The BBC have altered another speech

[TheFilliesWillRiseAgain]

BBC Persia translated the US defence secretary's speech from English to their Iranian audience.

He said the Iranian regime is experiencing death.

They said he said the Iranian people is experiencing death.

It was only when viewers called it out that they deleted the translation and apologised, saying it was a mistake.

Why does this keep happening?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/03/06/bbc-altered-hegseth-speech-on-iran-war/

I wonder how this will translate.

Pete Hegseth Mocks ‘Iranians That Think They’re Gonna Live’ (mediaite.com)

Maybe it's Just as well Iranians don't have access to the news to see what the US Secretary of War is saying.

Of course, the Iranian Regime will report this on their State TV, hopefully most people will dismiss it as propaganda.

Exactly this

They're not saying this kind of thing as far as I know. Perhaps because they know how translation works.

Yes of course, that is why they have revisers as mentioned.

The revisers are not meant to let errors slip through.

My dad spent 25+ years in the UN translation service and this would be a serious matter. You wouldn't let this kind of error out.

Someone must be reading it. Probably best to get it right wrt regime v people.

It's a big distinction. The BBC apologists say there's a fuzzy line between the regime and the people, so it's easy to misinterpret. The regime is shooting the people, not the other way around. That's a pretty bright line.

That's possible with translation but not with interpretation generally. This was interpretation wasn't it?

Zonder, I thought the error was repeated in a printed report. Might be wrong.

If it was interpretation, then yes that is different as I said earlier.

BBC have a history of purposely misreporting on events in the Middle East and have a definite bias. Lots of evidence, especially BBC Arabic and BBC Persian.

They're pro-islamist & hate Jews.

Possibly. I'm not sure this counts as evidence though.

Translation and interpretation are not straight forward. There are not always word for word correlation, well in fact rarely.

It can even be difficult understanding a dialect.

Do you remember when Shannon Matthews disappeared? Her mother made an appeal for her in which she said, "Your dad's even out looking for you".

A lot of people interpreted that as "Even your dad's looking for you" but using 'even' in the way Karen Matthews did is a Yorkshire turn of phrase that doesn't mean that.

And that is not using dialect words, just a different way of using a normal English word.

There is evidence going back years including the report last year by an independent advisor.

I said I'm not sure this particular example is evidence. I'm just repeating that. This thread is about one example and it's a very weak one, whipping up people who don't understand translation/interpretation.

It is hard to get the exacting nuances into translations, and it's not helped by words having multiple ways in which they are used. For instance regime can be a government or a system of working or a group of people who are organised together- for instance me and my friends could get together and have a workout regime. I imagine the alternate words in Persian are similarly used in nuanced ways. Maybe there was a better way of translating this but its not maths, translations are rarely exact, regime in English will not always equal X. People have been disagreeing over the right translations for the bible for centuries and each translation would change the meaning slightly.

Suggesting this is some big conspiracy by the BBC is worrying. The world is flooded with AI fake images, very heavily skewed and cherry picked stats on GB news that hide real changes behind % increases which can obscure how low real numbers might be, sensationalist unsubstantiated gossip from the tabloids and accusations from politicians that are designed just to confuse and worry you. I have travelled the world, and spent a lot of time abroad, and I am proud of our BBC. There is a reason many people worldwide choose to watch our BBC channel over their own local sources. They are not perfect but they are not corrupt and beholden to corporations for their money. It's a very valuable thing which we will miss immensely if it's gone. The worst of the politicians hate them because they hold them to account and want to see it taken down.

Well said @PurpleNightingale

Just another example, I worked with a Brazilian man for a while, he called all advertisements 'propaganda'.

For most of us who speak English propaganda is not the same as an advertisement but in Portuguese it is the same word.

I don't mean this post as a whataboutism, I am posting for information, given how ppl posting here are interested in how media reports news.

https://polinews.org/fox-friends-appears-to-swap-in-old-footage-after-trumps-dignified-transfer-sparks-backlash/

It's a terrible link for me to provide yes, but I happen to be in a country with web restrictions, and Fox have admitted and apologized. A quick google will confirm.

Not a whataboutism. Just a recent example of how genuine mistakes can happen.

For most of us who speak English propaganda is not the same as an advertisement but in Portuguese it is the same word.

Does the context not make it clear?

Fascinating. I reckon the Portuguese have it right!

Context wouldn't always make it clear, I imagine - that's why in other languages we have two distinct words.

Wow!

Confirmed on Sky news feed:

"Fox News apologises for airing old video of Trump during dignified transfer ceremony
Fox News has apologised for airing old footage of Donald Trump, while covering his attendance of a dignified transfer ceremony for US soldiers killed in the Iran war.
The president has been criticised after wearing a baseball cap during Saturday's ceremony, which is considered one of the most solemn duties of a commander-in-chief.
However, video shown on the TV channel had suggested Trump was not wearing a hat at the time.
Critics have claimed the network was trying to make him look better by using footage from a previous ceremony.

Fox News said archival footage of the US president at an earlier ceremony was inadvertently used on two Sunday morning broadcasts.
A spokeswoman said the correct footage was aired at other times, including on Saturday.
"We regret the error and apologise for the incorrect footage," Fox said in a statement.
In an on-air correction on Sunday, Fox News anchor Griff Jenkins said "we extend our respect and condolences" to the families of the service members killed.
But some critics were not happy with the apology.
"If any other network did this it would be a huge scandal, Fox would lead the chorus of criticisms and faux outrage, and people would lose their jobs," said Mehdi Hasan, founder of the online site Zeteo."

Funny that doesn't seem to be of concern to everyone @RedTagAlan

Yeah. Odd that. TBF. I did say the Fox stuff was not a whataboutism.

I mean it's an easy enough mistake. To splice in footage from over 5 years ago. They must have filed the old stuff with the wrong date ?

Must have been that!