Cable Critique – BBC News
5.5
Reviewer
Like
Good for Science
Frequently updated
Great general documentaries
Wide variety of content
Dislike
Focus on Western View
Usage of vague language
Dubious sources
Funded by the UK government
Summary
Although the BBC is renowned throughout the world for its objective views, readers will find it hard to find articles stating anything else than the Western one. More troublesome, when discussing political topics, vague language or dubious or unnamed sources are often used to present a certain viewpoint as fact. Wording like "allegedly", "seems to be" or "according to some groups" (whom frequently remain unnamed) are employed to make their statements. The BBC hardly ever states its sources, and often does not shy away from presenting an easily countered argument as if it were fact.
Objectivity
Factuality
Equivocacy
Western View
Eastern View
The British Broadcasting Corporation is a go-to source for information for over 100 million unique browser sessions a month. Needless to say, quite some people seem to trust the information they are getting from it. It is a shame then to observe that it relies on editorial pieces which knowingly take a position in the conflicts defining the international situation.
Examples:
- In 2013, Raffi Berg (still in his role in 2015) instructed journalists not to put undue emphasis on Israel’s aggression against Palestine. To reword that the offensive was aimed at ending rocket fire from Gaza, despite the fact that Israel itself breached a truce Palestinians had been observing until Israel’s offensive on 14 November;
- In 2016, the Panama Papers appeared. Although Mr. Putin had not been mentioned anywhere in the papers, the headline of BBC rang: Panama Papers: Putin associates linked to ‘money laundering’, with the introduction paragraph mentioning that “A suspected money laundering ring involving close associates of Vladimir Putin has been uncovered in a leak of confidential documents.” In just two lines, Putin’s name was mentioned, although explaining a Putin-relation to the actual perpetrators took a lot more. Furthermore, the BBC did not question the absence of American companies or individuals in the Papers, which unbiased reporting would certainly mention.
