BBC and the Gaza appeal
| 18:38 UK time, Saturday, 24 January 2009
It's not often as editor-in-chief I use our 'editors' blog' to highlight a BBC issue, but with strong views about our decision not to broadcast a Disasters Emergency Committee appeal for Gaza, I wanted to write directly and explain our thinking.
When there is a major humanitarian crisis, the DEC - which is a group of major British charities - comes together and, if it believes various criteria are met and a major public appeal is justified, asks the BBC and other broadcasters to broadcast an appeal. We usually - though not always - accede to the DEC's request and as a result have broadcast many DEC appeals over the years.
A few days ago, the DEC approached us about an appeal for Gaza and, after very careful reflection and consultation inside and outside the BBC, we decided that in this case we should not broadcast the appeal. One reason was a concern about whether aid raised by the appeal could actually be delivered on the ground. You will understand that one of the factors we have to look at is the practicality of the aid, which the public are being asked to fund, getting through. In the case of the Burma cyclone, for instance, it was only when we judged that there was a good chance of the aid getting to the people who needed it most that we agreed to broadcast the appeal. Clearly, there have been considerable logistical difficulties in delivering aid into Gaza. However some progress has already been made and the situation could well improve in the coming days. If it does, this reason for declining to broadcast the appeal will no longer be relevant.
But there is a second more fundamental reason why we decided that we should not broadcast the appeal at present. This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious. We have and will continue to cover the human side of the conflict in Gaza extensively across our news services where we can place all of the issues in context in an objective and balanced way. After looking at all of the circumstances, and in particular after seeking advice from senior leaders in BBC Journalism, we concluded that we could not broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully constructed, without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story. Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations. The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story. When we have turned down DEC appeals in the past on impartiality grounds it has been because of this risk of giving the public the impression that the BBC was taking sides in an ongoing conflict.
However, BBC News and the BBC as a whole takes its responsibility to report the human consequences of situations like Gaza very seriously and I believe our record in doing it with compassion as well as objectivity is unrivalled. Putting this decision aside, we also have a very strong track-record in supporting DEC appeals and more broadly, through BBC Children In Need, Comic Relief and our many other appeals, in using the BBC's airwaves to achieve positive humanitarian and charitable goals. This is an important part of what it is to be a public service broadcaster. It is sometimes not a comfortable place to be, but we have a duty to ensure that nothing risks undermining our impartiality. It is to protect that impartiality that we have made this difficult decision.
Finally, it is important to remember that our decision does not prevent the DEC continuing with their appeal for donations and people are able to contribute should they choose to.
Mark Thompson is director-general of the BBC.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
The BBCs decision here is partial, political, shows an insulting lack of trust in the major aid agencies, and a contempt for human life. I am utterly appalled. Like many other people, if I could opt out of the licence fee to NOT watch BBC I would do so now.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson should resign.
Complain about this comment
I've watched your tabloid reporting of the 'credit crunch', so I am fully aware of the contempt in which you hold the intellectual abilities of your audience.
Nevertheless, I find your reasoning in this matter incomprehensible. Do you also believe us unable to separate the humanitarian needs of people oppressed by both sides of the divide, from the political issues?
I regret you have totally and permanently lost the moral high ground. Refund my licence fee. I will donate it to the DEC and never watch a BBC channel again
Complain about this comment
BBC it is your decision is political and partial, not those who critisise it.
Have you no respect for human life or faith in aid agencies like the Red Cross?
The BBC must have a death-wish.
Complain about this comment
Has the BBC no humanity? This is not a matter of politics or credibility! People are suffering terribly in Gaza and need our help as a matter of urgency. At the very least the BBC should broadcast the appeal with a message explaining their position. To not broadcast is to turn your backs on innocent people caught up in a terrible conflict and would disgrace you in the eyes of a huge number of your viewers.
Just do the decent thing!!!!
Complain about this comment
People are suffering and need aid to get them water and clothing. The broadcast of a few minutes will reach a few donors who can alleviate that suffering. Your own reporters have told us that there are at least 1300 deaths in Gaza and yesterday I was moved by the Today Programmes report on the mother of 9 who saw her eldest decapitated and her daughter-in-law dissolve in front of her eyes as well as losing her husband and 3 or 4 other children. This is not political, this is humanitarian. To not broadcast the appeal would make you biased towards one side as it reinforces the view that no such suffering exists. Please change your minds.
Complain about this comment
This is an absolutely disgraceful decision. I am greatly disappointed in Mark Thompson.
The BBC already shows its partiality be refusing to broadcast pictures of the suffering and destruction which it considers too distressing to show us.
Since when has showing suffering been a question of showing bias?
The reputation that the BBC once had has been replaced by pusillanimity. For ever?
Complain about this comment
Nice one BBC, stick to your guns on this one. I saw the interview on Channel 4 news and I thought your representative handled herself excellently.
Channel 4 wants to count numbers? well here is a vote not to air the Gaza appeal on the BBC.
Strange no one seems concerned about the much higher death toll in Zimbabwe.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I have never been more appalled by the human race than I am at BBC's decision. Gutlessness reaches new lows.
Mark Thompson, make all the mealy mouthed platitudes you like, but the whole world knows you for what you are. I guess you will never need a chiropractor, though, they work on the spine! Do you seriously think anyone will admire you for this? The UN, the government, the whole world accepts the horror that is in Gaza.
You were so quick to condemn Jonathan Ross for a rude comment, but when hundreds are dead, injured and maimed by phosphorus bombs, then you sit on the fence. You hero!
Shame on you, shame on you, shame on you! You gutless gutless man.
Complain about this comment
You are 'damned if you do, and damned if you don't'.
I can understand that you have had to work very hard to achieve a situation where the complaints from the likes of Melanie Phillips about the BBC now say an awful lot more about her than it does about the BBC.
You have built up an awful lot of capital whereby American audiences now realise that 'Fair And Balanced' isn't just a label you can stick on a channel - it has to be achieved by day in, day out work to provide balanced and impartial coverage. Many on the other side of the pond [and elsewhere ] are now gaining an insight into the Middle East which maybe they did not have before.
Of course, the huge danger for you, and you only have to look at Robin Lustig's blog to realise this, that almost all comments are inevitably polarised - and that maintaining neutrality is very difficult. Indeed huge numbers of comments on the feedback on sites like the Daily Telegraph, or on more right wing blogs, now see the BBC as very anti-Israel. But that contrasts with views some years ago that only Israel's voice was being heard.
Of course, the real danger is that you could be painted into a corner where you are seen as either 'Fox News' or 'Al-Jazeera' and people stop watching, because they assume you've already made your mind up and will slew your coverage accordingly.
But I do think some way can be found for running this appeal. After all - if you are linking to the DEC website from your website, aren't you already giving access to it, even if you are not endorsing their coverage of it ?
And you 'advertise' the Radio Times with that caveat 'Other Magazines are available'
I can't go as far as Marina Hyde in her column in today's Guardian - but maybe your coverage is strong enough to be able to show, what is after all, a humanitarian appeal from an organisation far far more apolitical than, say, Amnesty or Liberty.
Complain about this comment
Does the BBC think we are stupid? There is NO WAY that the great British public will confuse the offer of aid with the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality ! This STUPID decision has so incensed me that I have now made 3 times the donations to NGOs to assist in Gaza! The BBC have never gotten it SO wrong! Shame on YOU ! Shame Shame Shame!
Complain about this comment
1. I think the charities know better than the BBC, whether aid can get through or not. Are the charities telling you there is a low likelihood that money donated now won't be effective?
2. All emergency appeals are part of an on-going news story, that is best time to run them! Surely running any appeal is compromising impartiality, in which case why does the BBC bother airing anything from DEC? Then the BBC should not get involved with any appeal and stick to reporting.
I think if the DEC decide that there is a humanitarian case for such an appeal, the BBC has a moral obligation to air it. Ultimately people will decide for themselves whether to contribute.
I hope the BBC realise how stupid they look in all this and reverse their decision.
Complain about this comment
For once I support the BBC. Of course what has happened in Gaza is terrible, but Hamas will merely use such broadcasts as propoganda.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"Finally, it is important to remember that our decision does not prevent the DEC continuing with their appeal for donations and people are able to contribute should they choose to."
Good, so can I choose to withold my license fee and give it to the DEC appeal instead?
Complain about this comment
Well, by not broadcasting the appeal you are doing what you said you wished not to, i.e reducing confidence in the BBC's impartiality, because it looks as if you are leaning towards the Israeli stance.
As for being concerned whether aid raised could be delivered on the ground, this is a specious argument. One is always in these cases concerned whether aid will be delivered appropriately but that is no reason to not deliver aid or to broadcast an appeal. The British public should be allowed to decide such issues. Those who wish to give will and those who don't will ignore the appeal.
What is important is the suffering people of Gaza and our response to such suffering. To follow your arguments to their logical conclusion would mean no aid being sent. Is that what you wish for?
Last night I telephoned the BBC to complain about this decision, earlier today I logged a complaint on your site - not an easy site to use as I was unable to access other people's comments. (Perhaps you would care to tell me how it can be done).
The BBC is funded by the taxpayer, the British public, and you have a duty to us. There have been too many crass and stupid decisions of late, not least being the exorbitant fee paid to Jonathon Ross. However, this stupid, uncaring decision takes the biscuit.
It is obvious that the overwhelming response you have been receiving - evidenced by the fact that your phone line seemed to be permanently engaged until around 16.30 today, added to which a special 'Gaza' message has been added -
is in favour of an appeal being broadcast. The UK is supposed to be a democracy, therefore I suggest you bow to the wishes of the majority and broadcast the appeal.
Maureen A Jeffs
Complain about this comment
I rarely make a comment, this is probably my first. Do you not think the major British charities know if they can deliver, most of them have been there throughout the bombings, unlike the BBC. So why is this the BBC playing politics or the decider of who gets or doesn't? Are you worried about upsetting someone? Your statement doesn't truly explain why. Surely the suffering of humanity needs to be dealt with first and quickly. The should be no politics in helping people and the BBC can help do that. The people that need the help are just common people. What's 2 minutes to you?
Complain about this comment
By refusing to broadcast the appeal, they will succeed.
A bit like telling telling teenagers a certain song has been banned. Watch it shoot straight to Number 1.
Well done BBC, you've put Gaza back at the top of the News cycle, at least with everyone else.
Now how many complaints does it take to make you bend over? How many complaints befor Jonathon Ross was deemed a bad boy...
Count this as a complaint, please. Hopefully the number will have hit the magic number.
You might want to reflect on how many people you can take from the dole queue to work in your ever-expanding Complaints Department............
Complain about this comment
A gutless decision by Mr Thompson. Typical, don't upset the Israeli's whatever you do!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The bbc has been pro hamas throughout the conflict,why stop now.
Complain about this comment
What I think is regrettable about the BBc's decision is that it casts a slur on the suffering of Gazan Palestinians at a time when they need differences to be put aside for the sake of simple human compassion. The hostilities from Israel have ceased. Were we wrong as British citizens to help ordinary Germans from the brink of starvation after the end of WW2? Should we have not have given aid for fear it be used to rebuild the Third Reich? Personally, I had grave misgivings about the Chinese Government's human rights abuses in the run up to the olympics, I thought we were far too tolerant of their regime and should have threatened to have withheld our athletes until more changes were made but equally, I wanted to give money to the Chinese earthquake appeal because the ordinary people's suffering prompted it. I could have reasoned that the Chinese Government may have used some of the money donated to buy weapons of torture or execution but that would have meant I did not trust that the regime had even one ounce of basic humanity. I had to let my compassion override my political cynicism, in the face of widespread suffering. You say that we can still donate to the fund without the BBc's sanction. This is true but, the BBC IS showing partiality by not broadcasting the appeal. It is saying that Israel's view of Hamas as purely terrorist (as opposed to an elected government with duties to its people beyond the militaristic) is the only view, the right view of this organisation. The BBC has never, on any broadcast I have seen said very much about the 18 month blockade of Gaza by the Israeli government way BEFORE any hostilities. Is THIS not partiality? By not broadcasting the appeal, the BBC are signalling to ordinary British people that there is something deeply suspicious about Gazan Palestinians, that they cannot be trusted to care for their own people, that they are instead one-dimensional fanatics who only care about killing Israelis. This ommission is a powerful form of propaganda and colludes with political interests rather than avoiding them.
