apparent Binyamin Netanyahu admirer, Raffi Berg, who is accused by anonymous journalists of “micromanaging” the section." - https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-israel-gaza-media-experts/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-isra...

chvid 1y ago

This goes on all over western media not only the bbc.

somename9 1y ago
[flagged]
- ThrowawayTestr 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - defrost 1y ago
    You're not the only one ... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crime-people-of-interest-police-pearl/105052576 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crim... Fake terror plots became criminal currency for a while in Australia.
  - k4rli 1y ago
    Which part was antisemitic and which part was the conspiracy? The ownership is factual.
    - defrost 1y ago
      What are the 'facts' about ownership "all over western media"?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    I can see how it’s read that way but people really do seem to forget that billionaires buy media companies as an investment. It’s not a strictly financial investment, either; they get to shape public opinion with them. How many people know that Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post? How many people know that MSNBC is owned by Comcast? How many people know that Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Post are all owned by Rupert Murdoch? How many UK citizens know that he also owns Sky News and The Times of London? How many people have heard the name Rupert Murdoch? (Everybody knows Elon Musk owns Twitter. Why do people say he bought an election again? How did that happen?) They have a point and it is not anti-Semitic. The people who own the means to shape public opinion are exclusively in the billionaire class.

hliyan 1y ago

I'm starting to realize, very belatedly in life, that we suffer from an end-of-history illusion in politics and political economy. I used to think we live in a golden age because a hundred years ago, democracy broadly replaced monarchies, market economies replaced feudalism and other coercive systems, and with it went many of the old, indirect mechanisms of subjugating large populations (e.g. moral imperatives through the Church, legitimization of rule through concepts such as the divine right of kings, control of education etc). But it seems we've only replaced those mechanisms with more refined versions (manufacturing consent through mass media, surveillance and indirect indentured servitude through student debt, rent and health insurance). We probably have another century of socioeconomic and political evolution to go before we reach a decent end state.

atq2119 1y ago
I like your optimism that a decent end state can be reached at all. There are so many ideas that sound good on paper but are bad in practice, and that happen to be convenient for the goals of unscrupulous powerful people. The notion that society as a whole will at some point stop falling for such ideas seems very optimistic to me.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  Well, we have been improving. I don’t consider it too optimistic we’ll continue to do so.
  - smaudet 1y ago
    Improving at...what exactly? Please don't give some tripe about medecine or something...sure we have some fancy new techniques and the like, but that doesn't matter if those systems aren't generally available or rejected on pseudo-religious grounds. It might be true we have been living longer for a while, but that's a trend of the past 50 years in some areas, not some inexorable progress towards longer lives... Maybe we have lots of food and entertainment. I suppose that is good, in theory. But again, not something of recent history, that has more to do with the availability of large shipping vessels and TV production... The part people may find optimistic is continuing to improve in any appreciable manner, versus some gains made decades ago...

Liquix 1y ago

since key players realized decades ago how much sway news outlets hold over public opinion, a vast amount of them have been co-opted to spread propaganda [0]. at least a dozen countries and probably more (including Israel) are tapped directly into the five/fourteen eyes [1][2] intelligence network, countries which share "raw sigint" [3] with each other and strategically disseminate international propaganda to the alliance's benefit. watching or reading publications from any of these nation's news outlets is intended and virtually guaranteed to paint them all as the "good guys", and any other countries as "bad guys". just like BBC is doing here. this is not a conspiracy, it's all fairly well documented. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement#9_Eyes,_14_Eyes,_and_other_%22third_parties%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement#9_Eyes,_14_Eye... [3] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-...

