Burgess claimed that he and BBC leadership has spent “a lot of time” speaking with the Jewish community in the UK and around the world since the atrocity, paired with “consistent briefings and meetings with the IDF, senior figures in the Israeli government, former members of the IDF, and journalists in order to attain impartiality.” Similar meetings take place between the BBC and the Palestinian community, he said.
Burgess acknowledged that there would undoubtedly be some on the call who would not be assuaged by his remarks, but he felt it important “to at least demonstrate that I am willing to listen,”
“I don’t think it’s helpful if I am defensive. I’m not here tonight to tell you you’re wrong, or to tell you what you should think,” he said. “I’m here tonight because I think it’s important to listen and to hear peoples’ views. And I’ve done that with Jewish communities throughout this period and before.”
The first topic discussed was the BBC refusing to use the word “terrorists” to describe Hamas, a decision which Danny Cohen, the broadcaster’s former director of television, told the JC this week it was one he would have resigned over.
Burgess explained that the decision was based on the broadcaster’s editorial guidelines which have been enacted over a number of years. He said: “Once we label one organisation or violent act as a terrorist group or terrorist attack, it then means we would have to make that value judgement about every organisation, every violent act in the world. And because terrorism is a particularly political terminology, we don’t think that’s the BBC’s place to do that.”
He added that he “understands, accepts, and appreciates that this is not a view held by many people on this call, and we understand the strength and feeling [surrounding the issue]. But we think it’s an important principle on the part of impartial journalism that the BBC itself should not be labelling who are terrorists.”
Several listeners in the call pointed to examples of the BBC making “value judgements” in recent history, with multiple BBC articles online today referring to ISIS, the murder of Jo Cox, the Manchester Arena Bombing, as terrorists. They also argued that the BBC has referred to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as “occupied territories”, which itself is a value judgement and subjective.
The next question put to Burgess revolved around why the BBC has not allegedly published evidence of members of UNWRA participating in October 7 and collaborating with Hamas.
Burgess said: “We’ve done some reporting on UNWRA, but not being able to report on the ground from Gaza makes standing up these sorts of claims really difficult.”
The BBC has “consistently asked” for access to Gaza in order to report accurately, Richard claimed, but Israel “who really holds the keys” to Gaza, has with one or two exceptions not allowed it.
Burgess conceded that the BBC’s push notification in the immediate aftermath of the bombing of the Al-Ahli hospital in October “could have been clearer”. A push alert sent by BBC News around 6:25pm on October 17, read: “Hundreds feared dead or injured in Israeli airstrike on hospital in Gaza, Palestinian officials say,”
By the time the claim of it directly hitting a hospital resulting in 500 dead had been disqualified, and that the rocket had actually been a misfired Palestinian Islamic Jihad rocket, the misinformation had already been widely disseminated via the BBC’s social media channels.
[Missing Credit]BBC Director of News Content Richard Burgess
Burgess said the BBC received “quite a bit of criticism” over its reporting of the bombing, but claimed some major news publications sent similar notifications without even attributing it to Palestinian sources. Following that incident, the BBC changed its policy to begin attributing claims to the “Hamas-ran health ministry” – a decision for which they are heavily criticised by the Muslim community, he said.
He said that because it was the broadcaster’s role to interrogate spokespeople, including on the Israeli side, and that it was difficult to secure interviews with Hamas – and that even when they do the group’s leadership can just walk out – their coverage can come across as imbalanced or skewed.
Burgess admitted that he worries that major conflicts around the world, such as those in Ethiopia, Sudan, or Haiti, don’t get the level of coverage that Israel-Hamas gets. “There’s an awful lot of deaths that are happening in those countries and around the world that is not reported as widely. And why is that? Well, partly because of the level of audience interest in Gaza and Israel, but also because of the war’s global strategic relevance.”
He concluded: “I don’t accept that we’ve made many errors. If you compare us to other broadcasters, we’ve probably made fewer, but I also accept we are more high profile. We come under a lot of scrutiny and have an awful lot of output. So, when there is mistake that is significant issue, our endeavour is to correct those mistakes as soon as we possibly can – which I believe we have done during this conflict.
“But I’m not sitting here saying we’ve got everything right and there’s nothing to worry about. I’m under no illusion that we need to continue working really, really hard and honestly.”
Burgess thanked attendees for the “great” turnout and questions, promising more dialogues would take place in the future. “In all the meetings we’ve had [with Jewish community leaders], there’s a high level of decency and respect, which I’ve been really grateful for,” he said.
