The charge that the BBC might be deliberately sanitising its coverage of the trial of the alleged murderers of Lee Rigby (in an attempt to reduce anti-Muslim sentiment) is about as serious a charge as you could possibly make against the corporation - and it's one that shouldn't be made lightly.
And yet the signs that the BBC is sanitising the story continue to emerge each day.
What do you make of this?:
Having just come in from work I wanted to read the latest developments from the trial and clicked onto Sky News's account.
This led with the video of Michael Adebolajo's police interview, where he said that killing gives him little joy and that it's not in his character to kill people.
This is the same angle that the BBC is leading its article with too.
The BBC spends far more time than Sky, however, outlining Adebolajo's political points about Britain and about the (alleged) oppression of Muslims. Sky pays markedly less attention to these 'justifications'.
Sky, however, informs us that:
During his police statement, Adebolajo told officers that Drummer Rigby "was struck in the neck with a sharp implement and it was sawed until his head became, you know, almost detached".
The BBC, in contrast, chooses to tone that down - drastically:
He [Adebolajo] described how Fusilier Rigby was killed.
Similarly, while Sky tells us about Adebolajo's complaints about not being allowed to wash the blood off his hands, the BBC chooses to omit that part of the interview completely. Why?
And why choose to spend so much time on on those 'justifications' and 'self-justifications' instead?
Sky then tells us that:
A female juror wept as a pathologist gave the court a detailed breakdown of Drummer Rigby's injuries, which included some stab wounds up to 12cm deep and others that "almost entirely circled" the neck.
The soldier's family decided not to attend court for Dr Simon Poole's graphic evidence.
He said Drummer Rigby was probably knocked unconscious when he was hit by the defendants' car but died from multiple incised wounds inflicted later.
The BBC's account includes none of this testimony. It doesn't mention the weeping female juror either. Why not?
The BBC dwells instead on the testimony of a psychiatrist. Sky also covers his testimony, though in less detail.
It is noticeable, however, that the BBC's account of this part of the trial begins by saying that the psychiatrist concluded that Adebolajo does not have a mental disorder and then goes on to say that "the expert who assessed Mr Adebolajo said he was polite and co-operative and had mental capacity".
We have to wait a few more paragraphs before being told by the BBC that "the defendant 'showed no signs of regret or remorse' about what happened".
Sky News, in contrast, places the latter point first:
He said he showed "no signs of regret or remorse for his actions" but was polite and co-operative with medical staff.
There was no evidence of any mental health problems, he added.
The BBC also includes further 'justifications' given by Adebolajo during his interview with the psychiatrist and about his worries for his own family's feelings. Sky opts to report neither.
From this you can clearly see that the BBC is presenting an account that is much more helpful to Adebolajo's case than Sky News.
And it continues....
The BBC, for example, tells us that jurors were shown photos of a machete and two knives taken at the scene of the crime. Sky tells us that jurors were shown photos of a meat-cleaver, knives and a handgun.
Sky tells us:
DNA recovered from one of the knives matched Adebolajo's, the jury was told.
The BBC doesn't mention that at all.
Sky also tells us:
Other images showed a box containing a block of knives that was found inside the defendants' Vauxhall Tigra car, and the clothing worn by the pair on the day of the attack.
The BBC doesn't mention any of that either.
I'm very wary about making wild accusations against the BBC these days, but a worrying pattern really does seem to emerging in its reporting of this highly sensitive trial. Sanitisation really does seem to be going on - and that would be truly indefensible.
Incidentally, it is also highly suggestive that while both Sky News and ITV News are running live update feeds from the trial, the BBC News website isn't.
Why?
Both articles can be seen below the 'Read more' line. Please see what you make of them.
Woolwich Suspect: Killing 'Gives Me Little Joy'
Jurors are shown a police interview, during which a man accused of murdering Drummer Rigby said killing was "not in my character".
Video: Adebolajo's 'Emotional' Interview
Enlarge
One of the men accused of killing soldier Lee Rigby told police it gives him "little joy to approach anybody and slay them", a court has heard.
Michael Adebolajo, who denies murder, made the comments in a two-hour interview, which was played to jurors at the Old Bailey.
As he sat with a blue blanket covering his head, the 28-year-old, who gave his name at Mujahid Abu Hamza, told officers it was "not my character" to kill people.
The videotaped interview showed him speaking non-stop for 30 minutes, pausing only for a sip of water.
He described how the rape of Muslim women "disgusts me to the core", telling officers: "If it does not affect you, you are wicked men."
During his police statement, Adebolajo told officers that Drummer Rigby "was struck in the neck with a sharp implement and it was sawed until his head became, you know, almost detached".
"May Allah forgive me if I acted in a way that was displeasing to him," he added.
At one point in the interview, Adebolajo complained that he was refused permission to remove blood from his hands in hospital.
He was heard telling officers: "I have blood on my hands and I wish, like any sane man, to remove that blood."
When one of them tried to interrupt his monologue, Adebolajo raised his voice and said: "When I'm finished, you may speak."
A female juror wept as a pathologist gave the court a detailed breakdown of Drummer Rigby's injuries, which included some stab wounds up to 12cm deep and others that "almost entirely circled" the neck.
The soldier's family decided not to attend court for Dr Simon Poole's graphic evidence.
He said Drummer Rigby was probably knocked unconscious when he was hit by the defendants' car but died from multiple incised wounds inflicted later.