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
globalnode 1y ago
murdoch empire, from zero to hero. also broligarchs are falling over themselves to own media companies. it doesnt take an einstein to see whats going on.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

YZF 1y ago

The BBC having 21,000 employees (5500 journalists). Only 100 signed. From my perspective the BBC is extremely anti-Israeli but for some people this is obviously not good enough. They want the BBC to champion their cause. Naturally people supporting the anti-Israeli cause who only get anti-Israeli content will feel that the BBC is "pro" Israel. Nothing could be farther from the truth and Pro-Israeli media looks nothing like the BBC. This is from 2006: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/governors_archive/impartiality.html https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/governors_archive/im... "We were appointed by the Governors to assess whether the BBC's coverage of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict meets the required standards of impartiality." ... "apart from individual lapses, sometimes of tone, language or attitude, there was little to suggest systematic or deliberate bias; on the contrary there was evidence, in the programming and in other ways, of a commitment to be fair, accurate and impartial;" ... "these shortcomings include:" ... "Equally in the months preceding the Palestinian elections there was little hard questioning of their leaders" ... This has been a big criticism of the BBC which is still not addressed: "The term "terrorism" should accordingly be used in respect of relevant events since it is the most accurate expression for actions which involve violence against randomly selected civilians with the intention of causing terror for ideological, including political or religious, objectives, whether perpetrated by state or non-state agencies."

aaomidi 1y ago
That definition of Terrorism would make Israel a terrorist state.
- YZF 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - creatonez 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - YZF 1y ago

dismalaf 1y ago

[flagged]

Aeolun 1y ago
> BTW, this article doesn't mention that Gazans are still holding Israelis hostage, nor October 7th... Ah yes, the 7 remaining hostages. But don’t forget that that counter is still zero for Israel only because all the people that could have been taken hostage have instead been killed.
- dismalaf 1y ago
  It would be alot more than 7 if Hamas didn't murder a bunch.
  - Aeolun 1y ago
    Sure, but they’ve pretty much stopped now (presumably mostly because they ran out). Israel continues to rack up a larger count every single day.
    - dismalaf 1y ago
      [flagged]

myth_drannon 1y ago

[flagged]

gruez 1y ago

Coming from an outsider, the letter is frustratingly vague. The only concrete allegation is the pulling of the documentary "Gaza: Medics Under Fire", but without a statement from BBC explaining why they pulled it, it's basically impossible from an outsider to know whether censorship is indeed happening or not. The rest of the letter basically down to a he-said-she-said over bias/censorship happening. Owen's article doesn't really add much either, seeming to take everything at face value and then using that to slam the BBC. This is all great if you're already predisposed to think the MSM has a pro-Israel bias, but otherwise leaves you at least confused. Is there another source that does a better job at substantiating the claim that BBC has a pro-Israel bias?

jedimind 1y ago
"Instead, the report says, the BBC’s coverage has involved the systematic dehumanisation of Palestinians and unquestioning acceptance of Israeli PR. This has allegedly been overseen by BBC Middle East Editor and apparent Binyamin Netanyahu admirer, Raffi Berg, who is accused by anonymous journalists of “micromanaging” the section." - https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-israel-gaza-media-experts/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-isra... "Comprehensive new research finds the BBC coverage of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza is systematically biased against Palestinians and fails to reach standards of impartiality. Analysis of more than 35,000 pieces of BBC content by the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) shows Israeli deaths are given 33 times more coverage per fatality, and both broadcast segments and articles included clear double standards. BBC content was found to consistently shut down allegations of genocide." - https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased-against-palestinians-in-gaza-coverage/ https://novaramedia.com/2025/06/16/bbc-systematically-biased...
- YZF 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - int_19h 1y ago
    It doesn't matter if the the original cause for the war is just or not if the war involves mass slaughter of civilians, and concealing this fact is deeply unethical. This is true in all other cases that you mention - whether civilians are targeted by the West and its allies in the war against ISIS, or by Ukraine in the war against Russia, that should all be covered objectively, not suppressed. Separately from that, you seem to be conflating Hamas with Palestinians in general. Most people killed by Israel in Gaza are not Hamas.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

aaron695 1y ago

[dead]

swoorup 1y ago

The world has been a sad state of affairs since Covid. People in power need more power for themselves, view the world as a zero sum game, use coercion, deceiving, propaganda to achieve their goals, in this case a territorial expansion. Anyone who opposes the means it's currently being carried out is a anti-.... whatever.

fossgeller 1y ago
Imo the world was the same before in terms of corruption and propaganda, it’s mostly us, the common folks, who changed radically. There are only binary states and opinions, either you’re a genocide supporter or an antisemite. Internet discussion on politics have gotten too toxic. Covid brought everyone online and we’ve been stuck in echochambers ever since.

