Not upheld

For those wanting a break from British general election-related matters...

The latest batch of rulings from the BBC's Editorial Standards Committee  (focusing, as ever, on escalated complaints and appeals to the BBC Trust) are out, and some of them make for interesting (if frustrating) reading. 

The committee's Brucie-like catchphrase is 'Not upheld'...

...(as in 'Nice to see you, to see you...Not upheld!' or 'Oh Anthea, that's lovely. Come on, give us a 'not upheld'!' or 'You get nothing a 'not upheld' for a pair!' or 'What do points make? A complaint the BBC can say is 'not upheld'!')...

The complaints are many and various, ranging from Top Gear in Patagonia to Panorama on Nigel Farage, Strictly Come Dancing, BBC Scotland's reporting of the SNP and Countryfile on the badger cull. All were 'not upheld'.

By far the most common escalated complaints and appeals, however, concern the BBC's reporting of Israel. 

(Search for the word 'Israel' in the BBC report and it comes up 305 times).  

A couple of the escalated complaints come from people accusing the BBC of pro-Israel bias (pp.10 and 101), seven from people accusing the BBC of anti-Israel bias (pp.33, 38, 61, 83, 91, 107 and 122). All were rejected by the BBC, except for part of one of the appeals by the anti-Israeli pair - and that was only 'upheld' in part because the BBC was judged to be dragging its heels over the complaints process.

The one on p.33 relates to a report on BBC Breakfast from Bethany Bell during last year's Israel-Hamas war. The complainant argued that the report about a new ceasefire gave the audience the false impression that it was Israel, rather than Hamas, who had broken the previous ceasefires.

The one on p.38 concerns a Today interview with Jeremy Bowen, just after the killings of the four teenagers preceding last year's war. The complainant said Jeremy Bowen had made four “totally misleading” statements.

The one on p.61 concerns a Today discussion during the Israel-Hamas conflict of 2014 between two British Jews. The complainant claimed that the trails for the item misled people into assuming that they were going to hear a representative sample of the views of British Jews. The complainant also claimed that one of the participants made unsubstantiated accusations designed to incite racial hatred against Jews who support Israel.

The one on p.83 relates to a report on the News at Ten (BBC One) which used third party footage purporting to show a Palestinian civilian being shot by an Israeli sniper as he searched bombed out streets for his family. The complainant alleged that the footage was not genuine. This complaint also challenged the reporter’s assertion that there was no evidence that Hamas were using their own civilians as human shields, saying there was abundant evidence of that.

The one on p.99 concerns a BBC News Channel broadcast with the complainant felt inaccurately stated that Israel imposed tight controls on exports from Gaza and restricted similarly what goes into the territory.

The one on p.107 concerns a BBC News Channel broadcast that the complainant felt was misleading because it emphasised the closure of border crossings between Gaza and Israel rather than explaining beforehand that the closure was a response to a rocket attack from Gaza.

The one on p.122 relates to the BBC's failure to label Hamas as "terrorists", merely as "militants".

All of them got nowhere with the BBC. All were 'not upheld'.

If your blood-pressure and patience can stand it, you might want to give some of them a read - and maybe even a fisking.