Complain about this comment
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
The controversy here may in fact draw more attention and support for the DEC appeal. Nevertheless,
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Shame on the BBC
Complain about this comment
The basis for the BBC's decision-making criteria as declared in this blog is seriously suspect.
Firstly, if the charities themselves have to get the aid to the intended beneficiaries, why on earth is the BBC second-guessing both the charities and the givers? I can work out the real-politique, whether it's Gaza, Burma or elsewhere and make my decision whether to give, knowing that there will be problems getting the relief to the ground. If anything, that's where the BBC's objective reporting should come in to play, to provide a basis for informed decision-making, by others!
Secondly, do I take it that the BBC will now no longer report from those places it broadcasts appeals for? Dafur, maybe; many places in Africa and, mostly, anywhere else in the world where there is a dodgy regime or some fractious political conflict? Do you not have enough confidence in your own morality, judgement and standing, to be able to justify objective and un-biased reporting from disaster zones, whatever the colour/ religion/ regime/ weather??
I urge you to go to the gym and tone your stomach and waste works muscles. If they're weak, you'll not get the wider public support you need and ought to deserve to be the world's best trusted media provider.
Complain about this comment
The BBC is to be congardulated on maintaining and standing for, its impartiality status.
There is no guarantee that any money raised for the Gaza appeal who go to those in need.
Hamas has already hijacked a number of lorries containg aid that was delivered via the Israeli crossing points.
It would also be insensitive to ask the Brisish public to make donations to a terroist regime, at a time when the number of unemployed in Britain is on the increase.
Charity begins at home.
Complain about this comment
I am ashamed at the BBC's refusal to help the innocent victims of a humanitarian crisis. Your coverage of the crisis has been one-sided enough but this just marks the BBC's public capitulation to the Israeli propaganda machine. What is this so called 'neutrality' in the face of children dying through lack of aid. Would you have remained 'neutral' on the Warsaw ghetto? It is an appalling and shameful decision.
Complain about this comment
Trust in the BBC with regards to middle east reporting is pretty much at zero anyway.
If I can be convinced that the BBC hasn't intentionally created a fuss so as to give more media coverage to this appeal that it would have normally, than I would say this is a brave decision by the BBC and the correct one.
Complain about this comment
Once again the BBC are showing just how out of step they are with the people who pay the licence fee in the first place. Why does the BBC seem more interested in praising the return or Mr Overpayed Jonathan Ross than doing something about poor victims who have been bullied by another country. If i could refuse to pay the licence fee without risk of prosecution i would, as i like many people are rapidly coming to the conclussion that the BBC is only interested in looking after its favoured few, and sod the rest of us! Perhaps its time for a change at the top in both management and trustees!
Complain about this comment
Sorry Mr Thompson but you cannot have it both ways. If deciding to accede to the DEC request would be seen as political then deciding not to accede to it is also political. Don't insult me with your disingenuous attempts to suggest it is otherwise.
The relief fund is to relieve suffering and the BBC, as a supposedly neutral body, has a duty to respond to its audience the majority of whom would clearly wish there to be such an appeal.
The conflict between Hamas and Israel is not central to the human suffering we have all witnessed since most of the injured and homeless are innocent bystanders.
I would suggest you take your lack of spirit elsewhere because it is unwelcome in a public service provider.
Complain about this comment
Here's where to complain:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaints_stage1.shtml
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson's patronsing comment in his final paragraph that the BBC's shameful and ill-judged decision not to broadcast the appeal for aid to Gaza "does not prevent the DEC continuing with their appeal for donations and people are able to contribute should they choose to" indicates a breathtaking level of arrogance. His appointment as Director General has proved to be a disaster (and dangerous for the BBC's long-term survival). The sooner he resigns the better.
Complain about this comment
This is a most bizarre post.
The aid agencies don't ask for donations if they don't have procedures in place to ensure aid reaches the people who need it. That's their job - and the logistics of that are what such agencies are dealing with daily. It's not the job of the BBC - the DEC wouldn't be proposing appeals if they didn't think their agencies should distribute the aid.
The second point, distastefully political, suggests to me that perhaps the BBC would only broadcast appeals if the need is caused by a natural disaster. There are always sides to conflicts but the people who suffer in the long run are individuals - not political parties. You don't need to agree with the politics of a nation (or disagree) to have compassion on those affected by war. The BBC is putting politics before the real needs of people who have been placed in situations which they cannot escape from, and who need help.
Please reconsider your incredibly odd political argument, Mark.
Complain about this comment
This was the correct decision if you put the weakness of human sentimentality to one side for a moment. Mark Thompson is correct and this could also be seen as supporting the wider cause of Gaza - an area run by terrorists and criminals - in their fight against Israel and desire for it to be wiped from existence.
Complain about this comment
All the other channels weren't going to show it either, no one is asking questions of them because they sold the BBC out by changing tact.
Appears to me as if that some are using this issue to draw attention to their appeal, instead of looking at alternatives, BBC doesn't have a monopoly in broadcast so why treat it that way.
Another excuse to BBC-bash it seems.
Complain about this comment
Whilst I sympathise with the innocent victims of the Gaza situation, I have to wholeheartedly support the BBC in their ability to remain impartial in this circumstance.
The publicity arising from this decision more than adequately raises the issue (as if the news coverage didn't achieve that anyway) and still maintains the BBC's credibility as an unbiased news source not influenced by political agendas
Complain about this comment
Mr Thompson, I find your attitude astonishing. I seem to recall a passage from the Bible - the parable of the good Samaritan - with which you appear to be unfamiliar. You and your colleagues should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves.
I can only assume you have bowed to pressure applied behind the scenes from the more extreme element of the pro-Israeli lobby. I regret that I shall in future not be watching any of your news or current affairs programmes as I feel your objectivity, and that of the BBC, cannot be guaranteed.
Complain about this comment
I pay my BBC license because essentially, I'm forced to if I want to own a TV.
The last thing I want to do, is fund the BBC to broadcast propaganda. It's bad enough I have to pay Jeremy Bowen to give me his pro-palestinian claptrap, there's no way I will pay the BBC to air the DEC's politically-motivated 'appeal' for Gaza.
Gaza is run by a government which is internationally recognised as a terrorist group, including by the EU.
There is no doubt that some aid/fund will be 'procured' by Hamas.
I don't want the BBC to be responsible for potentially indirectly aiding Hamas.
Good decision BBC.
Complain about this comment
Well done BBC, this decision is really giving me more faith over the impartiality issue which I thought was slipping in the wrong direction. The DEC aid appeal is still going; it's not going to get any less money, in fact if anything this has given it more publicity. But it is sad that it has been hi-jacked by leftist anti-Israel campaigners/bullies, and it is sad that ITV and Sky have caved into them so quickly
Your point about how the aid will get into Gaza is also valid. Will the money be distributed straight to the people from the aid agencies (very unlikely), or will it be given to Hamas to spread out. If it is the latter, then I wouldn't want to be giving trust my money to a terrorist organisation - this is something that people, swept away in their cause, don't bother thinking about. Stay strong on this one.
Complain about this comment
Sorry Mr T. but this is your worst yet.
The qualification for aid is undeniable.
Gaza is a huge man made disaster and we can who made it. It is a totally unbalanced case of needs. The Israeli's do not need any more aid. Western largesse has amply supplied their military and social needs.
Perhaps you should ask DEC to set up two funds. One for Israel, as well,
if it would ease your anxiety.
Thinking of your 'Impartiality' I don't know why I keep hearing Ralph Waldo Emerson's - "The louder he talked of his honour the faster we counted our spoons"
Complain about this comment
"we concluded that we could not broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully constructed, without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story."
You think that
a) people do not see the BBC as biased in its coverage already
b) that by refusing to broadcast it you are making very clear that you ARE partial. This is an appeal for AID, pure and simple. You either have a very low opinion of your audience or you just ARE biased
Disgraceful, despicable and inhuman, you should be ashamed.
Complain about this comment
Whilst I do respect the BBC wish and clearly need to stay impartial this is first and foremost a humanitarian tragedy. Whilst suffering takes place on both sides it is clear that the devastating effects of Israel's military action in Gaza are there for all to see and the UN Secretary has visited the area and spoken about this.
An appeal to help the suffering people in Gaza is the least that can and must be done.
I struggle to see how this makes the BBC less impartial.
By deciding this way the BBC actually gets involved in politics. This is regrettable and lessens my confidence in the corporation.
Complain about this comment
I never thought I'd see the day when, actively or passively, the BBC would add to the suffering and deaths of innocent civilians by refusing to inform the British public of their plight. By refusing to show this appeal the BBC has, by definition, taken sides and shown it values some lives more than others. I'm ashamed to say I've always been a supporter of the licence fee in the past, but for Mark Thompson to claim he is doing on this on behalf of us, the licence-fee payer, angers me enough to change my mind.
Complain about this comment
i always use to lwatch bbc from my childhood but after gaza terror attack what i saw bbc also puppet of israel and don't have feeling for human i will stop watching bbc from today,
Complain about this comment
This is a bad decision by the BBC. Whatever the politics, whatever the cause of the conflict, innocent children are dying and need help. The BBC should broadcast the appeal and not worry about the logistics of getting aid into the region. That is best left to the professionals and in any case, it could be weeks before the money donated is actually used.
Complain about this comment
1. It is frankly nothing whatsoever to do with the BBC what any 'alleged' difficulties in getting AID into Gaza are or are not. That judgement is a matter for the Charities concerned and the UN. They feel they can, and the UK Government has given £25m so it clearly believes the AID *can* get through. So that is out of the way as a red herring.
2. The condescending, patronising nonsense in suggesting that the overwhelming *majority* could not see perfectly clearly for themselves, that the appeal is to raise funds to help almost half a million people without water, and 50,000 without homes, and not an act of partial judgement about the politics of it, is breathtaking.
There has also been dishonesty on the part of the BBC in suggesting that other Broadcasters had taken their own independent view in concurrence with the BBC when clearly they had not. They had waited for the BBC's decision and not made their own.
The BBC should be ashamed of themselves and I, for one, am now considering for the first time in my adult life supporting the ending of the TV Licence system.
Complain about this comment
Shame on you Mark Thompson!
This is clearly a humanitarian not a political situation. The people of Gaza are clearly in desperate need of our help and we should do all in our power to help them. If the people of Israel were in this position we would be right to help them too.
It is not a matter of partiality, death, homelessness and suffering are not partial.
I suspect that the reality here is that you are afraid of the pro-Israel lobby.
Mark Thompson you are a spineless man who should resign with immediate effect.
Shame on you and shame on the BBC.
Complain about this comment
How long has Mark Thompson worked for a major charity in his life . Let the charities deal with getting the aid to those who need it. He also assumes your audience is incapable of differentiating between assigning blame, understanding the politics and helping people in need.
In any contest for the moral high ground I will guarantee that the DEC will come out ahead of the BBC.
Complain about this comment
The BBC really must reconsider this stupid decision. You say that you wish to avoid people believing that the BBC is "taking sides in the conflict". Do you not realise that by refusing a perfectly reasonable request from the Disasters Emergency Committee, related to what is universally accepted as a humanitarian catastrophe, then "taking sides" is exactly what you have done?
Complain about this comment
The BBC should have told the DEC that they would only air the appeal if it included southern Israel where around 1,400 homes have been damaged. There is a big problem with trauma amongst Israeli kids who've spent years running in and out of bomb shelters.
A survey found the majority of kids suffered from stress/mental problems due to rocket barrages.
Additionally, Israel's economy in the south has taken a battering.
The only reason why Israeli deaths don't number that of Palestinians, is because the Israelis have built shelters for their population.
Only if the appeal includes the areas in the south of Israel which were fairly poor to begin with, should the BBC air the appeal.