jjangkke 1y ago

"To know who rules over you, simply notice who you are not allowed to criticize" - Unknown

drc500free 1y ago
That’s not “unknown”, that’s an antisemitic quote from neo-nazi Kevin Alfred Strom.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  Do any of those qualifiers make it less true?
  - thrance 1y ago
    "To know who rules over you, simply notice who you are not allowed to criticize: capital owners". There, fixed it. As it stands the quote is supposed to make you "notice" a fantasized jewish cabal that would own the world. In reality, the most powerful sionists in America are christians.
- sltkr 1y ago
  Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
  - drc500free 1y ago
    I don’t think agreeing with a neo-nazi about the foundational tenets of nazism is a good use of that idiom. It’s supposed to be for things like “pickles on pizza are actually pretty good” not “we are all slaves to the Jews who control society.”
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- yieldcrv 1y ago
  Oh that’s hilarious because it has been misattributed to Voltaire and TIL it was from 1993 Wtf, I hate that quote now! Just kidding its still accurate: In the East you don’t criticize the party, in the West you don’t criticize one particular designated genocidal foreign army. Easy enough to follow.

molteanu 1y ago

I still cannot get over the fact that we, in Europe, have banned RT on the grounds that it is a publication sponsored by a "foreign" government and, as such, it cannot be trusted. For one, so many publications here in Europe are financed by the local governments and we have no problem allowing them to function and act in the interest or said governments. Two, it flies in the face of an independent, free individual who can choose what to read and discern what the truth is. By blocking it, you are saying, "You, as an individual, are not able to take your own decisions, you are not able to separate truth from lies and fiction." If, supposing the later is actually the case, then all this "free" media is actually dangerous as it becomes a game of "don't trust them, trust us!" and whoever has the better image, the best marketing and exposure wins over the others.

notpushkin 1y ago
As a Russian, I wouldn’t trust anything that comes out on RT. Banning it though is a really bad move – something I would expect from the Russian government itself, not Europe. One of the reasons I’ve become disillusioned in EU recently.
- memonkey 1y ago
  Most thinking people will try not to take current event reporting at face value. For many Americans, it's easy to accept a lot of things your Mainstream Media Source gives you (including NPR or NYTs), and ironically when one of the current themes is to distrust mainstream media.
  - CoastalCoder 1y ago
    FWIW, I trust NPR reporting to only make true statements. What they're sometimes guilty of (in my judgement) is one-sided reporting. E.g., regarding illegal immigration, providing sympathetic personal stories of illegal immigrants, but not of the persons hurt by illegal immigration. It's also possible they've gotten better about this. I stopped listening years ago.
- atmavatar 1y ago

wtcactus 1y ago

This is a non exhaustive list of news where the BBC started by blaming Israel of some war crime since the October 7th massacre occurred, and then had to remove, recant or apologize about after overwhelming evidence against it came to light: - Al-Ahli hospital explosion (Oct 2023) - Al-Shifa hospital “medical teams targeted” (Nov 2023) - Summary executions claim (Dec 24) - Aid‑centre shooting attribution (Jun 2025) - Al‑Shifa “raid on medical teams” redux (Jun 2025) Imagine if the journalists weren’t “forced to do pro Israel PR”. BBC needs a proper external investigation on the levels of anti semitism that clearly permeate the ranks of their so called journalists.

ragazzina 1y ago
>after overwhelming evidence against it came to light Or maybe they removed articles because of political pressure? Post overwhelming evidence against the fact that the Al-Ahli hospital explosion was caused by an Israel airstrike, for example.
- wtcactus 1y ago
  Sure, here you go: Not only every expert consulted by every journal agreed that the explosion was not even caused by an airstrike, but they also agreed it was caused by a projectile launched from Palestinian territory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosion?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosio...
  - ragazzina 1y ago
    You are posting, with a straight face, a link that repeats in all its entirety how nothing conclusive can be stated, how no expert has ever given a definitive answer, and you are saying the article affirms the opposite. Are you an LLM?
    - wtcactus 1y ago
      All the consulted experts on the source agree that this wasn't an airstrike. Most of the consulted experts agree that it was fired from inside Palestinian territory. No consulted experts agree this was an airstrike. No consulted experts agree this was fired from outside Palestinian territory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosio...

