# "BBC viewers vent their anger at 'anti-US' bias of Iraq coverage" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 23, 2003, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963 "2003-02-23T13:27:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/1 "2003-02-23T13:27:03Z")
_Is the BBC really biased against the US position on Iraq?_ [A lot of their viewer think so.](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/02/23/nbbc23.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/02/23/ixnewstop.html) > [@](#): > > The BBC has received an unprecedented number of complaints at the alleged anti-war and anti-American tone of its coverage of the Iraqi crisis… > > One programme to attract opprobrium was the screening of a debate on Newsnight two weeks ago in which Tony Blair was savaged by an overwhelmingly anti-war audience. A Panorama programme on the crisis three weeks ago, which featured very few speakers in favour of military action, also provoked a hostile reaction. > > Viewers have complained that BBC interviews with “ordinary Iraqis” in Baghdad routinely fail to point out that they risk death if they criticise Saddam Hussein. Many others have been incensed by BBC journalists seeming to add personal comment to their reports that is openly opposed to American policy and a possible war. > > Some viewers were angered about a piece by Angus Roxburgh, the BBC’s Brussels correspondent, on the BBC website on February 12, which was headlined: "Europe’s new gang resists US ‘bullying’ ". He wrote: “President Bush’s attitude has reminded Russians of the bad old days when American presidents branded Russia the axis of evil.” > > Viewers also complained because he misquoted President Ronald Reagan, who actually said that the Soviet Union was an “evil empire”. > > There were also complaints about a Radio Five programme on January 25 in which David Loyn, the BBC world affairs correspondent, said it would be better if “America was engaged in the rest of the world, rather than frankly wanting to bomb it”. And, while we’re at it, please feel free to also debate a second bias accusation: _Is the BBC biased against Israel?_ ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/2 "2003-02-23T13:39:18Z")
I’m sure there are a few legitimate complaints against individual reporters or correspondents. The Roxborough and Loyn quotes do indeed sound very ill-informed. However, when you challenged me in another thread for cites that the BBC _does_ portray pro-war opinions, I found you at least a dozen in five minutes. That 400 people, the Telegraph, and **december** find the BBC biased does not surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/3 "2003-02-23T13:45:09Z")
[BBC tells its journalists to be alert over impartiality](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/12/23/nbeeb23.xml&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=79913) > [@](#): > > The head of BBC News has warned its journalists that they need to be more concerned about “impartiality” on contentious issues. > > \ > > Addressing an internal staff meeting of BBC journalists, he said: “We need to be on our mettle, particularly over the question of impartiality.” > > The main battlefields were Europe, the urban-rural divide and the Middle East, he added. > > The three issues are areas where the BBC has faced **particularly vociferous** allegations of bias. > > \ > > **However, the BBC said that on all three issues it was regularly accused of bias by both sides.** My emphases. ---
**Author:** ![MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bb73d2/32.png) [@MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MC_Master_of_Ceremonies)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/4 "2003-02-23T13:47:59Z")
well December, I have heard alot of people complain that the BBC are too _pro-war_, the truth is they are just about as impartial as it is possible for a news organization to be. They have no editorial line forced on any of the journalists, so any bias that is there is the result of the individual journalists. The Daily Telegraph is a pro-war paper which doesn’t have anything like the reputation that the BBC has for being impartial, especially on the Israel issue (Rupert Murdoch has extensive buisness interests in Israel, which has led to a lack of reporting on that issue). The owner Rupert Murdoch does enforce a strong editorial line. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/5 "2003-02-23T13:57:53Z")
Damn! **December** has caught us again! Our vast conspiracy, our total grip on media power, is once again exposed! Curses! Foiled again! All that labor and effort, duping the British public into believing that this war is unwise and ignoble, all for nothing! There are still **400** , yes, that’s right, _ **400!!!** _ clear-eyed and right-thinking Brits left to subvert. As to Israel…gotta admit that troubles me some. Our joined at the hip foreign policy is worrisome. We are Israels very best friend, but are they ours? By what reasoning can GeeDubya call Ariel Sharon a “man of peace”? Whose interests are best served by a dominant US military presence in the ME? Not ours. Not by a long shot. The fervent support of the pro-Apocalypse rabid right for Israel is a political fact but sounds like a premise for a novel co-authored by Tom Clancy and Stephen King. But it is a fact. People who long for the end of the world, crave it, dote upon it, see Israel as an instrument of Divine Prophecy. And they vote. Republican, of course. ---