Well done for not bowing to left wing pressure (so far)
Complain about this comment
i think it is disgusting that the bbc can do this cos if it was us they would want people to help us as well, what would they do if we were in the same situation? They should rethink about what they have done, they have showed appeals before for others that have been in worse humanitarian difficulties,would they still say the same if we all refused to watch or pay our t.v licence,i completely agree with lyonesse.
the BBC seem to show only what they want they must ask themselves what if they were in the situation or if it was someone they knew or loved, i think the BBC should either refund all of our t.v licence money to all who dont agree with them or send all our t.v licence money over through the charities to help all of them people who have nowhere to live, nothing to eat and help to rebuild the country
Complain about this comment
This is a humanitarian appeal on behalf of the desparate people of Gaza by the highly respected and truly impartial DEC. The BBC decision is political and far from impartial. It is yet another nail in the coffin of the impartiality of the BBC. The answer, for those who care about the humanitarian situation, is easy; change channels, watch the appeal and don't be too quick to change back again. I've just discovered that Sky Sports News have a very credible alternative on Freeview to BBC's Final Score on a Saturday afternoon. Not much of a protest, but if others join in.......
Complain about this comment
The EU has just pledged millions to re-build Gaza. And now major charities are scrambling for a place on the bandwagon. Can´t we spend just a little more time contemplating the wisdom of pouring money into a Hamas stronghold, without any guarantee that these funds will not be misused to further terrorism?
Hamas, financed and armed by Iran, receives United Nations and EU subsidies to bolster a regime that has terrorised the population of Gaza, that successfully provoked the Israeli attack at the cost of so may lives and has either murdered moderate Fatah supporters or driven them out of Gaza.
The present cease-fire is fragile and the leaders of Hamas have been discredited. The population of Gaza must now decide on their own political future and it would be irresponsible if western charities were to enable terrorists not only to re-arm, but to do so with the acquiescence of western democracies.
Re-building a new and viable Gaza is a laudable cause. And help must be provided immediately to alleviate suffering. But this can only be accomplished if the distribution of aid is not supervised or influenced by terrorist organizations. Long-term economic aid to Gaza must be dependent on a unified, moderate Palestinian government and a negotiated settlement of border issues.
Complain about this comment
The sheer inhumanity of the BBC's decision really takes the breath away. It is almost as though they are in agreement with the Israeli line that anyone in Gaza is a justifiable target because they live in an area governed by Hamas. The need of the people who live there is what should determine any decision to broadcast an appeal, rather than the politics of their rulers.
I very much value the journalism of the BBC and I do not support the calls of other contributors for the abolition of the licence fee. But it is because the BBC is so important that Mark Thompson and his offensive henchwoman, Caroline Thomson, should go. It is their inhumanity that is damaging the reputation of the BBC.
Complain about this comment
Maybe the BBC should concentrate on educating people on why they think the DEC would compromise impartiallity. Maybe the BBC thinks that the DEC will smuggle in weapons? I for one would like to know more about this untrustworthy organisation that i have given money to in the past. An expose of how they would spend the money, maybe they could dedicate a whole panorama program on the DEC and the way they work, surely my supporting this organisation means that i have supported the Burmese goverment when i donated, and i must have been supporting the Goverment or the Rebels in DR Congo when i supported the DEC there.
I once respected the BBC, all i think now after seeing the continious dumbing down of news is that its time the organisation was dismantled as very little it left worth saving as a whole. Better to spend the money commissioning individual projects from the money spent on the BBC as a whole.
Complain about this comment
"This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious."
And by not showing it - you're being impartial?
Would there be a debate if the appeal was for Zimbabwe? Or Afghanistan?
I don't think so.
Complain about this comment
Resign now.
Complain about this comment
I'm going to donate my BBC licence fee to the DEC appeal to make up for the shortfall that this incomprehensible decision will induce.
The BBC can stick it.
Complain about this comment
I absolutely agree with this decision. It is just a pity that the reporting is so one sided.
Complain about this comment
Innocent people will die because of this cowardly decision. Shame on you.
The choice for the BBC seems clear -
By choosing to broadcast the appeal, the BBC could help to save the lives of innocent Palestinians BUT it would risk the anger of the Israeli government and some of Israel's most ardent supporters.
By choosing not to broadcast it, it will contribute to the death and suffering of civilians BUT it will appease the Israeli government and its most ardent supporters.
Apparently the latter option is preferable.
Only the most unfeeling person could see the broadcasting of an appeal that will do something to alleviate the suffering of the Gazans as an act of impartiality rather than as an act of humanity.
The weak excuses put forward about the uncertainty of aid reaching its target are pathetic. If this is a real concern, Mr Thompson, then you must quote your sources. Saying
"Clearly, there have been considerable logistical difficulties in delivering aid into Gaza."
is simply insufficient. I have not seen it reported that the NGOs involved share this concern and can, therefore, only consider this to be nothing more than a cheap excuse to cover up the BBC's brutal cowardice. It should be up to the NGOs, who have actual experience of the situation in Gaza, to decide whether they can supply aid effectively, not the BBC chiefs in London. They cannot possibly claim to be in a better position to judge whether the aid will be deliverered than either the NGOs or the government, who have condemned the BBC's decision.
The weakness of this excuse only makes it clearer that the BBC is depserately trying to conceal the shameful nature of its actions and its claims regarding impartiality.
Shame on you.
Complain about this comment
It's commendable that the BBC didn't kow-tow to left wing elements within the government, or the angry mob outside of their offices.
However, I am slightly concerned that the most basic aspects of impartiality such as simple reporting on the conflict, have not been met. So I'm confused why the BBC would suddenly see this appeal as a threat to their mythical neutrality when it appears they don't seem to care about cheap, emotional, pro Palestinian journalism from the likes of Jeremy Bowen.
Whatever the BBC's reasons (one of which could be that in doing this, they have granted more airtime for the appeal) I support not broadcasting this appeal.
There's a long way to go before you can regain the prestige you used to have BBC. Much of it evaporated when you decided to
initiate a media war against Israel.
Complain about this comment
The BBC's decision not to broadcast the Gaza appeal is a disgrace. You must rethink your policy. To pay foul-mouthed Jonathon Ross millions of pounds of licence payers money yet deny a Palestinian child the chance of medical aid is obscene.
Complain about this comment
By not airing the appeal the BBC has lost all credibility and impartiality. The aftermath of the disaster in Gaza is not a question of 'who is to blame?' @who do we support?'. It is a humanitarian disaster as a result of a military action of an unrivalled scale. One of the reactions sent in on the BBC's website congratulates the BBC for it's courage because' I don't see any appeals for the victims of Hamas' and Hezbollah's rockets'. And this is exactly the crux of the story. What would the BBC's stance be when Jerusalem would be flattened by a criminal military action by Hamas? I'm quite convinced now that the BBC would air any appeal. In my eyes they have lost all impartiality in this matter and only SHAME SHAME SHAME is a correct reaction. But then shame has left this country long ago.
Complain about this comment
I remain unconvinced by your justification Mark. Forgive me but it is weak and lacks substance and credibility. You weren't done any favours by Caroline Thomson's gobbledygook explanation on the Today programme this morning either (which continues to baffle me btw). How can you equate genuine human suffering with politics. You may consider yourself impartial but you have also awarded yourself a new accolade today...inhuman.
I think you'll have to try a bit harder with a response....one that's truthful would be a good start.
I believe that you are ultimately answerable to us as we pay your salary so we deserve the truth don't we?
Complain about this comment
BBC is acting like IDF, prejudging respectful humanitarian organization, withouth any reason.
Calamitous situation in Gaza transcends any other argument used not to help.
As a public TV, it has duties and obligations to fulfill with public opinion.
It's quite imoral and indecent to accept money from Royal Dutch sued for environmental and labor crimes all overt the world.
Complain about this comment
Please BBC - don't give in to your pride. Do the right thing and run the advert - it will save lives. Of Children.
it's not pro anything except humanity.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
There are clearly faults on both sides in this appalling conflict; but I believe that the humanitarian needs of those in Gaza must be placed above rather dubious concerns over whether or not the BBC remains impartial.
I urge the BBC to reconsider the decision not to broadcast the appeal urgently.
If the BBC is so impartial then why were national newspapers , and other news channels,detailing the use of white phosphorus in areas occupied by civilians 3 days before there was any mention of this in the BBC news?
Complain about this comment
If I can just echo other people's points about the aid getting through.
Mark Thompson hinted, yet didn't have the courage to say it, so I will.
The reason the BBC wasn't satisfied that the aid would get through, is because it's been documented for years how Hamas manage to gain from aid and have recently stopped lorries at gunpoint and even went on to SELL the aid to the Palestinian population.
The BBC doesn't want to be seen to aid terrorists, even though it seems many in Britain of a left wing persuasion have become Hamas' biggest cheerleaders.
Complain about this comment
This is a contemptible decision by the BBC. It is absolutely not impartial - quite the contrary. Most of the hundreds of victims of the recent conflict in Gaza are innocent civilians, including children. The BBCs decision demonstrates contempt for the expertise of the DEC and an appalling disregard for human life. I am ashamed to pay the licence fee.
Complain about this comment
Absolutely disgusting...the one silver lining is that this extra coverage may be giving the appeal more attention than it may have got..but there is a principle here.
I too would love to withhold my licence fee on the basis of this decision alone.. gutless people in overpaid jobs more concerned about how they are perceived than a humanitarian crisis.
We are not stupid we can tell the difference between supporting a side in this unfortunate affair and wanting to help innocent victims.
Does Isreal's money and influence really reach this far ?
I can usually see both sides of an issue but in this instance, having read Mark Thompsons comments, I am amazed out how weak the reasons are...very poor indeed.
Complain about this comment
One good thing to come out of this otherwise shameful episode is that the appeal is getting more publicity than it otherwise might have done and lots more people will send in donations.
The BBC's defence if its position is absurd. If it OK to broadcast an appeal for the victims of Darfur, it's OK to broadcast this one, and if it upsets the Israeli Government then so be it.
Complain about this comment
Well done the BBC, please continue to remain impartial so the nation can continue to trust the news they receive is unbiased.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Come on BBC you have had failed to save these children by standing up to the Israeli Government and your present was missing we reverse that. The least you could do now is to recosider your decission and help the parents, sisters and brothers of these kiled innocent children.
At least 450 children are among the more than 1,330 Palestinians who have died since Israel began to bombard the Gaza Strip on December 27.
Al Jazeera has obtained the names of 210 only of the young victims, 44 of which were under five years old.