The court also heard a statement from a psychiatrist who assessed Adebolajo in the days after Drummer Rigby was killed in Woolwich, southeast London, just metres from a military barracks.
He said he showed "no signs of regret or remorse for his actions" but was polite and co-operative with medical staff.
There was no evidence of any mental health problems, he added.
Earlier, jurors were shown pictures of the weapons used in the attack on Drummer Rigby, including a meat cleaver, knives and a handgun.
DNA recovered from one of the knives matched Adebolajo's, the jury was told.
Other images showed a box containing a block of knives that was found inside the defendants' Vauxhall Tigra car, and the clothing worn by the pair on the day of the attack.
Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, 22, both deny murdering Drummer Rigby, attempting to murder a police officer and conspiracy to murder.
The trial continues.
4 December 2013 Last updated at 15:10
The two defendants also deny attempting to murder a police officer
CCTV footage shown on the first day of the trial showed Fusilier Rigby at Woolwich station shortly before the attack
On Tuesday, the police released CCTV images of Mr Adebolajo and Mr Adebowale being shot in the aftermath of the attack
Lee Rigby trial: 'No joy in killing', Adebolajo says
The two defendants also deny attempting to murder a police officer
One of the men accused of murdering soldier Lee Rigby told police it gave him "little joy to approach anybody and slay them", the Old Bailey has heard.
The jury heard Michael Adebolajo make the statement in a video of a police interview played to the court.
Fusilier Rigby was killed as he walked back to his barracks in Woolwich, south-east London, on 22 May.
Mr Adebolajo, 28, and Michael Adebowale, 22, deny murdering the soldier.
Both men also deny attempting to murder a police officer and conspiracy to murder a police officer.
'Soldier of Allah'
In the video shown to the court, Mr Adebolajo speaks at length to the police, saying he was "not a man who enjoys watching horror movies. This is not my character".
The defendant had a blue blanket covering his head for much of the interview, during which he said he was not ashamed of being called British.
He said he was born in Britain, grew up in the country, was educated there and experienced many good things.
But he continued: "That word British is now associated with murder, pillaging and rape."
The murder suspect said there was a "war between the Muslims and the British people" and he was a "soldier of Allah".
He blamed the country's political class, who he accused of ruling the British people "in a very wicked, corrupt, selfish and oppressive manner", for sending working class people to fight in Muslim lands.
Occasionally revealing his face to the camera's view, Mr Adebolajo said: "It's for those people who have not yet understood the nature, the nature of the war that's ongoing and has been ongoing for some many years between the Muslims and the British people."
CCTV footage shown on the first day of the trial showed Fusilier Rigby at Woolwich station shortly before the attack
Mr Adebolajo told police he was "particularly disgusted by David Cameron, the Miliband brothers and what's-his-name, Nick Clegg".
In a second interview session shown to the court, the police asked Mr Adebolajo what had happened to Fusilier Rigby.
He described how Fusilier Rigby was killed and asked for Allah's forgiveness if his actions had displeased him.
Earlier the court heard how a psychiatrist who assessed Mr Adebolajo concluded that he does not have a mental disorder.
The expert who assessed Mr Adebolajo said he was polite and co-operative and had mental capacity, the jury was told.
The statement read to the Old Bailey on behalf of consultant forensic psychiatrist Tim McInerny, who interviewed Mr Adebolajo at King's College Hospital on three occasions, said the defendant had been keen to talk about the incident that led to his arrest.
Mr Adebolajo stressed that he had not been taking any illicit substances and had not been feeling unwell in the run-up to the events of 22 May.
On Tuesday, the police released CCTV images of Mr Adebolajo and Mr Adebowale being shot in the aftermath of the attack
The defendant "showed no signs of regret or remorse" about what happened, the psychiatrist said.
Mr McInerny added that Mr Adebolajo warned he would be a "continuing risk to the British military".
His actions had been "on the basis of his religious beliefs and because British soldiers were killing people in the Middle East", Mr Adebolajo had told Mr McInerny.
Mr Adebolajo told the psychiatrist that he was concerned about the impact the events in Woolwich would have on his family.
In their final meeting on 31 May, Mr Adebolajo said he had no concerns about his medical care and that he was aware he would be transferred to police custody and interviewed.
At the start of the fourth day of the trial, the jury was shown a series of photographs taken at the scene of the killing, including a bloodied machete, two knives, and a letter that Adebolajo had handed to members of the public at the scene of the attack.
The trial continues.
I agree that the BBC's reporting of the trial shows a considerable degree of pre-meditation, so to say.
ReplyDeleteBut I do sometimes I wonder if the Corporation is even aware of what it's doing, that perhaps this kind of thing's actually a simple reflex action (though whether the result of years of self-conditioning is a matter for debate).
For instance, take the recent widely-reported story of the primary school headmistress who threatened to label any children as racist whose parents didn't let them attend a workshop on Islam:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2511841/Children-8-racist-miss-Islam-trip-Schools-threatening-letter-parents-met-outrage.html
There was justifiable outrage that the sins of the parents should be visited on the children, and she had to back down.
However, the BBC's report entirely omitted any reference to its being an Islamic workshop:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-25066688
and the casual reader may have wondered what all the fuss was about.
But looked at one way, this story was entirely favourable to Moslems, and wholly in keeping with the Moslems-as-victims, Islamophobic-public BBC line, and in that light you might have expected it to be a news item they'd've run with.
So perhaps any omission of Islam was just force of habit?