Complicity in Oppression: Do the Media Aid Israel?
A packed meeting at Amnesty International’s Human rights Action Centre, London, were treated to an expert panel speaking with insider knowledge on the BBC’s coverage of Palestine/Israel. Chaired by Victoria Brittain the speakers were Greg Philo, Research Director of the Glasgow Media Group and co-author of Bad News from Israel (2004) and More Bad News from Israel (May 2011), Tim Llewellyn the BBC’s former Middle East correspondent and Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of Al Quds El Arabi the London-based paper.
Speaking first, Greg Philo recounted several stories about how the lack of context given to the viewing and listening public on Palestine/Israel by the BBC, can lead people to draw odd conclusions as to the source of the conflict and what can be done to resolve it. One group of women in Glasgow who were shown scenes taken from TV coverage of youths throwing stones during the second intifada, suggested that if their parents were more responsible and didn’t let them out of the house then that would solve the stone throwing problem. However, when one of the women said that she seemed to remember that the people throwing the stones had been invaded and their land stolen, then the group opinion changed and they agreed that if that had happened to them that they’d be out throwing stones too.
Greg Philo spoke about the very sophisticated PR campaign initiated by Israel at the beginning of 2008, the aim of which was to coordinate language, ‘key phrases that work’ and group tested propaganda points which were collected in the ‘Global Language Dictionary’ issued to Israeli media spokespersons by the Israel Project. The effectiveness of this campaign could be judged by the way these ‘key phrases’, which were repeatedly used by all Israeli spokespersons on TV, were then regurgitated by individuals taking part in research test groups as though this were the one and only true opinion. As Greg Philo pointed out, there are always at least two ways of viewing a story but when only one side is heard repeatedly while the other is shut out, then this becomes the sole story.
This PR onslaught was especially effective in controlling opinions formed by TV coverage of the murderous campaign against Gaza in 2008/09 known as Cast Lead. The BBC apparently thought that the images of horror from Gaza were enough of a comment on behalf of the Palestinian victims and that a verbal context or explanation from the Palestinian viewpoint was unnecessary.
However, when these images were accompanied with commentary by Israeli spokespersons, quoting from the ‘Global Language Dictionary’, the disconnect between the image and the Israeli’s explanation of the ‘need’ for this violence, led viewers to question their initial shock and horror and sympathise with the aggressor’s actions.
In conclusion Greg Philo called for debate to be opened up. He said that shutting out one side, the Palestinian’s story, could only lead to a continuation of the status quo and would resolve nothing.
Context, and lack thereof, also featured in Tim Llewellyn’s talk. He spoke of the period before 2004 during which, although far from perfect, journalists had access to senior management and executives at the BBC and there was a relatively free environment for reporting from the Middle East. The situation now is very different and he put this down to three main causes; Israel’s highly organised media campaign that started in 2000 to swamp coverage of the second intifada with the Israeli viewpoint and which led to the forming of BICOM, the events of 9/11 which enabled Israel to reshape the conflict in terms of the so-called ‘War on Terror’, and the fallout from the Hutton Report which left the BBC fearful of politicians power.
The combination of these factors has led to an “iron wall” being built around reporting on Palestine/Israel and journalists living in fear of stepping outside the strict parameters laid down by the Israeli lobby, a point also stressed by Greg Philo. Tim Llewellyn gave as an example of the new regime at the BBC the timid and compromised report that the BBC Trust produced in answer to the 1,500 complaints that were received over the Panorama program about the murders of peace activists on the Mavi Marmara, ‘Death in the Med’. He concluded that until the BBC is answerable to an outside monitoring body such as OFCOM, there was unlikely to be any self-criticism or challenge to the existing order.
Abdel Bari Atwan, born in Gaza, spoke on ‘attacking the messenger’. During his long career as a journalist and newspaper editor he has appeared on TV as the voice of the ‘other’, the Palestinian, many times as producers found he engaged well with their TV audiences. However, during the attack on Gaza in 2008/09 he was not asked to appear even once to present the Palestinian side while the Israel Ambassador was “practically camped out at the BBC” for the duration. The dismissive and high-handed attitude displayed by the BBC towards Abdel Bari Atwan is an example of the general prevailing attitude at the BBC towards Palestinian commentators in general. The outcome of allowing the Palestinian story to be heard on an equal basis would be to expose the coordinated Israel propaganda for what it is, a pack of shiny lies, and Aunty wouldn’t like that.
Abdel Bari Atwan is also the author of several books, one an authoritative book on Osama Bin Laden, who he interviewed in the late 1990’s, which was published before 9/11. He was subsequently asked to comment on the attacks in New York by media outlets across the world. He was twice asked to appear on the BBC’s Newsnight to comment as an expert on Al Qaeda but on both occasions, after arriving at the studios, was told that he wouldn’t be needed as they had another guest. Watching the program after going home the first guest to replace him was the well-known ‘expert’ Netanyahu and on the second occasion, Ehud Barak.
In response to questions, all three speakers suggested that change would only come to the BBC through sustained complaints over biased and unequal coverage of events, small steps can lead to changes of perspective. Greg Philo ended by pointing out that during a report last week the BBC had mentioned the massacre by British soldiers of 14 unarmed Irish civilians at Croke Park in 1920. This type of contextual information about the conflict in Ireland had been a no-go area in the 1980’s when the Glasgow Media Group first started analysing coverage of the ‘troubles’ and he’d been hard pressed to believe that he’d actually heard it right.
Hopefully there will be video of the evening online soon as I’ve only been able to skim the surface of what was said at this important and informed meeting. Please watch it when it appears and keep calling and writing to the BBC until they get with the program.
This event was organised by The Palestine Solidarity Campaign and MEMO
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/may/23/bbc-israeli-conflict-coverage
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/may/23/bbc-complaints-procedures
Zionist Federation and EDL/JDL supporters that included Jonathan Hoffman, Roberta Moore, Martin Sugarman and Ian Sternberg demonstrating outside.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