Date Name Gender Age
27/12/2008 Ibtihal Kechko Girl 10
Ahmed Riad Mohammed Al-Sinwar Boy 3
Ahmed Al-Homs Boy 18
Ahmed Rasmi Abu Jazar Boy 16
Ahmed Sameeh Al-Halabi Boy 18
Tamer Hassan Al-Akhrass Boy 5
Hassan Ali Al-Akhrass Boy 3
Haneen Wael Mohammed Daban Girl 15
Khaled Sami Al-Astal Boy 15
alaat Mokhless Bassal Boy 18
Aaed Imad Kheera Boy 14
Abdullah Al-Rayess Boy 17
Odai Hakeem Al-Mansi Boy 4
Allam Nehrou Idriss Boy 18
Ali Marwan Abu Rabih Boy 18
Anan Saber Atiyah Boy 13
Camelia Al-Bardini Girl 10
Lama Talal Hamdan Girl 10
Mohammed Jaber Howeij Boy 17
Nimr Mustafa Amoom Boy 10
29/12/2008 Ismail Talal Hamdan Boy 10
Ahmed Ziad Al-Absi Boy 14
Ahmed Youssef Khello Boy 18
Ikram Anwar Baaloosha Girl 14
Tahrier Anwar Baaloosha Girl 17
Jihad Saleh Ghobn Boy 10
Jawaher Anwar Baaloosha Girl 8
Dina Anwar Baaloosha Girl 7
Samar Anwar Baaloosha Girl 6
Shady Youssef Ghobn Boy 12
Sudqi Ziad Al-Absi Boy 3
Imad Nabeel Abou Khater Boy 16
Lina Anwar Baaloosha Girl 7
Mohammed Basseel Madi Boy 17
Mohammed Jalal Abou Tair Boy 18
Mohammed Ziad Al-Absi Boy 14
Mahmoud Nabeel Ghabayen Boy 15
Moaz Yasser Abou Tair Boy 6
Wissam Akram Eid Girl 14
30/12/2008 Haya Talal Hamdan Girl 8
31/12/2008 Ahmed Kanouh Boy 10
Ameen Al-Zarbatlee Boy 10
Mohammed Nafez Mohaissen Boy 10
Mustafa Abou Ghanimah Boy 16
Yehya Awnee Mohaissen Boy 10
Ossman Bin Zaid Nizar Rayyan Boy 3
Assaad Nizar Rayyan Boy 2
Moaz-Uldeen Allah Al-Nasla Boy 5
Aya Nizar Rayyan Girl 12
Halima Nizar Rayyan Girl 5
Reem Nizar Rayyan Boy 4
Aicha Nizar Rayyan Girl 3
Abdul Rahman Nizar Rayyan Boy 6
Abdul Qader Nizar Rayyan Boy 12
Oyoon Jihad Al-Nasla Girl 16
Mahmoud Mustafa Ashour Boy 13
Maryam Nizar Rayyan Girl 5
01/01/2009 Hamada Ibrahim Mousabbah Boy 10
Zeinab Nizar Rayyan Girl 12
Sujud Mahmoud Al-Derdesawi Girl 10
Abdul Sattar Waleed Al-Astal Boy 12
Abed Rabbo Iyyad Abed Rabbo Al-Astal Boy 10
Ghassan Nizar Rayyan Boy 15
Christine Wadih El-Turk Boy 6
Mohammed Mousabbah Boy 14
Mohammed Iyad Abed Rabbo Al-Astal Boy 13
Mahmoud Samsoom Boy 16
Ahmed Tobail Boy 16
Ahmed Sameeh Al-Kafarneh Boy 17
Hassan Hejjo Boy 14
Rajeh Ziadeh Boy 18
Shareef Abdul Mota Armeelat Boy 15
Mohammed Moussa Al-Silawi Boy 10
Mahmoud Majed Mahmoud Abou Nahel Boy 16
Mohannad Al-Tatnaneeh Boy 18
Hani Mohammed Al-Silawi Boy 10
01/01/2009 Ahmed Al-Meshharawi Boy 16
Ahmed Khodair Sobaih Boy 17
Ahmed Sameeh Al-Kafarneh Boy 18
Asraa Kossai Al-Habash Girl 10
Assad Khaled Al-Meshharawi Boy 17
Asmaa Ibrahim Afana Girl 12
Ismail Abdullah Abou Sneima Boy 4
Akram Ziad Al-Nemr Boy 18
Aya Ziad Al-Nemr Girl 8
Ahmed Mohammed Al-Adham Boy 1
Akram Ziad Al-Nemr Boy 13
Hamza Zuhair Tantish Boy 12
Khalil Mohammed Mokdad Boy 18
Ruba Mohammed Fadl Abou-Rass Girl 13
Ziad Mohammed Salma Abou Sneima Boy 9
Shaza Al-Abed Al-Habash Girl 16
Abed Ziad Al-Nemr Boy 12
Attia Rushdi Al-Khawli Boy 16
Luay Yahya Abou Haleema Boy 17
Mohammed Akram Abou Harbeed Boy 18
Mohammed Abed Berbekh Boy 18
Mohammed Faraj Hassouna Boy 16
Mahmoud Khalil Al-Mashharawi Boy 12
Mahmoud Zahir Tantish Boy 17
Mahmoud Sami Assliya Boy 3
Moussa Youssef Berbekh Boy 16
Wi'am Jamal Al-Kafarneh Girl 2
Wadih Ayman Omar Boy 4
Youssef Abed Berbekh Boy 10
05/01/2009 Ibrahim Rouhee Akl Boy 17
Ibrahim Abdullah Merjan Boy 13
Ahmed Attiyah Al-Semouni Boy 4
Aya Youssef Al-Defdah Girl 13
Aya Al-Sersawi Girl 5
Ahmed Amer Abou Eisha Boy 5
Ameen Attiyah Al-Semouni Boy 4
Hazem Alewa Boy 8
Khalil Mohammed Helless Boy 12
Diana Mosbah Saad Girl 17
Raya Al-Sersawi Girl 5
Rahma Mohammed Al-Semouni Girl 18
Ramadan Ali Felfel Boy 14
Rahaf Ahmed Saeed Al-Azaar Girl 4
Shahad Mohammed Hijjih Girl 3
Arafat Mohammed Abdul Dayem Boy 10
Omar Mahmoud Al-Baradei Boy 12
Ghaydaa Amer Abou Eisha Girl 6
Fathiyya Ayman Al-Dabari Girl 4
Faraj Ammar Al-Helou Boy 2
Moumen Alewah Boy 9
Moumen Mahmoud Talal Alaw Boy 10
Mohammed Amer Abu Eisha Boy 8
Mahmoud Mohammed Abu Kamar Boy 15
Marwan Hein Kodeih Girl 6
Montasser Alewah Boy 12
Naji Nidal Al-Hamlawi Boy 16
Nada Redwan Mardi Girl 5
Hanadi Bassem Khaleefa Girl 13
06/01/2009 Ibrahim Ahmed Maarouf Boy 14
Ahmed Shaher Khodeir Boy 14
Ismail Adnan Hweilah Boy 15
Aseel Moeen Deeb Boy 17
Adam Mamoun Al-Kurdee Boy 3
Alaa Iyad Al-Daya Girl 8
Areej Mohammed Al-Daya Girl 3 months
Amani Mohammed Al-Daya Girl 4
Baraa Ramez Al-Daya Girl 2
Bilal Hamza Obaid Boy 15
Thaer Shaker Karmout Boy 17
Hozaifa Jihad Al-Kahloot Boy 17
Khitam Iyad Al-Daya Girl 9
Rafik Abdul Basset Al-Khodari Boy 15
Raneen Abdullah saleh Girl 12
Zakariya Yahya Al-Taweel Boy 5
Sahar Hatem Dawood Girl 10
Salsabeel Ramez Al-Daya Girl 6 months
Sharafuldeen Iyad Al-Daya Boy 7
Doha Mohammed Al-Daya Girl 5
Ahed Iyad Kodas Boy 15
Abdullah Mohammed Abdullah Boy 10
Issam Sameer Deeb Boy 12
Alaa Ismail Ismail Boy 18
Ali Iyad Al-Daya Boy 10
Imad Abu Askar Boy 18
Filasteen Al-Daya Girl 5
Kamar Mohammed Al-Daya Boy 3
Lina Abdul Menem Hassan Girl 10
Unidentified Boy 9
Unidentified Boy 15
Mohammed Iyad Al-Daya Boy 6
Mohammed Bassem Shakoura Boy 10
Mohammed Bassem Eid Boy 18
Mohammed Deeb Boy 17
Mohammed Eid Boy 18
Mustafa Moeen Deeb Boy 12
Noor Moeen Deeb Boy 2
Youssef Saad Al-Kahloot Boy 17
Youssef Mohammed Al-Daya Boy 1
07/01/2009 Ibrahim Kamal Awaja Boy 9
Ahmed Jaber Howeij Boy 7
Ahmed Fawzi Labad Boy 18
Ayman Al-Bayed Boy 16
Amal Khaled Abed Rabbo Girl 3
Toufic Khaled Al-Khahloot Boy 10
Habeeb Khaled Al-Khahloot Boy 12
Houssam Raed Sobeh Boy 12
Hassan Rateb Semaan Boy 18
Hassan Ata Hassan Azzam Boy 2
Redwan Mohammed Ashoor Boy 10
Suad Khaled Abed Rabbo Girl 6
Samar Khaled Abed Rabbo Girl 2
Abdul Rahman Mohammmed Ashoor Boy 12
Fareed Ata Hassan Azzam Boy 13
Mohammed Khaled Al-Kahloot Boy 15
Mohammed Samir Hijji Boy 16
Mohammed Fareed Al-Maasawabi Boy 16
Mohammed Moeen Deeb Boy 17
Mohammed Nasseem Salama Saba Boy 16
Mahmoud Hameed Boy 17
Hamam Issa Boy 1
08/01/2009 Anas Arif Abou Baraka Boy 7
Ibrahim Akram Abou Dakkka Boy 12
Ibrahim Moeen Jiha Boy 15
Baraa Iyad Shalha Girl 6
Basma Yasser Al-Jeblawi Girl 5
Shahd Saad Abou Haleema Girl 15
Azmi Diab Boy 16
Mohammed Akram Abou Dakka Boy 14
Mohammed Hikmat Abou Haleema Boy 17
Ibrahim Moeen Jiha Boy 15
Matar Saad Abou Haleema Boy 17
09/01/2009 Ahmed Ibrahim Abou Kleik Boy 17
Ismail Ayman Yasseen Boy 18
Alaa Ahmed Jaber Girl 11
Baha-Uldeen Fayez Salha Girl 5
Rana Fayez Salha Girl 12
Rola Fayez Salha Girl 13
Diyaa-Uldeen Fayez Salah Boy 14
Ghanima Sultan Halawa Girl 11
Fatima Raed Jadullah Girl 10
Mohammed Atef Abou Al-Hussna Boy 15
If this was in reverse god forbid I will do the same.
Complain about this comment
What a load of pompous, self-righteous garbage.
If you really can't bring yourself to help thousands of suffering people because of political correctness you should be very ashamed of yourselves.
It makes me wonder if the right people are running the BBC.
Complain about this comment
The DEC are not requesting an appeal for money to support the Palestinian cause but to save innocent civilian lives. The issue of partiality is irrelevant when innocent civilians of any country need urgent help, whether from natural disaster or war.
Ongoing conflict in the Congo was being shown by the BBC when they broadcast for the DEC to raise funds for those affected in that situation. I don't imagine partiality was a concern then though.
The BBC will be seen to decline to broadcast an appeal for life saving aid only because they're Palestinians in this case. This will be recognised as political bias throughout the world, the very accusation they say they wish to avoid.
This appalling pronouncement disgusts me.
Complain about this comment
So it's wrong to ask for money to help wounded, homeless and traumatised civilians, but it's right to ask for money to pay your wages? I assume that all fee-paying phone lines will now be banned as they too are partial. Or will you spread the money impatially between all UK broadcasters?
This one incident has done more to erode our trust in the BBC than anything you've broadcast in years.
Complain about this comment
Ok, I've tripled my donation to Save The Children.
Hopefully, by following your example, the Israeli propaganda employees will be impartial in providing a similar amount of aid to children.
After all, the Israelis did not mean to hurt or kill the children and innocent adults in Gaza - right.... Being the good people that they claim to be, we shall await the massive donations from Israel.
Perhaps a group of charities may consider making an appeal to raise funds to help the one or two Israelis who are homeless, and suffered terrible acts of war. That would be impartial. Would the unequal level of and severity of damage suffered in Israel over the past few weeks pose a problem in terms of partiality for the BBC ..... Would the BBC like to discuss this with the charities in order that they may meet the silly level of impartiallity too........ Perhaps the BBC would like to see the Government give an equal amount of aid to Israel to ensure they are seen to be impartial...
Would that make Mr Thompson feel a little bit better... although would do nothing to resore our belief in his ability to do his job. Quite the opposite.
In the meantime, Mr Thompson et al., I await a news report of your resignations. As soon as possible.
You are too much of an idiot to be employed in any responsible postion. Douglas Alexander is stating the obvious, and you are so incompetent, you can't see it.
This spineless decision making is bringing shame on the UK. Pathetic.
Complain about this comment
I think this is a shocking case of the BBC putting humanitarian needs second to its own needs as a company.
The ordinary people of Gaza are at the mercy of not only the Israelis, but Hamas. To deny an appeal for those people who have suffered so much IS political and biased, denying them the help they need so urgently. They need help as human beings, and the BBC are the ones who are making it a political issue.
To say that the aid may not reach them is just a copout, the BBC is not responsible for whether the aid reaches them or not and most people who might make a donation will hardly hold it against the BBC if it doesn't reach them, they will decide for themselves if they're willing to donate under the circumstances.
The BBC DOES have a responsibility to publicise humanitarian needs, a responsibility it is sadly neglecting at the moment.
Complain about this comment
Well done the BBC.
I can recall occasions when Isreali representatives have wriggled out of tough questions about dubious behaviour by claiming the BBC is biased against Isreal.
Stick to your guns and they cannot use this excuse the next time your jounalists ask legitimate questions.
That will be far more helpful to the people of Gaza that a small temporary appeal for funds.
Complain about this comment
I'm simply appalled. The charities involved say that they are confident that the aid will get to those who need it. Why does the BBC think that they know better?
You're right about one thing. The decision IS political, just not in the way that some people may think.
If only giving money to the BBC was also voluntary.
Complain about this comment
Well done BBC.
I lost faith in you a long time ago over the Balen report fiasco which was rumoured to point to anti-Israel bias at the BBC. A report you suppressed in court with tax payers' money.
