BBC to review Middle East coverage in wake of bias scandal

The BBC is to review its coverage of the Middle East after admitting to multiple problems with its reporting of the war in Gaza.

The broadcaster has accepted that it must “learn lessons” after allegations of bias were exposed by The Telegraph last month.

In a 19-page memo, leaked by a whistleblower, the BBC was accused of appearing to “always believe the worst about Israel” and “paint Israel as the aggressor” in the conflict with Gaza.

The response amounts to a slap down of Jonathan Munro, the BBC News global director, who dismissed warnings of bias earlier this year and described BBC Arabic as “exceptional”.

On Friday, the BBC published a response to the memo, written by Michael Prescott, a former independent adviser to the corporation. The memo covered wide-ranging claims of bias, including the revelation that Panorama had doctored a speech by Donald Trump, over which the US president is suing the broadcaster for $10bn (£7.4bn).

The BBC’s response disclosed that staff have been banned from using the phrase “assigned at birth” when referring to someone’s sex, following claims that its coverage of transgender issues had been captured by gender ideologists within the corporation.

The BBC is also reviewing its history output after accepting that it had been overly defensive when The Telegraph reported complaints that it was presenting a distorted version of Britain’s colonial past.

Separately, a review of the way the BBC monitors its editorial standards concluded that Samir Shah, the chairman, should no longer sit on the editorial guidelines and standards committee  because his “roles are conflicted” under the current arrangement.

After The Telegraph’s disclosures about BBC bias, which led to the resignations of Tim Davie, the director-general, and Deborah Turness, the BBC News chief executive, the BBC board asked Peter Johnston, its director of editorial complaints and reviews, to compile a detailed report into the issues raised by Mr Prescott.

Mr Prescott had claimed the broadcaster appeared to have “a desire always to believe the worst about Israel” and that BBC Arabic in particular tried to “minimise Israeli suffering and paint Israel as the aggressor” in the conflict triggered by the Hamas terrorist attack of Oct 7 2023.

When an internal report highlighting problems with Gaza coverage was presented to BBC managers in January, Mr Munro, who remains in his job, responded by “dismissing or diminishing its findings”, according to Mr Prescott’s memo, and said BBC Arabic had delivered “exceptional journalism during this period”.

However, Mr Johnston found that many of the complaints highlighted by Mr Prescott were justified, including problems with the way figures for deaths in Gaza were sourced; wrongly reporting that the International Court of Justice had found a “plausible case of genocide” in Gaza; wrongly reporting that Israeli soldiers had buried hundreds of bodies in mass graves when the graves were in fact dug and filled by Hamas, and wrongly claiming 14,000 babies in Gaza were at risk of starving to death in the space of 48 hours.

The BBC had already accepted that it had been wrong to use supposed freelance journalists who in reality were pro-Hamas and anti-Semitic for some of its reports from Gaza.

The BBC will now conduct “a full editorial review of coverage of the Middle East”, Mr Johnston said in his report, intended to “fully evaluate our coverage of such a difficult story and to learn any lessons”.

It will include ongoing analysis of the output of BBC Arabic to “test the progress” of the work to rid it of bias.

All BBC Arabic editorial staff are being put through a new training programme, and a World Service Head of Editorial Quality and Standards, who is an Arabic speaker, has been appointed.

In 2022, The Telegraph reported that a group of Oxbridge academics called History Reclaimed had complained to the BBC about its history programmes, saying the broadcaster was “seeking out non-expert academics” who would present a “woke” view of Britain’s colonial past.

The BBC responded at the time by accusing the academics of “cherry-picking” their examples.

Mr Johnston said the response was “not acceptable or appropriate” and that the historians had made some “sensible recommendations”. He recommended a review of the BBC’s history output.

Mr Shah said: “Along with the BBC board, I am now ensuring immediate changes are made to the editorial guidelines and standards committee to ensure swift, appropriate and transparent action is taken to address editorial issues as effectively as possible, whenever they occur.”

[Source: Daily Telegraph]