**Author:** ![istara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e79b87/32.png) [@istara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/istara)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/6 "2003-02-23T14:19:28Z")
Just because a news organisation does not express the opinion or viewpoint that you want to hear, does not mean that they are biased. If you don’t want to hear impartial news, if you are not happy with the truth, don’t listen to the BBC, or any other similar impartial news medium. I think adding the extra (uncited) line about alleged Israeli bias makes this one of **december’s** lamest OPs yet. One example of a contentious issue as analysed on the BBC website: > [@](#): > > \*\*Is this about oil? > > Iraq has the second largest untapped reserves of oil in the world after Saudi Arabia. The powerful American oil industry is closely connected with the Bush administration. > > Some commentators believe that US oil companies are exerting pressure on the president to topple Saddam Hussein and gain control of this vast resource. > > Others argue, however, that the US has plenty of oil and is unlikely to commit to such a vast and risky undertaking as a war in Iraq for this reason alone. \*\* Both sides of the agument equally represented. Here’s the BBC on Arafat and the Palestinian National Authority : > [@](#): > > \*\*During its short existence, the body has largely failed to live up to the widespread optimism and high expectations which greeted its formation in the mid-1990s. > > _Peace process weapons have been put to use in war_ > > It has brought corruption, police brutality and - with an estimated 120 separate departments answering directly to Mr Arafat - there has been very little movement towards the pluralist civil society that was envisaged. \*\* Here’s the BBC on Sharon: > [@](#): > > \*\*Ariel Sharon has a thick skin and is proud of it. He does not care who loves or hates him - be they Israelis or Arabs. > > The one aim in life for the 74-year old former soldier and veteran politician is to ensure total security for Israel on his terms. > > That means keeping maximum land and political rights for the Jewish state and giving the very minimum of both to the Palestinians. \*\* I dunno, you find the anti-Israel bias. Sometimes, the truth just hurts. We know both sides have committed and continue to commit atrocities, and the BBC’s reporting just reflects that. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/7 "2003-02-23T17:24:03Z")
> [@](#): > > Just because a news organisation does not express the opinion or viewpoint that you want to hear, does not mean that they are biased. To december that is _exactly_ what “biased” means. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/8 "2003-02-23T17:49:24Z")
CNN and the BBC both blithly use street interviews and alleged measurements of Iraqi public opinion as though Iraqis are free to speak their minds. But, other than that and a few other ‘progressive’ affectations I find annoying, they do a pretty good job. Once you can see through the biases inherent in the system - help me, I’m being oppressed - you can get decent news from any outlet. ---
**Author:** ![MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bb73d2/32.png) [@MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MC_Master_of_Ceremonies)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/9 "2003-02-23T17:53:56Z")
Actually Beagle, I’ve never seen an interview with an Iraqi in Iraq on the BBC without added commentary on the fact that the fear of Saddam could be influnecing their opinions. This is an honest question, do you watch the BBC in Florida? ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/10 "2003-02-23T17:55:29Z")
I’m not sure **Beagle** whether you’re trying to suggest further parallels between CNN and the BBC. If so I would caution you not to do so. At least IMO, CNN just isn’t in the same league as the BBC as source of quality journalism. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/11 "2003-02-23T18:06:49Z")
We have a couple BBCs actually. [sub]I’ve got (500) channels of shit on the TV to choose from…choose from…choose from. [/Pink Floyd][/sub] I’ve heard all the news outlets point out that they are being monitored by the Ministry of (dis)Information. They are less consistent about pointing out that in every day life Iraqis are not free - at all - to express an opinion. It varies by correspondent and the context. I’m not saying that the BBC (or CNN, **Mandelstam** ) is in cahoots with the Iraqis. I think they are - like every outlet - trying to balance coverage, and yet not get kicked out by their Iraqi handlers. Sometimes, time constraints on television preclude any intelligent commentary at all. A particular story might only have 15 seconds of actual commentary. I chafe at the term “obective.” Can we all agree that _every single journalist in the world has a bias?_ That, to me, is the most important point. ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/12 "2003-02-23T18:43:11Z")
I agree that every journalist has some kind of bias and also that organizations such as the BBC or CNN or _The New York Times_ also not bias-free. But I also feel that there are varying standards of journalistic integrity. A high standard tends to offset individual and institutional bias–to whatever degree possible. Low journalist standards lead to little more than punditry dressed up as journalism. I think the BBC tries very hard to meet high standards of journalism. CNN doesn’t really serve the same purpose as the BBC–which is a much larger organization–and doesn’t have the same high standards. Though they’re far from terrible IMO. ---
**Author:** ![phreakomatic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/87869e/32.png) [@phreakomatic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/phreakomatic)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/13 "2003-02-23T19:14:17Z")
Sigh… Bias is part of what makes us human. Evryone has a Bias, this debate is now over.:wally ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/14 "2003-02-23T19:57:20Z")