However, the fact you have knocked back this cynical politically-motivated appeal from being broadcast, has helped to slightly restore my faith, even though the reporting is still one sided.
How on earth the other broadcasters fee its right to appeal for aid which could land in the lap of Hamas, is beyond me.
What next? aid for Al Qaeda areas in the Pakistan/Afghanistan border? it's ridiculous.
Complain about this comment
Why has Israel become so untouchable? This impartiality doesn't make sense. You aren't taking sides with the Israeli government or Hamas you are taking sides with ordinary people. You suggest with you impartiality arguement that Gaza is Hamas . Its as ridiculous as saying the UK is the Labour party. It seems a little a ignorant and predjudiced. I wouldn't want to stereotype the whole population of Israel as a load of Nasty right wing bigots. Just its government.
Is BBC hiding under the table from the Jewish Lobby?
Complain about this comment
Shame on you Mark Thompson !
Regardless of your analysis of the causes of the Gaza conflict and who is to blame, people are suffering and dying in Gaza. We must help !
Why can't the BBC broadcast the appeal with a message explaining your position - like Channel 4 did with Ahmedinejad's so-called Xmas message ?
Your first reason is also quite spurious - since when did the BBC have the right to decide not to broadcast an appeal because 'the money might not get through' ? The members of the DEC, as professional charities/NGOs, must have made that calculation before launching the appeal. This sounds like a poor excuse to me.
If I could withhold my licence fee, I would !
Complain about this comment
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is a reality. If the BBC broadcasts that reality and public opinion turns against the Israeli government then so be it. It is not the BBC's job to protect the Israeli government from the consequences of the people seeing the truth.
Complain about this comment
The BBC must maintain its impartiality by showing this appeal. Not showing it is favouring the Isreali cause. We can't allow the BBC to discriminate against Palestine.
Complain about this comment
Mark is talking for the shake of talking, alsolutelly nothing he says makes any sense. it could be he may have made or got paid by the israelis...... i am asking everyone to stop paying their TV licences in protest at this outrageous decission
Complain about this comment
Writing as a British Jew with no love for Hamas, I have to say that this is a disgraceful decision, and the BBC's justification is nonsensical. This is not a political or partisan issue:; it is not about the rights and wrongs of the Gaza conflict or the wider Israeli-Palestinian issue; this is simply a humanitarian appeal for people who are suffering grievously and whose suffering will be relieved by the assistance of the DEC aid agencies. It is the BBC's response that has turned this into a political issue.
The BBC has previously broadcast DEC appeals for humanitarian relief in Darfur and Congo. Darfur is a controversial issue that is often on the news agenda, but it was recognised in that case that the DEC appeal was humanitarian, not political. Why not in this case?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Ther must be something I don't understand. The UN has recognised the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and John Holmes the UN Humanitarian chief has stated that massive relief is needed.
Israel deny the humanitarian crisis and The BBC by not allowing the appeal to be broadcast show a disregard for the suffering and need by the Palestinians and instead a bias toward the Israeli position.
I am much saddened and disappointed by your decision and wonder indeed what public opinion you are worried about.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson should stick to his decision
and not be pressured by members of the Goverment appearing on News 24 suggesting that all members of the public would support the appeal " as all charities in DEC would do a good job in helping children injured in the recent fighting".
This is not the point. The BBC must be free to make editorial decisoins without pressure from ANY outside influence.
The BBC have provided excellent unbiased coverage of events in GAZA.
Everybody watching this can have no doubt that donations to the charities involved in Gaza would be needed, once the fighting stopped.
We dont need an appeal to help us make a decision, its blindingly obvious !
Complain about this comment
A shameful decision by the BBC - arrogant as ever. Do you think your audience is so stupid that it can't differentiate between reporting and an appeal?
The BBC now has blood on its hands - every child in Gaza that dies from lack or medicine or food can now be blamed on the BBC.
I for one, won't be paying my licence fee - I'm sending the money to a charity that WILL deliver aid and I hope Thompson will have a lot of sleepless nights as the BBC becomes increasingly isolated.
Complain about this comment
I’m surprised that the BBC does not have staff bright enough to know that in refusing to support aid to civilians caught in a humanitarian catastrophe they are not being impartial – they are supporting the views of Israel, who often deny there is a humanitarian problem. Israel also consider all of Gaza as a battlefield (justifying the use of white phosphorous), and from independent reports do not consider obligations to civilians under the Geneva Convention to be relevant. Again the only logical conclusion is that the BBC agrees with this viewpoint.
This is a sickening and cowardly decision based on the fear of Israeli propaganda. The BBC is not just a news outlet – it is a public service provider. The decision to describe helping civilians as “political” suggests that the BBC agrees with the Israeli “Defence” Force who, from its outrageous use of extreme force, considers that there is no such thing as a blameless Palestinian.
Complain about this comment
Seems to me that the action to inhibit the DEC appeal does actually benefit one party - Israel - although i always found it jaw dropping that you were more than happy to provide a platform for some gobsmackingly outrageous claims and assertions from the Israeli war PR machine.
Is your unfortunate decision some kind of test to see how dumbed down we have become because there's a great many here far from that?
I've defended the BBC, it's approach, it's funding in many places but this is one issue i'll happily join the mob at the gates against you on.
Complain about this comment
If this is the stuff of its Director General then no wonder the BBC is in meltdown. A five year old is capable of inventing better logic than Mark Thompson!
Would you like to give us the details (including names etc) of everyone you consulted Mr Thompson - what was said to them and how they responded - or is it the simple truth that you haven't the bottle to make common sense decisions when called upon to do so?
I shall be writing to my MP to call for your head and I will be expecting her to deliver it - this is not the first time that the BBC has shown clear unmitigated bias or error under your stewardship.
Complain about this comment
lets not pay or TV license in protest see how long they take to change their minds
Mr Mark Thompson should resign with immediate effect
i had enoug of the BBC and all its cronies
Complain about this comment
Thank heavens for the commercial channels.
Shame on you BBC.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
It's the correct decision.
There are campaigns by left wing and Islamic groups to flood this blog and flood the BBC with complaints.
I hope the BBC doesn't bow to pressure from this noisy, yet small gang who don't represent the vast silent majority who either don't care or don't want the appeal aired.
It's sometimes easy to be swayed by the volume of complaints, but just remember it's deliberate and organised on the part of left wing and Islamic groups.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
disgusting decision by the bbc.
how can an appeal for a humanitarian aid be biased and impartial?
is mark thompson suggesting that the DEC appeal is done to aid the HAMAS?
Complain about this comment
Shame on you Mark Thompson. Shame on your "senior figures in BBC Journalism" for shaping your decision. Were it not pointed out quite clearly by Tony Benn on the BBC News Channel this morning, that not one person he had met within the BBC today agreed with your stance, so at least I still have faith in most of your active journalists. I am a huge BBC supporter and do not raise this criticism at you lightly, but this issue is about saving lives and getting help to people who desperately need it. It is not about politics and impartiality. It's an emergency. Thank you for taking the effort to address concerns but the fact of the matter is your decision has been very, very ill advised, your arguments weak and completely out of touch and insulting to your audience. Shame on you but well done to those working on your services (on TV and online) who have managed to raise awareness of the campaign despite your ill-advised and gutless decision by managing to cram the details in as much as possible in their reporting.
Complain about this comment
Astonishing... no, shocking. Mark Thompson says 'The danger for the BBC is that this [broadcasting the appeal] could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story.' Well, you've certainly offered that interpretation by your decision NOT to. Your decision shows an appalling lack of humanity.
You also imply that you don't trust the ethics of the DEC.
And, as GirlThursday (comment 24) has already noted, the BBC has not 'on any broadcast I have seen said very much about the 18 month blockade of Gaza by the Israeli government way BEFORE any hostilities', a habit I have noticed before in TV reports, such as when weeping settlers were evicted from Gaza in 2005, with no reference to the fact that they should never have been there on land taken illegally. What use is reporting without a context?
Complain about this comment
I've just donated to the IDF.
59. At 7:53pm on 24 Jan 2009, deadkite wrote:
I'm going to donate my BBC licence fee to the DEC appeal to make up for the shortfall that this incomprehensible decision will induce.
The BBC can stick it.
Complain about this comment
It is hard to believe that such a higly regarded voice of worldwide importance is turning its back on a humanitarian crisis of such magnitude by refusing to allow an appeal for aid donations.
It is also difficult to see how the BBC can resurrect its reputation for impartiality after failing to allow the Gaza appeal to be broadcast.
The decision not to allow the appeal to be broadcast should be rescinded forthwith and the person(s) who made that decision suspended pending an investigation regarding that decision.
Complain about this comment
This is my first ever post, but I just couldn't let this one pass. Almost all of what I wanted to say has been put clearly and concisely in the excellent comments above, which anyone must agree are overwhelmingly against the BBC's position on this issue. Just contrast the intelligence of the analysis with the pusilanimity of Mark Thompson's regurgitation of the spurious reasons and arguments we have been reading all day. He adds nothing to the debate, but demonstrates a level of disrespect for the intelligence of the reader.
Manifestly, it is this stance that is reducing public confidence in the BBC, not the laughably spurious issue of 'balance'. The BBC's support for DEC and other appeals in the past is irrelevant - it is when the issues are challenging that moral backbone is needed, not when they are easy ('BBC Children in Need, forsooth!), and to echo a commentator above, I AM an osteopath, so I know!
I'll put it simply. You've adequately covered your corporate butt by taking this position; no one can say you you didn't give the impartiality red-herring a thorough airing. You've done a lot of good for the DEC by setting yourseves up as an object of ridicule. Now do the right thing, listen to the overwhelming tide of opinion here and elsewhere, and broadcast that appeal.
I won't tell you I'll never watch or listen to the BBC again, or say you should resign, because neither of those need to happen. The BBC is in my blood and bone, but I hope I never again feel as ashamed of it as I do today. You just need to admit you've got it wrong this time, take it on the chin, and put it right quickly.
Complain about this comment
One has to ask why there aren't appeals for the likes of Afghanistan, where civilian casualties are much higher.
It points to political motives for this DEC campaign. Political motives that the BBC has picked up on and decided not to air.
57. At 7:49pm on 24 Jan 2009, newanarchy wrote:
Would there be a debate if the appeal was for Zimbabwe? Or Afghanistan?
I don't think so.
Complain about this comment
The BBC's decision not to allow an appeal for aid to the people of Gaza is as scandalous as their decision not to allow the truth about the atrocities committed in Gaza.
The BBC cannot hide behind it's claims of impartiality when it consistently presented a biased view of the conflict itself.
1. We saw all the Israeli victims (all 3 of them) of Hamas rockets, we heard their family and we saw their funeral. Where was the corresponding coverage of Israel's rockets, and bombs? Where were the cries of the thousands of Palestinian families? Did the BBC attend a single funeral of any Palestinian? No. Where is the impartiality of that?
2. We heard Israeli spokespeople claim that Israel was returning fire against Hamas who use human shields. Did the BBC speak with a Hamas spokesperson to rebut these claims? No. Where is the impartiality of that?
When the UN proved that Israel was lying, Israel changed its story. Did the BBC challenge the Israeli spokespeople the next time they bombed and killed children? No. Where is the impartiality of that?
3. We heard the Israeli spokespeople complain that Hamas was lobbing rockets Israel even during the 6-month ceasefire. Did the BBC point out that the publicly available Israeli intelligence document praised Hamas for maintaining it's ceasefire and stopping other groups from shooting rockets? No. Did the BBC point out that the 6-month ceasefire agreement required Israel to lift the siege on Gaza, when in fact Israel did the opposite and tightened the siege? No. Where is the impartiality of that?
4. Did the BBC point out that attacking airplanes and ships in Gaza's airspace and water is an act of war? Did the BBC mention that the blockade on Gaza existed before Hamas was even elected? No, where is the impatriality of that?
5. Did the BBC point out that in the West Bank where there is no Hamas and no rockets, that Palestinians are still being killed by Israel anyway? Did the BBC point out that the Israeli settlements are illegal, the Israeli checkpoints are illegal and the Israeli wall are illegal? No.
6. Did the BBC point out that International law considers Palestine is to be under occupation by Israel? No. Did the BBC point out that International law allows armed resistance against an occupation? No.
