We, the undersigned – a group of diverse industry professionals and concerned parties – are dismayed at the lack of consistently fair and accurate evidence-based journalism in coverage of Gaza across impartial broadcasters (“BBC staff accuse broadcaster of Israel bias in Gaza coverage”, Friday 1 November).
Organisations like the BBC, ITV and Sky enjoy high levels of public trust. These outlets all have a heightened duty to fearlessly follow the evidence, and paint an accurate picture.
The BBC, in particular, is licence fee-funded, and the erosion of its own editorial standards has put its impartiality and independence at serious risk. Basic journalistic tenets have been lacking when it comes to holding Israel to account for its actions.
We, as a group of largely industry professionals, want to see the best possible journalism coming out of the region and ask these broadcasters for accuracy across the board, including, but not limited to: reiterating that Israel does not give external journalists access to Gaza, making it clear when there is insufficient evidence to back up Israeli claims, highlighting the extent to which Israeli sources are reliable, making clear where Israel is the perpetrator in article headlines, providing proportionate representation of experts in war crimes and crimes against humanity, including regular historical context predating October 2023, use of consistent language when discussing both Israeli and Palestinian deaths, and robustly challenging Israeli government and military representatives in all interviews.
Many of us have raised concerns across organisations via the appropriate channels, to no avail.
Israel has now killed at least tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023, including over a hundred Palestinian journalists reporting on the ground. We are appalled to see the same editorial failings repeated across news organisations over a year since this onslaught began, and are dismayed at the targeting of journalists who have either robustly challenged Israel on air, or raised concerns over the quality of coverage.
The consequences of inadequate coverage are significant. Every television report, article and radio interview that has failed to robustly challenge Israeli claims has systematically dehumanised Palestinians.
We now ask broadcasters to recommit to the highest editorial standards – with emphasis on fairness, accuracy and due impartiality – and to exhibit the editorial bravery we have seen in other story areas. Israel must be held to account for its actions, without fear or favour.
Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, Conservative peer; William Dalrymple, historian; Juliet Stevenson, actor; Dr Catherine Happer, director of the Glasgow University Media Group; Rizwana Hamid, director at the Centre for Media Monitoring; John Nicolson, broadcaster. Full list of 237 signatories, both journalism industry professionals and other concerned parties
We must lift the burden on the NHS
The unbelievable lack of awareness over the impact the hike in employer’s national insurance will have on social care providers has, once again, betrayed a horrific lack of understanding, at the highest level of government, of the way this country looks after its most vulnerable (“Now Reeves faces backlash from GPs, care homes and hospices over national insurance hike”, Friday 1 November).
A way must be found to avoid this further burden being added to care providers who are struggling to survive as it is. If not, more providers will leave the market, and there will be an increase on the 2 million who already can’t get care.
Not only that, but any reform of the NHS will be totally scuppered with this extra burden in care.
Mike Padgham
York
This Budget has hindered, not helped, social care
The Budget is alarming for not-for-profit social care providers because it will put us under pressure to meet the increases in tax costs across our workforce (“Employer national insurance hike to slow hiring and wage growth, critics say”, Wednesday 30 October).
Our initial analysis indicates the increases to national insurance and reduction in the lower limit earnings will cost us £5m next year. In addition to this, the increase in the national living wage will increase our wage bill by £10.2m and give us less scope to maintain differentials between entry-level and more experienced colleagues, which is vital to retain them.
The NHS has received a huge amount of funding – £21bn over two years – compared to a mere £600m split between children’s and adult social care. This won’t be enough to cover the increased costs we’ll face, and we will be reliant on uplifts from local government commissioners to pay for these increases. From what we can see, the Budget does not provide the extra funding local authorities will need to support this.
We need funding now, to help us recruit more staff and stabilise the sector.
Continuity of support is vital to the people we support. This Budget does the opposite; it adds to the financial pressure we already face.
Rachael Dodgson
Chief executive of support provider Dimensions
The value of nothing
I do hope the National Audit Office looks at the appointment of David Goldstone, chair of the new Office for Value for Money, who, it is reported, will be paid a day rate of £950, for one day a week for one year (“Head of value for money office to earn £950 a day”, Friday, 1 November).
I think, when it comes to public money, they may find his appointment a waste of money and of no value at all.
Kartar Uppal
West Midlands
