Hamas hits out at BBC - saying it is spreading 'misinformation'

On 11 October, BBC News said that according to ‘local sources’:

Hamas has recalled about 7,000 members of its security forces to reassert control over areas of Gaza recently vacated by Israeli troops.

BBC gives ‘deliberate misinformation and false narratives’

The BBC continued:

The mobilisation order was reportedly issued via phone calls and text messages which said the aim was to “cleanse Gaza of outlaws and collaborators with Israel” and told fighters to report within 24 hours. Reports from Gaza suggest that armed Hamas units have already deployed across several districts, some wearing civilian clothes and others in the blue uniforms of the Gaza police.

In a statement released on 12 October, Gaza’s Government Media Office has called these claims ‘false and baseless’.

It said:

These claims reflect deliberate misinformation and false narratives intended to mislead the public. We strongly condemn the fact that international media outlets resort to publishing such unverified allegations without referring to official authorities in Gaza, which clearly undermines their professionalism and serves the propaganda promoted by the Israeli occupation.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), as a public service broadcaster is meant to hold the government in this country to account, but this genocide has shown that when it comes to Israel and Palestine this is not the case. Multiple recent reports, open letters, and analyses have accused the BBC of bias towards the Israeli regime in its coverage of this genocide.

Systematic bias against Palestinians

In a report titled BBC on Gaza–Israel: One Story, Double Standards published in June 2024, which critiqued the BBC’s coverage of the Gaza genocide between October 2023 and October 2024, the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) accused the BBC of operating under a framework of ‘double standards’ when covering the Gaza genocide, of systemic bias against Palestinians, and of applying inconsistent editorial standards when covering Israeli and Palestinian experiences of war.

It argued that Palestinians are consistently underrepresented, under-humanised, and under-protected by the BBC’s editorial policies, and called on the broadcaster to undertake a major internal review of its editorial processes, to apply its guidelines of impartiality and fairness more rigorously, and to ensure more balanced representation of voices, language, and context in its reporting.

Over the course of 12 months, the CfMM analysed nearly 3,900 online BBC articles and over 32,000 broadcast segments across BBC television and radio, looking at how language, framing, airtime, interview subjects, and emotional cues differed when reporting on Israeli and Palestinian casualties.

Prioritisation of Israeli narratives

To highlight differences in its reporting, the report also examined the BBC coverage of Ukraine, and looked at the differences in tone and framing when reporting on civilian suffering. It found that the broadcaster was much more willing to use humanising language, discuss war crimes, and highlight the deaths of journalists and civilians when covering Ukraine.

In contrast, the suffering of Palestinian civilians was often framed in more abstract or clinical terms, and accusations of Israeli wrongdoing were treated with more caution or scepticism.

According to CfMM, the BBC prioritised Israeli narratives, voices, and suffering, while downplaying or marginalising the Palestinian experience.

One of the main differences was in the amount of coverage given per fatality. According to the report, while approximately 42,000 Palestinians were killed (at the time of writing) compared to about 1,250 Israelis during the covered period, Israeli deaths received approximately 33 times more coverage per death in BBC online articles and 19 times more coverage in broadcast output.

The report argues that this suggests an editorial decision-making process that privileges certain narratives over others, rather than one based purely on journalistic impartiality.

BBC has ‘double standards’ on how it portrays violence against civilians, depending on victim’s identity

Another key finding involved the emotional framing of victims.

The BBC was found to have used emotive language, such as terms like ‘massacre’, ‘murder’, and ‘slaughter’ far more frequently when referring to Israeli casualties than to Palestinian ones. The word ‘murder’ was used over 220 times in reference to Israeli victims, but just once in reference to Palestinians, while the term ‘massacre’ appeared 18 times more often in relation to Israeli deaths. The CfMM interprets this discrepancy as a ‘double standard’ in how violence against civilians is characterised depending on the identity of the victim.

The report also details that during the year-long period, the BBC conducted over 2,300 interviews with Israeli voices, compared to just over 1,000 with Palestinians. The presenters themselves, the report claims, also echoed or affirmed Israeli occupation perspectives much more frequently – over 2,300 times-compared to just 217 instances where they reflected Palestinian perspectives.

In addition, CfMM claims that on more than 100 occasions BBC presenters shut down or dismissed attempts by guests to raise concerns about genocide being committed against Palestinians. At the same time, the BBC allegedly failed to report or contextualise numerous statements made by Israeli officials that human rights experts and UN figures have cited as evidence of incitement or genocidal intent.

Failure by BBC to report on UK weapons exports to the Israeli occupation, and legal implications

In December 2024, Guardian columnist Owen Jones also published a report about BBC bias towards Israel. It was titled The BBC’s Civil War Over Gaza, and was based on interviews with about a dozen anonymous BBC staff who spoke to Jones about their concerns. Overall, they said:

As an organisation we have not offered any significant analysis of the UK government’s involvement in the war on Palestinians. We have failed to report on weapons sales or their legal implications. These stories have instead been broken by the BBC’s competitors.

His investigation revealed that over 100 BBC employees and 300 other journalists and media professionals had signed a letter to the Director‑General Tim Davie expressing concerns about editorial suppression, lack of impartiality, and opaque decision‑making – claiming the corporation has become ‘a mouthpiece for Israel.’

The letter alleged that reports and documentaries favorable to Palestinian perspectives had been blocked or delayed even after passing standard editorial checks, that staff felt constrained by fear of being accused of having agendas or being biased, and that decisions we not transparent.

Several staffers also told Jones that they had resigned in recent months, not just from dissatisfaction, but because they believe the BBC’s reporting was not honest or balanced. One of these, was newsreader Karishma Patel.

The BBC is complicit in genocide, by its selective storytelling, by remaining silent, and by distorting the truth. The corporation is funded by the public in this country, and has a duty to serve the public interest – not the interests of the powerful.

If it is not fulfilling its mandate, it should be held accountable.

Featured image via the Canary