Throughout the entire conflict, the BBC News (otherwise known as Mark Regev's propaganda channel) has consistently presented Israel's version of events without any challenges or alternatives.
The BBC, uniquely for this conflict,has interpreted impartiality to equate to showing the two sides as equals.
Western leaders called Israel's actions a "disproportionate response", the BBC failed to even present the disproportions.
The president of the UN assembly called this an act of genocide. The UN is calling for investigations of war crimes committed. The UN is warning of the desperation of 1.5 million Gazans living on the edge. The charities are appeal for aid to help the widows and orphans and ordinary civilians in Gaza. This is the extent of the disaster which the BBC has censored from our screens and is further censoring again by refusing to run the Gaza aid appeal.
This is not impartiality, this is censorship to maintain consistency of biased coverage. The rest of the channels did not "break with the BBC" as your headlines claim, it is the BBC that broke with British values and it's charter to provide a fair and balanced service to the British people when it refused to broadcast the truth during the conflict, and refused to help dying children after the conflict.
Complain about this comment
Its disgraceful to hear the BBC's argument for not broadcasting the DEC appeal on Gaza.
At the very least, the appeal will make people think hard about the terrible cost associated with the failure of the international community in not resolving the middle east conflict. The BBC's decision is partial to people not interested in resolving the crisis.
If an appeal on a natural disaster can be broadcast without pointing fingers at who's to blame for the environmental changes we're seeing, why can't we forget the shenanigans here !
Complain about this comment
This seems to me an error of judgement that makes the BBC appear not impartial but pro-Israeli and anti-humanitarian.
There is no doubt on the evidence of your own reporters and BBC interviews with Israeli officials that civilians have been wounded, have died and are dying and desperately need aid. This is an appeal by charities not partisans.
Where is the humanity in this decision? It makes you wonder if the Ross and Brand fiasco has caused Mark Thompson to lose all sense of proportion?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I simply don't understand the 'fear' that by screening an appeal for humanitarian aid there is a fear it may be seen as the "BBC was taking sides in an ongoing conflict".
There is no 'ongoing conflict'. There is the reality of thousands of people without access to shelter, food or clean water. They just all happen to be in Gaza.
There is no more an 'ongoing conflict' than the refugees of Darfur are 'in conflict' with the militias who terrorise them.
This is not a principled or courageous decision - it is a cowardly one and shows a staggering lack of faith in the BBC's ability to explain whey it's public service remit is not compromised by third party appeals for aid for those suffering.
Not to mention what it says about the BBC's faith in the intelligence of the viewing public.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
How on earth did you come to this conclusion? You are paid a significant salary to do a good job on behalf of the public. even the government has said you should broadcast. Once again the BBC gets it massively wrong. From the comments on the blog please, please, please do the right thing and broadcast this appeal. I abhore war and vilolence of any kind but trying to get aid to people on the ground must be the number one priority. or does the BBC think that impartiality is filming and reporting on innocent children dying and doing nothing about it
Complain about this comment
No appeal for victims of Hamas rockets = no appeal for Gaza.
Well done BBC.
Complain about this comment
The BBC considers itself primarily a news organisation these days. Running a Gaza Appeal would compromise the BBC news programmes.
Complain about this comment
There are only 2 explanations - either the BBC leadership is utterly gutless in the face of pressure from Israel, or they are in fact taking sides with Israel and don't want to show the true effects of an offensive that has mainly targeted civilians.
I really don't understand how an appeal to help the civilian victims of war can be viewed as indicative of bias, unless being humanitarian is now viewed as taking sides!
Some 500,000 people without running water for 3 weeks, sanitation plants and power grids blown up, hospitals attacked repeatedly, 1500 dead, thousands injured (i.e. legs blown off, eyes taken out....) - how can reporting that be politically biased??
Shame on you Mark Thompson, shame on you.
Complain about this comment
A humanitarian crisis by any definition:
More than 1500 Palestinians dead, over 436 children,
109 women, and more than 5,500 wounded
More than 4,000 buildings destroyed in Gaza, more than 20,000 severely damaged
50,000 Gazans homeless and 400,000 without running water
Shame on you BBC!
Complain about this comment
I find this article both offensive to the people suffering in Gaza, the British Public and to upstanding Journalists who strive to utilise their profession for the good of mankind where possible.
This is sadly nothing more than the BBC under influence from external forces (Israeli PR) and as a License Payer I feel aggrieved that my money has gone to this.
I agree that not all appeals should be aired on television; however given the DEC's well known credentials and the fact that much aid in Gaza has been restricted by Israeli Forces, surely the need to publicise the Humanitarian Crisis is now paramount?
This is a shocking drop in standards by the BBC and I also call for the sacking of Mark Thompson. I will write to my MP regarding this and urge all others to do the same.
Complain about this comment
this sounds defensive and is indefensible. Sorry. Impartiality means you don't have to be bothered about who is to blame for what. However, as an internationally respected source of information, you should be willing to give air time to a basic humanitarian plea from well-respected and impartial charities who wish to give us the chance to help other human beings who are in the most terrible and inhuman situation. The politics are irrelevant. The humanity is not. Shame on you. There has to be a political background to your refusal to allow children to receive water. You seem partial to me. Luckily for you, many of your reporters and journalists don't, otherwise this could be the end of your good reputation internationally. It still might be.
Complain about this comment
And I thought the Woss/ Brand thing was bad enough...
(it was pretty awful, wasn't it?!)
This time, at least, the leadership of the BBC isn't asleep on its watch; it's barking...
Complain about this comment
The decision was reprehensible, its defence indefensible.
But it's still not too late to review the decision (as was the case with Ross Brand Sachs, once the BBC became aware that it could not bully the public into silence) and reverse it.
Or is the reputation of the BBC more important? If so, you might like to consider what this has already done to your reputation and what remedial steps might be needed.
The 'very careful reflection and consultation' undertaken by the BBC was either incomplete and/or biased, and the reasons for this gross error of judgement should be re-evaluated very carefully indeed.
Complain about this comment
Like the overwhelming majority of your contributors, I am very angry about the misguided decision to refuse to broadcast the appeal. It makes absolutely no sense and makes , yet again, to show the BBC as craven and poor judges of its audiences. Why, again, are they so out of touch with common sense opinion?Why aren't they telling us how many complaints they're receiving as the did in the Ross/ Brand affair? Your blog would suggest a massive vote in favour of showing the appeal. They are making this matter political and as a result, showing great bias - the opposite of their aims! They are now looking very foolish and isolated but just like the Brand/Ross affair it takes ages for these executives to understand! Tell us how many complaints you've had, BBC!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Too much aid has gone to Gaza/West Bank, and wasted by the way, already
It should be spent on people who do not have an irrational hatred for neighbouring countries
Complain about this comment
It may have been said before but that reason doesn't bear any weight. It is fact, not a matter of debate or of picking sides, that more Palestinians were killed or injured than Israelis. However, would any of the aid agencies be biased in handing aid out? No. But your reasoning seems to suggest they will be.
Sadly I didn't listen to the Today programme this morning but I hear that Tony Benn gave out the appeal anyway. Three cheers to that man.
Complain about this comment
I second most of the comments below, the suffering of human beings (especially he children who make up at least 30% of Gaza's dead and injured list) is not a political issue. It is a simple choice to help other human beings. For Zedeyejoe and his ilk, actually quite a lot of money is being funnelled into Zimbabwe and aid agencies are working as hard as they can (and are being allowed to) to counteract the effect that Mugabe's government has had on his own people. Some of us are directly involved in this and would of course wish to see some more media coverage, but that's the nature of 'news' - the next hot topic crowds out the one before (anyone spending any time thinking about Georgia, or South Ossetia? or worried about the likely famine in tajikistan? thought not.) None of this negates the suffering that is going on in Gaza, as a direct result of an act of aggression from another state. Truly, the world is a terrible place; and perhaps instead of bemoaning the lack of resources, maybe get up and join those of us trying to make a difference?
Complain about this comment
On the day that a disgraced presenter returned to our screens, paid £6,000,000 per annum for his now-tired schtick, the BBC decided they couldn't help others to help dying children.
The BBC has adopted the management practices of the private sector, and BBC executives have adopted the attendant hubris and utter incomprehension of external views of their organisation. Which is not a little ironic given their own much-vaunted commitment to reporting news and opinion.
Mark Thompson's moral vacuity will directly contribute to children's deaths. Nice one.
Complain about this comment
Better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are an idiot, than to open it and confirm the fact!
Complain about this comment
Your decision regarding the DEC appeal on Gaza is either partial or cowardly.
I am sure the BBC will come to regret this very bad decision.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should of course be impartial and shoud not bend to pressure from external groups in it's bid to present what is the TRUTH! However what is the truth in Gaza - that western journalists have been locked out while the Gazan population has been locked in, terrorised, murdered and seriously injured in huge numbers while at the same time it's infra-structure has been reduced to rubble - is it this truth that the BBC wants to avoid highlighting!
An appeal by DEC for Gaza shows the seriousness of this dreadful attrocity commited by Israel, so callously and with such a huge PR campaign that has itself has put pressure on the BBC and other news channels. If the BBC shows this appeal it will highlight how dreadful and criminal Israel's attack has been on Gaza - something the BBC should be proud of highlighting as it's the truth. Gaza is getting less and less coverage, the DEC appeal will bring more - the BBC's excuses do not wash and the executives making this decision should be ashamed. Bravo C4,C5 and ITV - who would believe that commercial channels would be under less political and business pressure than the BBC over his issue !
Complain about this comment
The BBC is anything but impartial. It's shown clear bias on many events, the last few weeks have demonstrated this with the volume of pro-Israel coverage. Where are the pictures of the children literally cooking in their dying skin from the phosphorus weapons? It gets shown on Arab news channels; why not the BBC?
Taste and decency don't come into it. War is war. Tell it like it is, BBC, and maybe people will start trusting Auntie again.
Complain about this comment
So the BBC cites its impartiality as a reason not to broadcast this appeal. Seems to me that this decision illustrates that the BBC has chosen sides - the Israelis (who are still blockading Gaza) will be so pleased.
Complain about this comment
I have read and re-read Mark Thompson and Caroline Thomson's explanation for the BBC 's extraordinary decision to refuse the DEC's request to broadcast the appeal for Gaza on the grounds that it might undermine the corp's impartiality---- and I'm horrified on a number of counts.
1. It indicates very muddled thinking to conflate the need for even-handedness in reporting a war, with the desire to get aid to stricken victims.
2. It shows that you are profoundly out of step with the public mood in the UK on this issue ( witness today's Question Time straw poll on the subject , all but one of whom thought your decision wrong.)
3. Whether Tony Benn is right or not in his charge that the BBC has capitulated to Israeli pressure, the suspicion is now raised.
Bob from Suffolk
Complain about this comment
Correct decision by BBC. The corporation should remain non-political. By giving such media coverage to the few demonstrators outside Broadcasting House, you are adding to their misinformed propoganda. Hamas forced civilans to stay in their homes and fired at Israeli soldiers from them. The number of casualties has been exaggerated and all this could all have been avoided if the UN and others had stopped Hamas from firing 8000 rockets into Israel in the first place.
Complain about this comment
It's funny how sensitive, all of a sudden, you are about the possibility of being said to be biased on this particular issue.
What about the bias you have already shown and continue to show in reporting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: you depict Hamas as militants and terrorists for firing a few rockets into Israel and yet when Israel fires back with illegal (phosphorous) weapons into civilian areas, and killing many many more innocent victims, this is just called defending Israel.
By the way, if you were sincere about being impartial (and indeed, if you abided by your charter obligations) you would have asked quesions like: Why did the Israeli government officials condone the killing of 6 Palestinians in order to provoke Hamas into being seen to breach the original ceasefire.
The hypocrisy is sickening and I feel utter contempt for many of the top brass of the BBC.
Complain about this comment
For all those who support the BBC's decision because Gaza is run by - quote 'terrorists and criminals' - what about the 50,000 people who were just unlucky enough to be born there? is it their fault? Should they be punished for it? To follow that argument to it's logical conclusion, you could say that the people of Zimbabwe deserve no help because their plight is the result of Mugabe's economic policies; or that the victims of the Myanmar cyclone should have built better houses. In fact, your argument could well be summed up as 'I'm alright Jack, why should I care about you?' Nice. Sleep well tonight.
