Sky joins BBC in Gaza appeal veto

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sky joins BBC in Gaza appeal veto

Sky has joined the BBC in deciding not to broadcast a charity appeal for Gaza, despite mounting political and public pressure for them to do so.

BBC boss Mark Thompson has again defended the decision, saying it would jeopardise the BBC's impartiality.

Sky News said running the Disasters Emergency Committee advert was "incompatible" with its objective role.

More than 50 MPs say they will back a parliamentary motion urging the BBC and Sky to run the appeal.

Meanwhile, activist group Stop the War Coalition launched a demonstration at BBC Broadcasting House in central London.

Around 20 people walked into the lobby with a large banner proclaiming Hands off Gaza, before being removed by police and continuing a noisy protest outside.

A number of them set fire to their television licences.

ITV broadcast the appeal, which will also go out on Channel 4 and Five, on Monday evening.

John Ryley, head of Sky News, said: "The conflict in Gaza forms part of one of the most challenging and contentious stories for any news organisation to cover.

"Our commitment as journalists is to cover all sides of that story with uncompromising objectivity."

Criticism over the BBC's decision not to air the appeal has come from archbishops, government ministers, charity leaders and 11,000 viewers.

The DEC, which represents more than a dozen aid agencies, is asking for money to buy food, medicine and blankets following the Israeli assault on Gaza.

But Mr Thompson, the BBC director general said the corporation could not give the impression it was "backing one side" over the other.

He said it was not the first time the BBC had decided against running an advert on their behalf and denied his "arm had been twisted" by pro-Israeli lobbyists.

Labour MP Richard Burden, who is putting forward the early day motion, said he was "equally angry" at Sky News and the BBC, who were not being asked to broadcast a "political appeal".

"If they (the BBC) want to maintain impartiality, then they should act without fear or favour and treat that child in Gaza just the same as a child in Congo, Darfur or the earthquake in Pakistan."

Journalists' unions the NUJ and BECTU said the BBC's justifications appeared "cowardly and in danger of being seen as politically motivated".

A string of politicians, including International Secretary Douglas Alexander, Communities Secretary Hazel Blears and opposition spokesmen, have urged the corporation to reconsider its position.

Their comments drew criticism from BBC Trust chairman Sir Michael Lyons who said some were "coming close to constituting undue interference in the editorial independence of the BBC".

He was backed by John Whittingdale MP, the Conservative chairman of the Commons culture select committee.

Shadow culture minister Ed Vaizey also said the BBC was right to be cautious, saying: "The BBC very rarely, if ever, broadcasts an appeal from a war zone."

"The trouble with broadcasting an appeal from a war zone is that there are two sides to the argument - and that's what I think we're seeing here," he added.

The Church of England also waded into the row, with the Archbishop of York appealing for the BBC to consider humanity, not impartiality, and show the film.

The UN Relief and Works Agency, the largest humanitarian organisation working in Gaza, said there was a "huge and overwhelming need" for aid.

It described the situation as a "political crisis with grave humanitarian consequences" and estimated the cost of "rehabilitation and repair" at $345m (£257m), with two-thirds currently unfunded.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7850407.stm

[Yoink 7]

When a news channel airs programming it is in effect putting a rubber stamp on that footage. Sky and BBC's primary reasons for being on the air is to report news and not help interest groups solicit money for controversal issues.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Maybe the threat of beheadings and suicide bombers will convince them.

[Peikko 1,575]

What is remarkable about this story, is that it is the Conservatives who are backing the BBC in their decision. I am not sure what pressure, if any, could be put to SKY being as it is an entirely commercial station. I have to say, I am on the side of the BBC with this one.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

When a news channel airs programming it is in effect putting a rubber stamp on that footage. Sky and BBC's primary reasons for being on the air is to report news and not help interest groups solicit money for controversal issues.

I don't know enough about SKY but I think the appeal would have appeared on all of the BBCs progamming channels - not specifically the wall to wall news channel. BBC news is part of the corporations programming output, but its only one part - not their whole reason for being.

The BBC has broadcast charity appeal adverts before without issue.

[Peikko 1,575]

As for Lucky's comment, the threat of beheadings and suicide bombers will convince who to do what? Your post is remarkably vague even by your standards.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I have to say, I am on the side of the BBC with this one.

They actually broadcast the ad on Channel 4. It doesn't make any attempt to 'blame' Israel for the dreadful state that the Gazian population now finds itself living in, but instead presents their plight in much the same terms as if it was the result of a natural disaster rather than man-made conflict.

Its hard to see, on the basis of that, how an argument can be made that it somehow compromises political neutrality.

[Peikko 1,575]

I think it's matter of precedent rather than whether this was a 'tastefully' made film that does not stoop to finger pointing. I can see their point.

If there is a political will to provide aid, aid will be found whether or not this film is broadcast on the BBC.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Maybe the threat of beheadings and suicide bombers will convince them.

a fatwah on them!

[Nikita2Charles 32]

Maybe because everybody already KNOWS who committed those destruction, it's not a natural disaster, it's man made. Hmmm just wonder if it was the other way around it would be all over the world.

[mawilson 2,133]

I have to say, I am on the side of the BBC with this one.

They actually broadcast the ad on Channel 4. It doesn't make any attempt to 'blame' Israel for the dreadful state that the Gazian population now finds itself living in, but instead presents their plight in much the same terms as if it was the result of a natural disaster rather than man-made conflict.

Its hard to see, on the basis of that, how an argument can be made that it somehow compromises political neutrality.

But it wasn't a natural disaster - it was a war of Israel vs. Hamas. Where was the BBC with

their "charity appeals" when Hezbollah rockets destroyed homes and lives in northern Israel

or when Sderot was being bombed on a daily basis?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I have to say, I am on the side of the BBC with this one.

They actually broadcast the ad on Channel 4. It doesn't make any attempt to 'blame' Israel for the dreadful state that the Gazian population now finds itself living in, but instead presents their plight in much the same terms as if it was the result of a natural disaster rather than man-made conflict.

Its hard to see, on the basis of that, how an argument can be made that it somehow compromises political neutrality.

But it wasn't a natural disaster - it was a war of Israel vs. Hamas. Where was the BBC with

their "charity appeals" when Hezbollah rockets destroyed homes and lives in northern Israel

or when Sderot was being bombed on a daily basis?

Presenting it in entirely humanitarian terms mitigates the political dimension.

As to context - these other DEC appeals were rejected by the BBC (indicated in the article):

East Africa 2006: Famine appeal rejected by BBC because of difficulties of access

Lebanon 2006: BBC refused to air appeal for Israel-Hezbollah conflict victims on grounds of impartiality

Burma 2008: Appeal was only broadcast once BBC was satisfied aid would reach victims

Offhand I don't know whether these are representative or exhaustive but if it's the latter I find it interesting that the only other 'conflict' appeal the BBC has rejected also has an Israeli element to it. Apparently, conflicts in Congo, Dafur, Chad, Sudan, Liberia and Kosovo don't/didn't have an impartiality concern for the BBC.

Go figure.