BBC’s Gaza Coverage: New Report Reveals Deep Bias

[purpletablet]

I’ve just read the 2023–24 report by the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM), and it raises some serious concerns about how the BBC has covered Israel’s war on Gaza.

The report analysed over 3,800 BBC articles and 32,000 broadcast segments. Despite a 34:1 death ratio between Palestinians and Israelis, BBC coverage gave Israeli deaths far more attention, used much more emotive language, and consistently personalised Israeli victims while depersonalising Palestinians.

Some key points that stood out:

• Israeli deaths were mentioned 33 times more per person than Palestinian deaths in BBC articles
• The word “murdered” was used over 200 times for Israelis, but just once for Palestinians
• Presenters echoed Israeli perspectives 11 times more than Palestinian ones
• Historical context like occupation or blockade was mentioned in less than 1% of coverage
• Genocide claims were repeatedly shut down or ignored, despite being raised in international courts

They also compared this to the BBC’s Ukraine coverage, where victims were humanised, civilian deaths highlighted, and military justifications questioned far more frequently.

This isn’t just about bias in tone. It’s about shaping how the public understands the conflict and who is seen as human and worthy of sympathy.

I’m curious how others feel about this.
Have you noticed this imbalance in BBC reporting?
Should a public broadcaster be doing better?

Most media is biased, but he's the difference between bias and outright state controlled media.

1. Please point me to a news article from an Israeli journalist or publication where they report on the death of the Bibas children and I will be able to find you 50 articles from the same journalist or publication brutally criticising the Israeli government, calling for Bibis resignation, and otherwise holding their own country to account.

2. Then show me any news article from any journalist or publication inside Gaza reporting on the deaths of Gazan children and I will be able to find nothing, zero, not a single sentence criticising Hamas. Because they're not allowed to do that.

So how do you think you get the real truth is nobody is allowed to tell it?

I think you're spot on @ForgesOfEmpires .
And the naivety of the BBC in its reporting is breathtakingly reckless. It causes real harm - to all except Hamas - as it's so misleading.

The problem is the Israeli govt is taking no notice and no one is doing anything about it. So do you think the reporting of starving and maimed children in Gaza is biased or the truth?

Can you tell us which bits are misleading?

It's war @TheignT . It's a terrible thing and many innocents die. I'm not saying I don't care about dead innocents and children because I really do. But the two state solution is dead in the water due to Hamas' actions and I genuinely have no idea what happens next.

But broadcasting Gazan-based journos without the context @ForgesOfEmpires describes above doesn't surface how Hamas use Gazans as human shields, e.g. not letting civilians move from areas being bombed despite Israeli warnings, not explaining that quite often there are big death tolls to bombing because there are weapon stores that have secondary explosions or civilians surrounding terrorists, etc., not explaining that many of those that have died are terrorist combatants.

Other news sources sometimes cover this and so explain the reason behind what is being portrayed as indiscriminate bombing. They don't mention that terror tunnels are still being targeted and destroyed, etc. They don't show coverage of Hamas stealing aid or shooting their own people (to prevent them from taking it). I've seen this coverage on other Middle Eastern and Israeli news sites.

Now, I accept that they will have their biases too, which is why it's important to look at many sources and evaluate them for what's being included and excluded and why. And unless one has an interest in these things then why would one delve deeper? One would just take what the BBC covers as the 'truth' because, after all, it's the UK's national broadcaster that we all pay for via our license fee. We should be able to trust it. But we really can't. Which is frustrating and disappointing.

• They sanitise language for terrorists, calling them "militants" or similar
• They routinely publish unverified or false reports from Hamas sources and don't label them unverified
• By contrast they are very careful not to publish anything negative about Hamas without verification showing a double standard, for example they did not report on the rapes for months.
• They engage in selective outrage (focus on Gaza response, not Hamas crimes)
• They use headlines that draw false equivalence all the time between terrorists and a democratic state
• They demonstrate a lack of clarity or retraction after incorrect reporting
• They have had to make 15 Gaza related retractions for false reporting since the war
• Their mistakes are 2:1 in favour of Hamas
• They frequently have terrorists on TV and even showed a documentary where the child featured in it was the son of a Hamas member, and very little challenge takes place
• They completely ignore half the story which is unfavourable to Hamas, for example they downplay or ignored Hamas’s intentional embedding of fighters, weapons, and tunnels under schools, mosques, and hospitals.
• Several members of their own team have been removed for being antisemitic, some of which I have seen and it was bad!

they are just generally a poor source and not reliable, which pains me to say as I once had a great deal of love for the BBC

Well Israel won't let the BBC Sky ITV in so do you think we shouldn't know about the dead the maimed the staving? I'm sure that would suit Israel. Why do you think they don't want reporters in there? War reporters have been operating for many years. Winston Churchill was one as a young man. How come this is different and what might Israel be hiding?

An army operating within the Geneva Convention should have nothing to hide.

I watch Al Jazeera. Very good reporting.

They do let them in. British broadcasters like BBC, Sky, and ITV are allowed to operate in Israel and outlets like the BBC, Sky, and ITV routinely base correspondents in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

Do you mean in Gaza? Yes, access to Gaza is tightly controlled, escorted, and censored and I tend to agree this is a mistake on Israel's strategy broadly.

I get in a practical sense that allowing unescorted journalists into active combat zones could risk revealing troop positions, strategy, or exposing sensitive sites. Embeds are tightly controlled to prevent leaks - just like in other militaries (e.g. the US in Iraq or Afghanistan).

I also get that Gaza is a warzone, and Israel doesn't want to be blamed for killing foreign journalists. If a BBC or Sky team is killed by a Hamas rocket or IDF airstrike, Israel would take the international fall.