Complain about this comment
Very disappointed with this feeble reasoning. So you wouldn't broadcast an appeal for, say, people dying in Zimbabwe in order to be impartial towards Mr Mugabe?
Complain about this comment
I think the BBC has made a terrible mistake in deciding not to broadcast the two minute appeal put together by the highly respected Disasters Emergency Committee on behalf of the people of Gaza. It will deny that fund a major part of the publicity it needs at just the moment when it's crucial for the people of Gaza to be given the help they desperately need after the fearful battering their innocent women and children have received.
As it happens, I do take sides in this matter. I have fierce opinions, but I fail to see that the wording of my first paragraph is any more biased than the BBC would be by allowing a humanitarian appeal to be made. This is not a time for standing and watching.
Complain about this comment
I just want to say how pleased I am at all the publicity this denial by the BBC is causing. Their decision is incredible and appalling and can do nothing but lower their status as a world-class institution.
Complain about this comment
The BBC is quite right on this occasion.
Hamas have already demonstrated many times their ability to hijack money & supplies.
With the best will in the world, I cannot see the DEC charities being able to control Hamas.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The decision is an affront to dignity and humanity. What exactly is Mark Thompson's point? God forbid it, but supposing Hamas launches a terrible (chemical) weapon into the midst of Israel, and there are many innocent casualties. Would they block a DEC appeal to help Israel? Even if the Israelis ask for it? and the Red Cross (Red Star) says it could be done? Shame on you all. What about all the journalists on air? What are you doing to make Mark Thompson and Caroline Thompson a combined laughing stock?
Complain about this comment
i think the gaza appeal should be aired, i also think that the british public are inteligent enough to make up their own minds abpout the conflict, the most important reason human life could be lost by not showing the appeal
Complain about this comment
The argument above is not even worthy of consideration,and it raises deeply concerning questions over who exactly runs the BBC.
I know one thing...I,and the rest of the british public pay for it,and after this latest display of indecency I will look forward to my hour in the magistrates court for not paying a license fee!!!!!
Mark Thompson has the audacity to state that "they"(who ever they are) cannot be sure that the money will be spent wisely.
Well here's a thought... when we look at the News 24 for Dumbo's and the employment of Jonathan Ross then we can be well assured that the BBC doesn't know how to spend money wisely.
The BBC spend money on fat pay checks and brainless celebrities,at least Hamas will spend money on feeding children!!!
Yesterday I asked the BBC would they give me the number of complaints they had received for their one sided reporting(pro Jewish) of the invasion of Gaza.
I was eventually informed that in order to secure this information I would have to use the Freedom Of Information Act.
This,despite the fact that the number of complaints about Jonathen Ross were made public knowledge by the BBC.
The BBC has become a monster,and has outlived its usefulness.
For many people the refusal to broadcast the Gaza appeal will show the BBC for what they really are....
Jim
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark Thompson is a disgrace and he must resign.
Complain about this comment
This is disgusting and the Director General's position is untenable. An appalling error of judgement which has resulted in the loss of confidence of license fee viewers.
The BBC has been thinking a little too much of itself for a while. It is for the global aid agencies to decide if suffering people need aid - not the BBC. It is for the global aid agencies to decide if aid can be delivered - not the BBC. It is for license fee payers to decide if they will contribute - not the BBC.
As a staunch supporter of the BBC this is the first time I have resented that I have no option but to pay the license fee.
Resignation is the only option.
Complain about this comment
This is an outrageous decision and the explanation given is extremely poor. When did giving charity or requesting people donate for the sake of humanity and relieve the sufferring of innocent women and children become a judgement of impartiality. Has the BBc gone absolutely mad. In making this decision it tries to become not impartial but a judge in condemming the innocent people of gaza 'the women/children/the oppressed and the destitute people'. The conflict was not the peoples choice, they are being slaughtered and diying for no fault of their own. And are we to stand by and let them die. I object to this decision and as a license payer I believe this goes against any principles the BBC has or holds.
Complain about this comment
I cannot believe that the BBC are willing to play games with life of thousands of Palestinians and hide behind a cloak of "impartiality".
I feel compelled to change an age old phrase: While the BBC fiddles, Gaza bleeds.
A complete disgrace.
Complain about this comment
What seems so extraordinary about this decision is that the BBC is now seen to be more pro-Israeli than HMG, if Ben Bradshaw and Douglas Alexander are to be believed .
Given the total lack of pressure placed on Israel by the government, particularly Gordon Brown and David Milliband and also notably by Tony Blair, this is quite an extraordinary achievement.
I don't which organisation to hold in greater contempt, the BBC or HMG.
Complain about this comment
I'm in agreement with the concerns that have been expressed by the BBC Trust about political interference. Stand your ground BBC, and don't, as other broadcasters have done, cave in to it.
Complain about this comment
I think the reasons for blocking help for a grave humanitarian disaster are simply astounding . How can simpy bringing food, medicines and homes to hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians be seen as polotical impartiality? How stupid do the bbc think the british public are?
By refusing to give free airtime to the appeal the BBC have breached an agreement dating back to 1963.
Complain about this comment
The BBC can no longer claim impartiality in this issue. They have decided that the people of Gaza do not have the same rights or merit the same regard as others caught up in disasters.
Whatever your opinions about the Palestinian Israeli conflict, you must realise that 1.5 million dreadfully traumatised people are now struggling to survive and desperately need help from the rest of the world.
That is the only thing that matters.
The BBC has completely lost the plot now and can no longer be considered a serious, fair or impartial broadcaster. I am disgusted.
Complain about this comment
It is not the first time the BBC bowed to Israeli presuure. We all know how the BBC was forced to withdraw it correspondent in Jerusalem Orla Guiren when she started to look for sources of information other than the Israeli Press Office.
There is no politics in broadcasting an appeal, but it will only make the public ask the question: How could we let this happen? and that the Israelies do not like.
The delivery of aid is the responsibility of the Aid Agencies not the BBC and the public knows that.
The fact that the crisis in Gaza is an active news story is a feable execuse. Injured, homeless, cold and hungry innocent people can't wait and we need to act now.
The BBC has a duty to refelct the good name of the British public.
Complain about this comment
What a ridiculous decision. I too would like to not pay my TV licence.
Maybe the obvious way of remaining impartial would be to run an ad for contributions to help those affected on both sides of this conflict. How many Palestinians are in need of humanitarian aid? How many Israelis? I do not want to belittle Israeli deaths, or fears, or trauma, it's just that there's significantly more in need on the Palestinian side.
The BBC's decision on the DEC request makes it MORE difficult for me personally to remain impartial and see both sides of this conflict, because it makes me angry at the crassness of the BBC decision. Please do keep standards, BBC, but make them relate to international human rights and humanitarian law standards. Not your own random decisions about morality or what makes a decision impartial.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson's 'argument for not broadcasting the aid appeal is both shameful and disingenuous. By not broadcasting it he is merely supporting Israel's policy of isolating the people of Gaza and adding to their suffering. Is that what he means by ‘impartial’?
Perhaps he should consider the story of the Good Samaritan and risk crossing to the other side of the street.
Complain about this comment
BBC made the right decision on impartiality. So far, we have been receiving Hamas propaganda, or all of us too naive to see this? In every conflict, especially on as contentious as Israel and Palestine, can a public service afford to take sides? We all know how much the innocent victims need our help, so whether BBC broadcast or not makes little difference. It's critics wants to remove one last impartial view. Surely the majority of intelligent people can draw their own conclusion without self-serving individuals ramming their one-sided opinion down our throats. The BBC is a public service not propaganda mouth piece for the suffering, great as their plight is. I will donate to DEC without the need of BBC broadcasting the appeal. There is enough information out there.
Complain about this comment
Of course, supporting campaigns which are politically convenient is much easier for a mainstream media giants.
The BBC is a tool in the hands of the establishment. Unfortunately for the machine, the media propaganda network have not been able to divert public attention either away from the issue or the fact that Israel is the main representative of Western imperialism in the Middle East. However, heavy efforts have been made to do so. Thus, the words 'conflict' and 'military opperation' have been featuring heavily in relation to the Gaza crisis on all the mainstream chanels, whilst the words 'occupation' and 'blockade' received very little stress indeed. Needless to say, the ruling politicians have failed to use the words 'genicide', 'immoral' or 'slaughter', but instead spent their time discussing the extent to which Israel's action, might have been, 'disproportionate'. However, the inconvenience of the impossiblity for the establishment to openly take Israel's side did not mean that it would then be impossible for the media to pull a veil of impartiality over the eyes of the public.
I.e. as things stand, we are discussing whether or not the BBC was right or not in rejecting a humanitarian campaign. To any reasoning person the spectrum of opinion on the issue should seem either absurd or a job well done by the mass media.
Being impartial seems to have very little to do with it all - as long as there is no open and clear condemnation of what Israel's ruling party is doing (and has been doing for so many years) by every section of the British establishment, the word 'impartial' should be seen simply as a joke. This is not a fault of the BBC or any other media coorporation - there is no the journalists and management are doing their best to bring what they precieve as an accurate account of the events. However all of this is done within a propaganda framework, which is constantly reinforced by diverting from the greater issues.
By the time all the arguments about wheter or not one should openly encourage the Western public to help get food and medical aid for wounded civilians(?) have quietened down, the more fundamental issue of Israel's illegitimate occupation of Gaza and the genocidal blockade will be erased from public discussion, which seems to be the objective of the theatrical performance that the media are now trying to put on.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The BBC was consistently the opposite of impartial over your coverage of Israel's attack on Gaza. You often gave only Israel's version of why they had acted in the way they did and often had only an Israeli government spokesman commenting on events, with no-one to explain the Palestinian position. But suddenly, when a group of national charities wish to show a charity appeal - which any sensible person would immediately recognise is not a news broadcast and does not represent the views of the BBC - suddenly the BBC has to be impartial. What pro-Israeli made this decision, or leant on the BBC?
Complain about this comment
What a feeble explanation by Mark Thompson and a grave error of judgement.
Complain about this comment
The BBC is in a no win situation. Many DEC members are not partial on this. Members fail to criticise suicide bombings. They fail to condemn other genocides like that in Darfur, where it does not suit them. Nothing is done about human rights in Zimbabwe by many of them. Many remain silent on other occupations such as that in North Cyprus. Only one political issue seems to unite them and, as usual, it's their anti-Zionist stance against the Jewish State. I've not always felt this but 100% hats off to the BBC for remaining impartial and fair.
Complain about this comment
The DEC appeal is about people, not politics. So far I have given you as DG the benefit of doubt about your ability to make decisions. Your resignation is now the only solution, but if you want to do one decent thing first then allow the DEC appeal.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson blithely asserts that the BBC has turned down requests for appeals in the past, but he doesn't provide us with any details.
So let's be clear: What DEC appeals has the BBC turned down and what were the reasons in each case?
Complain about this comment
As a British Jew I am disgusted by the decision by the BBC not to broadcast the appeal for Gaza.
Rather than show impartiality the BBC and Mark Thompson have shown that they are pro-Israeli and that clearly Palestinian lives mean nothing.
Shame on you!!!
Complain about this comment
every one should STOP paying for the tv licence fee for BBC as they dont realy care what the people think about what going on in gaza.. it we the people who pay for BBC not BBC ok.. now it time that bbc was made privat like ITV AND C4, FIVE let them get the owen money to make the shows..
people need to act now
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Comments 73 and 78 say it more eloquently than I can. Palestinian case is being treated differently than other cases needing humanitarian aid, and that is appalling.
Complain about this comment
Over 1300 dead. More than 350 children murdered. Thousands wounded and homeless in need of urgent humanitarian aid.
It is preposterous that BBC, funded by the public is not going to broadcast the DEC appeal film whereas, ITV, C4 & 5 will air the film.
Is the BBC that scared of the zionist lobby?
Complain about this comment
There two arguments given for the refusal to broadcast the appeal. The first is impartiality and the second the supposed infeasibility of delivering the aid.
It is plain to most readers that these arguments have no merit. An appeal for aid by neutral organizations can clearly be phrased in a way which is neutral with respect to the dispute between Hamas and Israel. As for the feasibility of getting aid in lets leave that to DEC who are the experts, and of course the UK government agrees, that delivery of aid is at least worth a try.
