|
Current affairs
|
|
BBC's decision to deny people of GAZA much needed help
I strongly feel that the BBC's decision on not airing the DEC's appeal for humanitarian aid to the suffering people in Gaza on the pretence of so-called impartiality is totally baseless and appauling. I think they have given in to the lobby culture which they claim that they wanted to avoid in the first place. Its really sensleless to see how airing an appeal from an independant organisation would threaten your impartiality which bytheway was not impartial at all. If you look at BBC's coverage from an impartial person's point of view, you would find that it seemed as if BBC was always trying to appease the people in Israel and forgetting who the aggressor was who started the conflict. In fact, it was always apparent that BBC was always very eager in defending the point of view of 'Goliath' rather than speaking for 'David'. Shame on you BBC!
Tags:
|
Recent Entries
Archives
|
I think the BBC just doesn't want its international name embroiled in such a political minefield. The fact Sky with an equally multi-nation audience also refused to air the appeal seems supportive of this theory.
Although at least now more people will have heard about the fund. Everyone just donate anyway!
Having seen the appeal (http://www.dec.org.uk/item/200/?gclid=CLyYjqiZtJgCFQoi3godbwJ5Uw), it is very much a charity advert. Sentimental music, lingering shots of miserable children and haggard old men, a slightly condescending voice over that slowly reels off the statistics of death and disaster. I personally don't like such advertisments. I don't like emotional blackmail, and I don't like people trying to make me feel guilty. But, I am sure such tactics are effective, and I support the aim of alleviating the suffering of innocent people. To be fair, the DEC appeal steered clear of any political overtones.
If the BBC airs such appeals, where does it draw the line? Should it have aired NFU appeals during the BSE or foot and mouth crises in the UK? Should it air appeals only when they tie in nicely with current news reporting - or should it air any appeal where the people involved exceed some threshold of 10,000 or 100,000? It's not at all straightforward. I'm not aware of any BBC policy on the matter, the simple fact that bad things are happening to people isn't a good enough reason for the BBC to air any charity appeal. DEC is a very large, very well funded organisation - they are well equipped to raise awareness and money without prime-time tv.
So, the BBC might reasonably have refused the request for many reasons, but the reason it gave is a curious one - that to air the appeal would destroy the BBC's perceived impartiality. Again, there are two questions here - would it actually been biased for the BBC to air this appeal, and secondly, if the BBC were simply (and wrongly) perceived as being biased, would that be a good reason to not air it?
I don't think either of these questions have easy answers. The second question is easier in some ways. The BBC *does* have a formal mission to report widely on world affairs. If it were to gain a reputation for bias, then pretty soon the respect for BBC journalists would diminish, access to people and places would be reduced, and the BBC would be severely hindered in this core mission. That doesn't mean of course that the BBC should lie, even by ommission, simply to keep some group of people happy. The BBC is regularly accused by both sides of this conflict of extreme bias - it will never keep both sides happy. But it must show that it tries to stay impartial. It must show people everywhere that independence and impartiallity are vital issues for the BBC. By not airing this advertisement, at the very least they have shown the world that they take these things seriously.
On the final issue - whether any appeal of this nature is politically biased, the best I can do is suggest that people try applying this situation to other events. An appeal for innocent victims in Chechnya might seem similar to this one, although Israel's armed forces are a model of restraint and compassion compared with Russia's forces in that conflict. An appeal for innocent Albanian victims of the Balkans conflict in 1991 might seem strange - why not also help Bosnians, Kosovans, even innocent Serbian victims? An appeal that sought to help only Tamil victims in Sri Lanka? An appeal that sought to help only Christians in Darfu? An appeal for disaster relief in Iraq that sought to help Iraqi Kurds only?
These things are never simple.
"If the BBC had a policy of never broadcasting appeals then it would be consistent not to do it this time. They don't have such a policy," he said.
"If the BBC had a policy of not broadcasting appeals to help people affected by war then that would be consistent. Yet they have not objected in the past to highlighting appeals about Ethiopia or the Sudan, or Rwanda, where war has affected ordinary people."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7856810.stm
Destroying United Nations buildings and killing innocent women and children who had taken refuge there can neither be called restraint nor compassion. These are war crimes committed by a country which represents the last places on the face of earth where 'Aparthied' is still alive and thriving.
I think its the duty of the international community to investigate these war crimes and bring to justice the war criminals responsible for destroying UN buildings and killing inncocent children and for BBC, instead of siding with the Aggressor in the name of impartiality is not an excuse enough to save your face. Shame on BBC!
I didn't agree with the BBC's decision or its rationale for its decision.
Interestingly I think the subsequent media attention has ironically brought far more publicity to the cause...! No bad thing in view of the need.
In many respects I feel uncomfortable seeing the mass appeals for donations to sort out and rebuild Gaza. I'll dig deep in my pocket but I do think that Israel should be the major donor responsible for the reconstruction of Gaza-or perhaps the USA could cease their financial support to Israel and use these funds to rebuild Gaza.
Kate
Regarding the behaviour of the IDF, I don't think this is a model of restraint and compassion - except when compared with most other armies. This depressing list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ongoing_conflicts
Shows any number of conflicts in which one or both protagonists behave far worse than *either* side in the current Israeli incursion. It also shows the relatively small scale of the whole conflict.
Finally, I think we need to separate 'rebuilding' from providing immediate humanitarian aid. The first is a political/economic act. The second is an act of charity and compassion.