THE BBC’s coverage of the ongoing assault on Gaza should be subject to a “deep, systematic” review, according to the corporation’s chairman.
During an appearance at the House of Lords’ Communications and Digital Committee, BBC chairman Samir Shah was asked about how the corporation was responding to complaints about its coverage of the Middle East.
It comes after an AI-driven review published by an Israel-based British lawyer over the weekend claimed the BBC had downplayed the terrorism of Hamas and broken its own editorial guidelines more than 1500 times in its reporting of the conflict.
In response, the BBC said it had “serious questions” about the methodology of the report.
A previous report conducted by two data scientists also found the BBC had displayed “bias” in how it was reporting deaths, with words such as mother, father, daughter and son far more likely to be linked to Israelis rather than Palestinians.
Shah told the committee that he felt the BBC’s coverage of the conflict in the Middle East should be subject to an internal review.
“The Israel-Gaza story is a very, very complicated story and there are very strong emotions on both sides,” he said.
“I chair the editorial guidelines and standards committee and that is part of the process where complaints are discussed, talked about and addressed.
“We have discussed the Israel-Gaza situation, in various different ways, many times to look at what the complaints are, the nature of the complaints and the balance of complaints.”
He added that he felt the conflict between Israel and Gaza should be a serious contender for being the subject of the next “thematic review” conducted by the BBC.
The corporation undertakes one or two such reviews into parts of coverage each year.
“The Middle East conflict is one area we should consider very seriously to be subject to a deep, systematic analysis of how we cover it,” said Shah.
“It’s a very difficult story.
“In my time — and I’ve been doing it for 40 years — this is one thing that has really resulted in lots and lots of concern on all sides.
"I think it’s the duty of the board, because the BBC plays such a big role in reporting on the Middle East conflict to the rest of the world, that we do take time out and do an analysis, a review, of that coverage.”
Director-general Tim Davie added that the BBC took every complaint about their coverage seriously.
“Broadly, I think we are doing a very good job,” he said.
“The research that we have in terms of the overall public response is good but that does not mean we’re perfect.
“We will treat these complaints seriously and we won’t be, frankly, in auto-defence. But also, we will stand up for our journalists and stand up for people doing a good job.
“There’s a few of us around the table who have been through a few of these. This one’s as difficult as they get, in my view.”
A study conducted by openDemocracy earlier this year found that Israeli casualties were given proportionally more coverage by the BBC than Palestinian casualties and that the language used to describe Israeli deaths was markedly different.
Indeed, it found the phrases “murder”, “murderous”, “mass murder”, “brutal murder” and “merciless murder” were used a total of 52 times by journalists to refer to Israelis’ deaths but never in relation to Palestinian deaths.