philosophty 1y ago

[flagged]

theowjul10 1y ago

[dead]

iceKirin 1y ago

When the strong attack the weak, is your neutrality really still "neutral"?

topspin 1y ago

Recent BBC World headlines: Gaza doctor whose nine children were killed in Israeli strike dies from injuries (June 2) Gaza now worse than hell on earth, humanitarian chief tells BBC (June 4) Three journalists among five killed in Israeli strike on Gaza hospital (June 5) Four killed near Gaza aid centre, health workers say (June 8) Dozens of Palestinians killed while seeking aid in Gaza, hospitals say (June 11) More than 20 Palestinians killed by Israeli fire near Gaza aid sites, Hamas-run ministry says (June 16) Israeli forces kill 51 Palestinians waiting for flour at Gaza aid site, witnesses and rescuers say (June 17) Eleven killed by Israeli fire while seeking aid in Gaza, rescuers say (June 18) At least 12 Palestinians killed waiting for aid in Gaza, say medics (June 19) Israeli military kills 23 Palestinians near aid site in Gaza, witnesses and medics say (June 20) GHF boss defends Gaza aid operation after hundreds of Palestinians killed near sites (June 27) At least 81 people killed in Israeli strikes in Gaza, Hamas-run health ministry says (June 28) Israeli military investigates 'reports of harm to civilians' after hundreds killed near Gaza aid sites (June 30) Hundreds of families displaced by wave of Israeli air strikes on Gaza, Palestinians say (June 30) Dozens killed in Gaza as Israel intensifies bombardment, rescuers say (July 3) Israel's strike on bustling Gaza café killed a Hamas operative - but dozens more people were killed (July 4) Now, perhaps these anonymous staff make some distinction between headlines and whatever they mean by "PR," but there appears to be zero hesitation reporting everything the BBC can find on the crimes of Israel, real or imagined. Reading the open letter makes no such distinction, citing "reporting" many times. At least two of the above are directly attributed to "Hamas-run ministry," which is somehow a source for BCC's supposedly pro-Israel reporting. How am I supposed to not see what I'm seeing with my lying eyes? I don't believe I'm capable of this tier of cognitive dissonance.

kelnos 1y ago
Just because you can list a bunch of article headlines that seem to not show bias, it doesn't mean there isn't bias. That takes a much deeper analysis.
- ryeats 1y ago
  It's ~1% click through most just get the news from the headline.

yieldcrv 1y ago

When some of my more privileged Jewish friends are feeling glee, they proudly say their people do control the news Feels kind of gaslighty when we can all perceive that there is a disproportionate overrepresentation of exactly that, but if us gentiles say it is called an “antisemitic trope” not every observation is based on wanting a hurtful outcome against jewish people, but every reaction to that observation seems like thats the assumption. doesnt seem productive though, counterproductive and self fulfilling is what it seems like

ixtli 1y ago

[flagged]

strictnein 1y ago

> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html edit: honestly, look at the comment quality on this post. There's a reason that HN should avoid purely political stuff like this.

tacticalturtle 1y ago
You can look at the post history of some of the comments here - some of the most prolific commenters in this thread appear to only comment on the Israel/Palestine conflict.

fldskfjdslkfj 1y ago

[flagged]

bofadeez 1y ago

The PR only works on very old people and very low IQ people. It's just brute force at this point. Everyone knows what they're doing. Everyone here can identify the fake comments. They think they're slick but it's just the Streisand effect at this point.

globalnode 1y ago
or very badly educated.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
IAmBroom 1y ago
"Everyone". Basically, you're suggesting that propaganda only works on the feeble-minded and dumb, and "All True Scotsmen" know better than to fall for it. Wow.
- bofadeez 1y ago
  Like for example, your comment makes no sense. It reads like you got paid to write it. You're not contributing anything at all - just expressing that you feel something that most people would call "exaggerated" and "performative" and "embarrassing"

jwrallie 1y ago

[flagged]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

dietr1ch 1y ago

[flagged]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

EvgeniyZh 1y ago

[flagged]

init7 1y ago

As an outsider, I feel the narrative has totally turned for the rest of the world. Israeli citizens protesting against the genocide and war crimes rekindled faith that it's mostly the top of govts and military industrial complexes pushing for this. Not just BBC, most media ended up out in the open this time around. Or maybe it has always been like this, we are just growing up now and taking notice.