Certainly BBC reporter Jon Simpson has been a very strong advocate for the “Iraqi in the street” (as distinguished from Saddam Hussein and the rest of the Iraqi administration and military, of which he’s no fan), and has complained about the effect that both the last was and the sanctions have had on them. The Beeb in general, however, has been more circumspect in its approach; if there’s anything I dislike about their news coverage, it’s the movement towards less in-depth reporting they seem to be exhibiting in order to compete with the other UK TV channels. The World Service, OTOH, continues to do their job well. The Daily Telegraph, however, is well-known for its right-wing bias (and is sometimes referred to as the “Torygraph”), much in the same way that the Guardian has a clear left-wing bias. Furthermore, all of Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers in various countries have been toeing the pro-war line pretty strongly editorially, following His Rupertness’s lead. I recommend taking anything related to the impending war with a large grain of salt. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Brian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c89c15/32.png) [@I\_Brian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Brian)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/15 "2003-02-23T20:12:41Z")
> [@](#): > > And, while we’re at it, please feel free to also debate a second bias accusation: > > Is the BBC biased against Israel? Of course it isn’t. The wording is strictly neutral - possibly too much so. But as stated before, the BBC is always accused of bias by any offended party. ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/16 "2003-02-23T20:32:16Z")
how’s this for anti-Israel bias?It was reported about 2 years ago, at the beginning of the current violence. The Israeli air force assassinated an Arab political leader by bombing his car from an attack helicopter while he was driving to political meeting in the West Bank. At least, that’s how the BBC reported it. They “forgot” to mention that his car contained two 30 caliber machine guns and a lot of explosives, and the the “political leader” was a wanted terrorist who PROUDLY circulated pictures of himself in the local press wearing full combat gear, with belts of machine gun ammunition draped over his shoulders. ---
**Author:** ![II\_Gyan\_II](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bbe5ce/32.png) [@II\_Gyan\_II](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/II_Gyan_II)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/17 "2003-02-23T21:56:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by chappachula \* > \*\*At least, that’s how the BBC reported it. They “forgot” to mention that his car contained two 30 caliber machine guns and a lot of explosives, and the the “political leader” was a wanted terrorist who PROUDLY circulated pictures of himself in the local press wearing full combat gear, with belts of machine gun ammunition draped over his shoulders. \*\* You might be ignoring regional issues here. There’s a state in India where anarchy reigns (almost literally). I wouldn’t be surprised if ALL politicians there carried ammunition and detail with them . It’s entirely possible that the terrorist/leader was infact, going to a political meeting. And the “protection” was a part of daily life. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/18 "2003-02-23T22:18:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by chappachula \* > how’s this for anti-Israel bias?It was reported about 2 years ago, at the beginning of the current violence. > The Israeli air force assassinated an Arab political leader by bombing his car from an attack helicopter while he was driving to political meeting in the West Bank. > > At least, that’s how the BBC reported it. They “forgot” to mention that his car contained two 30 caliber machine guns and a lot of explosives, and the the “political leader” was a wanted terrorist who PROUDLY circulated pictures of himself in the local press wearing full combat gear, with belts of machine gun ammunition draped over his shoulders. What verb would you use for firing on another State’s politician from a helicopter? I remember the BBC reporting that the Israelis also blew up a building to execute an opponent (killing civilians in the process). (I am well aware of the surrounding violence, but democracies should not sink to the level of their terrorist opponents.) The BBC regularly come under attack from UK political parties, but since the BBC is independent, that is to be expected. P.S. Do you think December shows any bias? :eek: 😕 :rolleyes: :smack: :wally ---
**Author:** ![notquitekarpov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71c47a/32.png) [@notquitekarpov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notquitekarpov)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/19 "2003-02-23T23:21:28Z")
Just a small aside - MC Master of Cermonies, and perhaps also jr8, seem to be suggesting the The Daily Telegraph is a Murdoch paper - NO it is in the Conrad Black stable. It is The Times and The Sun which are Murdoch rags. That does not change the fact that the Telegraph holds a right wing stance and is indeed highly biased on the issue of Israel and the Middle East generally. Ultimately the reason I switched to the Independent despite missing the Sports coverage… Sometime I must find out what Conrad’s beef with Zionism is, unless it is just honest conviction rather than cynical business reasons… Finally my two cents worth on the OP - the BBC are not biased as far as any western conservative (with a small “c”) organisation is - although individual reporters may seem to be (OK - are) from time to time. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2003, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963/20 "2003-02-23T23:44:41Z")
Has the _Telegraph_ had anything complementary to say about the BBC since about the appointment of [Hugh Carleton Greene](http://www.transdiffusion.org/emc/TVHeroes/hugh/) ? In 1960. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-viewers-vent-their-anger-at-anti-us-bias-of-iraq-coverage/156963.md?page=2)