But at the end of the day I think journalists should be let in provided there was plans in place to prevent the above.

Also, in past wars, Hamas threatened or pressured reporters into downplaying rocket fire from civilian areas or not mentioning human shields meaning they are likely unable to report freely anyway. Foreign reporters have admitted this. Example: in 2014, multiple correspondents said they were intimidated by Hamas or saw things they didn’t report until they left Gaza.

All of this said, it is probably fair to say that a very large number of people - including journalists - are pretty biased against Israel and I am not sure they can be relied upon to be impartial and not to just amplify propaganda. Given the behavior they have displayed so far.

The facts do come out, if you look carefully. Watch for investigations and verifications and evidence because underneath all the accusations, the facts do appear.

I suppose some people think the IDF and Israeli government don't lie.

How about the lies about the paramedics they killed earlier this year, they denied it, the bodies and vehicles were found and they lied about them behaving suspiciously, the video evidence was found.

Does anyone remember the murder of Hind Rajab, a beautiful little six year old on the phone begging for help when the other relatives in the car were dead. The Palestinian Red Crescent notified the IDF where she was and it was agreed an ambulance was going in to get her. She was blown up and so where the paramedics in the ambulance. If the BBC were biased against the IDF they'd play that recording every day, it was horrific.

We know they kill unarmed civilians because they shot three unarmed Israeli hostages who were waving white cloths.

For a biased organisation the BBC hasn't been saying much about the landgrabs in the West Bank and what the settlers (terrorists?) are doing.

None of that means 7th October wasn't also horrific but it was reported. As for the BBC not reporting on the rapes you can still find their report on the BBC site, don't read it if you aren't very strong because it is also horrific.

I am sick of anyone who disapproves of what the IDF and Israeli Govt are doing being called antisemitic.. I suppose the Israeli soldier who has been disclosing some of what is going on, with his identity hidden as he is scared of what will happen if he is identified, is also antisemitic.

I hope Hind and all the other dead children are in heaven/paradise or whatever name is used.

Even in war there are laws and I hope those laws will be enforced.

There are a lot of people in Israel who do not agree with their governments actions. I l think they need our support and voices heard.

Is there any reputable neutral media source on this conflict? I am looking for something that is as neutral a source as possible.

I've seen BBC documentary on Oct 7th. I don't see bias in the content of that. I accept the bias exists in other areas.

No, there isn't.

The best thing to do is to verify key information yourself. So fact check things you read.

For example if people make an accusation, you can generally go and see if the data stacks up. For instance if people say Israel is starving Gazans you can go and verify the amount of food going in, and compare it with the recommended amounts in similar conflicts.

That is what I always do. It takes loads of time, but you'd be surprised how much of the reporting on this conflict is just complete bull shit.

Thankyou! I absolutely hate not knowing the full truth about anything. I know it's easy to go down rabbit holes. Part of me thinks you will never ever truly know every aspect.

That's helpful though 🙏

People have checked and still calculated it incorrectly. It has happened before.

I recall reading a whole thread about it once, where a poster was insisting that Israel were allowing in enough food according to their calculations but had calculated it wrong according to the recommended amount.

@TheignT I haven’t seen anyone suggest that the Israel government or IDF don’t ever lie.

They are organisations made up of humans and guess what: humans lie.

Those of us who support Israel do not do so because we think they are perfect.

Much like I don’t think my own government is perfect- far from it - but I would support them over a hostile force who attacked UK citizens & started a war.

@JoyDivision79 I have not found any neutral media sources on this war. Some are very obviously biased like Al Jazeera, others less so like the BBC.

The way I deal with it is to read a range of right wing and left wing sources and decide myself where I feel the truth lies, from the limited information we have.

In the end I think it comes down to trust. Some of us trust that Israel aren’t monsters so tend to believe they behave rationally rather than - for example- killing civilians because they enjoy it. Others take the opposite view.

Thank you 🙏. I'm reading Douglas Murray's new book ATM. It's really insightful and it feels like this is not bullshit to me.

I appreciate i have nothing to counter this position. I'm not confident Al Jazeera would be valid at all either.

I haven’t read Douglas Murray but I have heard people calling him biased. I don’t know if that’s true or untrue.

Like you I would like to find a neutral source of information.

I read some Douglas Murray recently. He is very right-wing socially. He is potentially quite xenophobic. I also think he understand the middle east very, very well and speaks very accurately on it. I also think he understand China and the threats to the west globally extremely well. I have never read a book by anyone in my life that wasn't biased :)

Thank you @JoyDivision79 & @ForgesOfEmpires

I think all reporting is biased on this issue now.

When I hear reports, I try and verify them. Most things that genuinely happened in Gaza are filmed. I cross check data if I can. Then I apply as much logic to it as I can.

Do I think kids have had their limbs blown off?
Yes, that is a very common injury in airstrikes unfortunately and nobody has evacuated these children.

Do I think Israel is deliberately targeting children?
Of course not, the only people who benefit from injured or dead Palestinians children are Hamas.

Do I think they are starving babies?
Again, this wouldn't make any sense and I have checked on the Hamas figures submitted to the UN and only 29 people have died of malnutrition since the war started (less than the UK!) and none are noted as babies. I'd imagine if people were starving we would have images like we do from Yemen or Sudan.

One thing I have never seen before is so much "fake news" surrounding any conflict. It's very hard to work out what's true, and sometimes you have to wait a while for the truth to unravel.

Palestinian parents have been trying to evacuate their injured children to countries who have said they are happy to treat them. The problem is they need permission from Israel. And Israel often deny them permission to do so.

@ForgesOfEmpires you haven't seen any Palestinians who look malnutritioned during the war?