ztrztrezzeru 1y ago

[dead]

surfingdino 1y ago

[flagged]

LeoPanthera 1y ago

It must not be the entire BBC. In the US I listen to the World Service radio news, and they do not shy away from reporting the horrors of war in Gaza. Even their interviews with Israeli representatives are shockingly unfiltered.

rich_sasha 1y ago

Offending or over-accusing sides of this conflict is a very asymmetric risk. Misrepresent Palestinians negatively and you may eventually get an angry, vague letter - with a quarter of signatories doing so anonymously. Misrepresent Israelis negatively and you get very powerful and well-organised protests. BBC is sadly doing the rational thing of staying clear of suggesting Israel may be doing some bad things. It is a Corporation after all and so acts in corporate ways. But this is also the example coming to them from the top. On the occasions where Israel has clearly committed egregious violations, such as shooting at people massed at the aid dispensal locations or the medics who then got buried in shallow graves, Israel gets barely a whimper of criticism from European politicians - and apparently full-throated cheering and support from the US. The ICC arrest warrant is as forgotten as last year's snow. So why are we surprised the BBC doesn't want to stick its head above the parapet?

dgellow 1y ago
> So why are we surprised the BBC doesn't want to stick its head above the parapet? Whenever a group publicly criticizes a behavior, you see the rhetorical question “Why are you surprised?”, and that feels dismissive and disingenuous. Yes, BBC has some reasons to behave the way they do, sure. It’s really not relevant to the points being brought. Every actor has reasons to behave. People are critical of the behavior, whatever the actor’s incentives are. Because a behavior feels more logical or rational it shouldn’t be discussed? If you would answer negatively then what’s the point of asking your question? Is it just to express your cynicism of that whole situation?
- rich_sasha 1y ago
  > Yes, BBC has some reasons to behave the way they do, sure. It’s really not relevant to the points being brought My point is they are responding to external constraints shaped by the broader society - the very same group who seems to put up with Israel's outrageous stunts. To angst about the first but not the second is the illogical bit to me. The BBC is not quite a weathervane, but like so many commentators in this space, is so heavily constrained in what it can do that it's meaningless to focus on the actions, not the constraints. It's like when people are shocked that politicians are not morally superior to the average person in the society that raised them. You sample from a group, you're going to mimick its distribution. So I am not surprised or shocked how the BBC is acting. I am surprised and shocked that the many societies (Europe, America, ME) seems to accept this situation, as a root cause if you like.

b0a04gl 1y ago

[dead]

shantnutiwari 1y ago

The left blames BBC, calling them Tory shills, the right blames them, calling them woke activists. Dont know--seems to me they are doing the right thing.

Protostome 1y ago

And I assume the BBC are completely impartial regarding the conflict.

aristofun 1y ago

[flagged]

sumo89 1y ago
Oh look the Israeli tech workers are online. Everyone knows it's a genocide. "Gaza victim narrative", the absolute state of you.
- aristofun 1y ago
  I’m not Israeli tech worker. Care to refute with facts any of my points? Or all you can do is drop words and call names? Everyone knows this is the only tactics of pro-xamas lunatics - just to scream loud. No facts, no logic, no answers to uncomfortable questions.

spants 1y ago

The BBC recently showed a documentary that was pro-Palestinian and factually wrong. They also paid Hamas affiliates and relations to star in it. I have no idea where the "BBC are pro-Israel" thoughts come from but as a brit - I don't see it.

IAmBroom 1y ago
Cite much?

myth_drannon 1y ago

Mandatory sketch of BBC interviews https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHTNuBKtzHc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHTNuBKtzHc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYUL1R4pupU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYUL1R4pupU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gut1jyzwFV8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gut1jyzwFV8

galfarragem 1y ago

War is complex. One party starts with the "moral advantage" — but as soon as conflict escalates, sides look more alike than different. This is war after all. Media is entrenched, disregarding their own side's actions. We've seen it in Ukraine-Russia. And now in Israel-Palestine. F*ck war.