MEMO
October 4, 2024
A view of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Headquarters in London, United Kingdom on July 14, 2023. [Raşid Necati Aslım – Anadolu Agency]
Pro-Israeli bias has been overwhelming in UK media coverage of what has been happening in Gaza over the past year, Anadolu Agency reports.
Issues ranging from lack of context to use of language have raised questions about ethics in reporting and analysis since the 7 October attacks by Palestinian Resistance group, Hamas. Many critics argue that mainstream Western media has given a platform to pro-Israeli voices that downplay the catastrophic situation in Gaza or use headlines that ignore Tel Aviv’s responsibility in Palestinian civilian deaths.
Rizwana Hamid, Director of the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM), told Anadolu that much of the coverage on Gaza had an “overwhelmingly pro-Israeli bias and narrative” across all UK media outlets.
This lopsided reporting is evident in “how the war was being framed”, Hamid explained, either as “a war between Jewish people and Muslims, or Israel versus Hamas”.
READ: Gaza and a ceasefire slip out of focus as Lebanon conflict rages
She noted that the absence of context continued in terms of “what the war is actually about, and that it’s an over-76-year conflict of occupation.” While this improved subsequently, it was largely absent at the beginning.
Hamid pointed out that “emotive language was very much being used towards Israeli victims, as opposed to Palestinian victims”. This trend continued for months, even though Palestinian casualty figures had far exceeded those of 7 October.
“That continues now as well, to very much refer to when Israelis are victims as it being brutal or barbaric or slaughter or horrific, etc.,” said Hamid, adding that, on the other hand, there has been a reluctance to use such emotive terms for Palestinian casualties and deaths.
Referring to a report by the CfMM, she said Israelis were referred to as victims 11 times more than Palestinians in the first month’s coverage.
She also pointed to a “constant emphasis on Israel’s right to defend itself” over Palestinians’ right to self-defence, noting that this was also clear in the current war against the Hezbollah group in Lebanon.
“We found that when it came to Israel-Palestine, the ratio was five-to-one in terms of them speaking about Israel’s right to defend itself,” she said.
‘Discrepancy’ in coverage
Hamid went on to say that, in the first months since 7 October, more pro-Israeli voices were being platformed than Palestinian voices.
“When and if Palestinian voices were brought on, the ticket to enter the discussions was always, ‘do you condemn Hamas’, challenging them whenever they tried to bring context in, or just shutting them down completely,” she said, adding that conversely, the pro-Israeli speakers were not made to condemn Israel’s actions and deadly attacks.
Highlighting a “discrepancy” in how interviewees were treated, particularly when Israeli voices expressed unverified claims, Hamid called attention to the widely circulated stories of beheaded babies and babies in ovens.
“When Israeli spokespeople were brought on, whatever the question was, they would first kind of spout these untruths and then go on to answer, there was a lack of challenge there as well.”
Hamid observed a similar biased approach in US media, whether in the use of language, how the war has been framed, or the lack of context and challenge. “So I think we can broadly say that the Western media, by and large, has approached it from a pro-Israel perspective,” she emphasized.
However, she noted that these tendencies have somewhat changed, although similar examples persist.
“There’re examples when a Palestinian person is brought on and they’ve been questioned at the end of the interview, the presenter will be very diligent in saying, ‘well, the Israelis would reject this, and this is the Israeli position’. So they’re very, very conscious of presenting the Israeli perspective.
“And yet, we don’t find that when there’s a pro-Israeli spokesperson on, they don’t necessarily over-emphasize that. ‘Look, this is not necessarily true. Or Palestinians would say this’,” Hamid explained.
“Language, platforming, lack of challenge, context framing, I think they’re ongoing issues,” she said.
No comments:
Post a Comment