An independent panel commissioned by BBC's Board of Governors stated that the BBC does not consistently give a full and fair account of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Nowhere is this more evident than in the network's reporting on the latest crisis in Israel, Lebanon and Gaza.
On July 11, the Washington Post editorial editor treated its readers to an opinion column, "Aggression Under False Pretenses," by Hamas leader and Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Readers would not know Hamas is a terrorist organization responsible for the murders of hundreds of Israelis and others, or that Haniyeh a leader or even a member of a terrorist entity.
The New York Times seems to be slipping back into a pattern of coverage skewed toward Palestinian perspectives in its headlines, human interest stories and characterizations of terrorist actions and counter-actions.
The International Herald Tribune wrongly blamed an unexploded Israeli shell for the death of two Palestinians in Khan Yunis last month. CAMERA staff prompted the following correction:
Ha;aretz has in the past revealed its complete disregard for journalistic norms by describing its "quasi-policy" of ignoring complaints about factual errors in news stories. And now, once again, a significant factual error has gone uncorrected in the pages of the newspaper.
The Guardian publishes an Op-Ed by Patrick Seale accusing Israel of conducting a ruthless operation in Gaza primarily aimed not at reducing the rocket attacks or freeing captured Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit but rather at squelching Palestinian moderates. The piece is riddled with unsubstantiated speculation, exaggerations, distorted language and false assertions.
Referring to the so-called Palestinan prisoners' document, an editorial in the New York Times wrongly claimed Hamas "endorse[d] a document that implicitly recognizes Israel within its pre-1967 borders" ("Hamas Provokes a Fight," June 29).
The following day, the newspaper published the folowing CAMERA letter pointing out Hamas continues to reject Israel's right to exist
Even while Hamas officials unequivocally stress the signing of prisoners' document does not mean the group accepts Israel's legitimacy, some news organizations continue to wrongly claim that by signing the document, Hamas leaders "effectively endorse a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." Other news organizations, however, have significantly improved their reporting on the document.
The BBC is not only overtly partisan in its Web site article choices, it misleads readers with a false, propagandistic version of the situation. A recent article entitled "Palestinians back prisoner release call" fails to inform readers that the protagonist interviewed was himself imprisoned for attempting to kidnap an Israeli soldier and that his wife had been imprisoned for planning a suicide bombing.
The San Francisco Chronicle claims to "strive for accuracy" and promises to "quickly correct errors or misleading statements." Yet its opinion pages serve as a haven for patently inaccurate anti-Israel allegations, and no corrections appear to be forthcoming.