So one can assume that the BBC are not sufficiently unintelligent to realise that their arguments have no merit. But apparently they have a sufficiently low opinion of the British public to think that we will believe these arguments.
The question therefore arises as to what the real reason is for the refusal? Clearly it is not reasons given as they are irrational. One is therefore drawn to the conclusion that there is some reason that they are unwilling to share and thus left open to speculation.
Without further evidence it will remain speculation, but I expect the truth will out in time. And when it does I expect also there will be a call for the resignation of the Director general.
Complain about this comment
The BBC has made this a political matter instead of a humanitarian one. It seems inexplicable when one reads and hears the comments of the UN, let alone the reports from your reporters. The current position suggests that the BBC is NOT impartial and the position needs urgently to be reversed.
Duncan Wood
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson, your explanation does not stand up to scrutiny.
For example, you say that the BBC, as a news organisation, needs remain impartial by not seeming to 'take sides' in the conflict.
Unfortunately, the BBC has already 'taken sides' as you produced an aired an excellent series on the short history of modern Israel. In that series, and the accompanying books, the BBC described with great honesty the main events in the history of modern Israel.
In case you've forgotten, the attacks and murder of British troops by the Irgun (Zionist terrorist group) were described, the massacres and destruction of Palestinian villages (over five hundred villages were laid to ruin) by the early Israelis, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian villagers was described, etc, etc, etc.
You were not scared of the pro-Zionist lobby then.... why now? Is it because if you upset the Israelis your reporters will be expelled from the great democracy of Israel?
Complain about this comment
Thompson and co. should be sacked.
So they are worried about risking reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story. I think they have nailed their colours to the wall. I just did not realise the BBC was part of the Israeli Government. Licence payers should rebel.
I for one am cancelling my licence fee standing order and paying the money to DEC Gaza instead.
Well done to ITV and Channel 4. We should scrap the licence fee. Thompson and co can then go to their friends in the Israeli Government for funding.
Complain about this comment
This is now a humanitarian issue rather than political - are the BBC now censoring anything that might improve the plight of ordinary palestinian people? The judgement of senior managers at the BBC is failing to provide a balanced argument in the matter; what a load of mealy-mouthed drivel! Get your act together quickly to save lives and not reinforce the view that "western" establishment figures (ie the BBC) are anti Arab/islam but humanitarian.
Complain about this comment
In (31.) bully_baiter wrote:
"Sorry Mr Thompson but you cannot have it both ways. If deciding to accede to the DEC request would be seen as political then deciding not to accede to it is also political."
As a staunch supporter of Israel, I totally agree that the BBC should participate in the Gaza appeal. If Israel took in hundreds of injured Gazans to be treated in Israeli hospitals, I fail to see why the BBC would not consider giving its voice in requesting donations for the victims of this war. It's not as if so far you maintained any objectivity reporting this conflict.
BBC always politicized through its strong anti-Israel bias. Better use "BBC's impartiality" in your articles, for example where you consistently publish Palestinian accusations as "this is what happened ... according to Palestinian sources" and Israel's statements as "Israel 'claims' ... one fact or another". Moreover, you always forget to add to your stories that Hamas is an organization which openly declares, over and over, that it wants Israel completely destroyed, Jews all over the world killed, and to be a principal actor in creating an Islamic Empire from Indonesia to Nigeria" (while continuously broadcasting Palestinian accusations about Israel's purported imperialistic objectives). BBC never gave a clear picture of the frequency of attacks on Jewish civilians, depriving its audience of the knowledge that in average there were several such attacks each day for the last four years (many of them maybe with a lower potential of killing, but not without that potential).
Being accurate and objective with your news articles is much more important if it comes to taking sides in this conflict. In your news articles you editorialize using continuously Palestinians' disgusting invectives at the address of Israelis (for example, the accusations of Holocaust or Genocide against Palestinians are even more disproportionate to the Holocaust against the Jews than the ratio of 13 Israeli deaths to 1300 Palestinian deaths you keep on repeating), achieving thus Goebbel's dream that if you call the Jews "devils" for long enough the crowds will believe it. There are just too many examples of your anti-Israel bias, so don't claim objectivity.
In this case supporting a call for funds to aid Palestinian victims of war is the right thing to do. Your duty as a news organization is to follow up and report how these funds are used afterward, as well.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
We waited for some more comprehensible explanation from Thompson but this is not it. To sum up his waffle it is that the appeal may use BBC news pictures to help with the appeal. The man has clearly lost the plot. Of all the things they could choose to make a stand on, Thompson bravely sacrifices human lives to preserve the BBC's relations with the few cretins who would regard such an appeal as partial. Sack him and his mate Caroline now.
Complain about this comment
If this crass decision is really what being the BBC is about, as we're told by its top people. let's get rid of it. There are other broadcasters.
The public can do without such BBC condescension, and the DEC without the BBC's peculiar brand of self-important "impartiality".
Complain about this comment
Please do not abuse my licence fee by adopting a partial stance against Palestine. The mass killings of children there are bad enough - but for you to collude with what has happened by refusing to facilitate the aid effort is adding great insult to injury. Children are suffering. Do not let blood be on your hands by refusing to help. We can only wonder who is applying pressure on the BBC to treat Gaza in this way. Do not abuse my licence fee by making spurious statements for your refusal to facilitate Gaza aid. Facilitate aid now - and show us the Gaza pictures that have been hidden from the world. Jeff
Complain about this comment
An utterly disgraceful decision in a long run of decisions which reflect no credit on the BBC or its standing in the world. Recognise your mistake and reverse the decision NOW.Your resons are specious and raise fears of undue influence from the Israeli lobby.Disgraceful.
Complain about this comment
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. The BBC has, instead of proving its imparitality, proven its partiality. The BBC has demonstrated that it is more sensitive to the pro-Israel lobby than to the humanitatian needs of the people living in Gaza. As a strong supporter of the license fee and the BBC's independence I am steadily losing confidence in its editorial judgement. This doesn't make up for the Ross/Brand fiasco. It compounds it.
Complain about this comment
I’m delighted to hear today that ITV, Channel 4 and Five are to show the charity appeal for Gaza. My congratulations to their brave decision to defy the indefensible BBC decision.
Until today, some gave the BBC the benefit of the doubt that perhaps rogue elements made this politically biased decision to reject the DEC appeal for Gaza. Now that Mark Thompson officially endorsed this decision, I am astounded and horrified that the BBC director general would allow himself to formally be associated with depriving dozens of thousands of malnourished children and babies in Gaza and dozens of thousands of injured and sick children and babies.
Even before the Israeli onslaught on Gaza, 50,000 children were malnourished, 70% had a vitamin A deficiency and almost half of children under age two were anaemic due to the Israeli imposed blockade. This information was made available by Save the Children on 30 December 2008. This horrific statistic did not make it to the BBC headlines. In fact, I searched for it on the BBC online [which usually gives more information than the radio and TV], but couldn’t find it in any obvious location. The information is, however, readily available in other sources and of course at the Save the Children website at: http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/en/41_7304.htm
As the Chair of Islington Friends of Yibna (IFY), I’ve been aware of the growing malnourishment in Yibna Refugee camp in Rafah. Our last consignment of high protein baby formula arrived in Gaza onboard the Free Gaza vessel just a week before the bombardment. Since Yibna has been carpet bombed, hunger has increased and thousands of children from Yibna alone were made homeless.
I received information that the trickle of food that entered from Egypt was completely stopped since the three-way [Israel/USA/Egypt] “unilateral ceasefire”. In Yibna, they did not receive any food since the “unilateral ceasefire”.
On 6 January 2009 the BBC quoted Save the Children: "Children are at risk from hypothermia, they are malnourished, there is not enough food, the situation is getting desperate", see at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7812979.stm
How malnourished should children in Gaza be before the BBC accepts that this is such a humanitarian catastrophe it cannot decline the DEC appeal for Gaza?
As an Israeli living in London, I am horrified how the BBC becomes even more compliant with the Israeli official line than does the Israeli media.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson, I almost forgot, you didn't mention why you thought the aid might get through.
Can I assume that you believe that the very people who tore apart Gaza and it's civilian population won't allow it through (obviously the IDF and the Israeli government)?
These are civilians, injured, homeless and destitute civilians. Shame on you and your journalistic integrity - what remains of it anyway.
Complain about this comment
I am appalled and disgusted by your decision. This is impartiality gone mad, except it is not really because by refusing to broadcast the appeal on behalf of the DEC you are siding with the aggressors. Hundreds of innocent human beings will suffer because of your decision. This is not about taking sides or showing bias, this is about raising as much awareness as possible of the suffering that is going on in the Gaza Strip. The DEC is trying to raise awareness and much-needed humanitarian aid for the human beings who are suffering so badly as a result of the recent conflict. Your actions will only prolong that suffering and will certainly do nothing to alleviate it. If I promise never to watch the BBC again can I get my license fee back please. I will gladly donate it to the DEC's efforts. Perhaps you would like to match my donation Mark Thompson then resign because you are out of touch with the common people, the licence fee payers. You should be ashamed because I am certainly ashamed of your decision as a human being.
Complain about this comment
Auntie !
You've let your pro-Zionist slip show !
I've lost all confidence in the BBC being a neutral reporter of World events.
You are a disgrace.
Paul Brown
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I think the BBC should show the appeal. I read what other broadcasters had to say on the issue and have to say I agree with what a spokesman for Five said, this situation really does transcend politics. Some things are just more important than rules and regulations, I consider potential loss of human life more important anyway and would have thought that many within the corporation probably agree with me.
Complain about this comment
The Saudis have just donated $1 billion to rebuild Gaza, with £20,000,000 from Britain, 50 million in medical aid from Israel, whilst the US assistance to the Palestinians average $85 million per year, this does not include the donations from Iran, Jordan and Egypt etc.
Israel currently has information on 14 more Hamas concrete planned terror attacks. Although last week marked a drop in the
number of rocket launches, there was a launch of a GRAD missile.
Hamas have done their best to destroy the lives in Gaza by booby-trapping their arms caches with explosives wired to petrol stations, zoos and homes and schools to do the most damage. See youtube.
Maybe if the Gazans would use their money on developing the new gas finds they have they could become autonomous and rich, but sadly the money will mostly go to fresh arms supplies to create more terror, It's addictive, and little aid with get to the Palestinians. Hamas regularly stopped the Israeli convoys and stole supplies.
BBC, you needed to think about impartiality a lot earlier, now you have the new wave of rabid hatred and antisemitism hitting people who have nothing to do with the conflict on your conscience.
Speaking of proportionality, when are we going to hit the "unacceptable" levels of deaths in Darfur ( 300,000), the Democratic Rep of the Congo (3M+), or Somalia (1M+) or China?
It's time this obsession with Israel stopped and a little understanding was shown for their untenable situation. A 2 state solution has been offered 5 times, but Hamas are really only interested in killing off the Jews, it is at the top of their charter.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
BBC SHAME ON YOU!I have never felt the need to complain to the BBC before but in light of the decision taken not to broadcast the appeal I could not stay silent.At no point has anyone asked the BBc to make a political stand on who is right or wrong in this conflict but with their decision the BBC is saying that they support the Israelis.Can the BBC not see the humanitarian need and at what point are they better informed than the aid agencies that are working in the area?I pay my license fee through no choice of mine whether I watch the BBc or not ,I will now be boycotting them so am I entitled to a refund?
Complain about this comment
Your insensitive decision shows how out of touch with the public the BBC has now become. If only you also tried to be impartial with your political coverage you might have a case. It is high time that yourself and the Chair of the BBC Trust properly consider your positions, and do the right thing by resigning, as it is clear the majority of the public no longer have any confidence in you.
Complain about this comment
Well I have argued all day on the POV board that BBC is right in this instance to remain impartial.
Lets just all forget about ethics of media journalism, the importance of remaining impartial to world events which have political context.
After a whole day of this - I have had enough - just show whatever the government wants to show and be damned with it.
Complain about this comment
Recent events show quite clearly that Mark Thompson is way out of his depth in his current job.
How can the suffering of civilians in Gaza be seen as a bi-partisan issue? Is the BBC seriously concerned about the views of those who WANT to see civilians suffer - if indeed anyone of such a viewpoint exists.
Would the BBC have considered helping Jews in Germany during WW2 a politically loaded decision?
Mark Thompson has made an huge error of judgement that nobody else at the BBC supports. He must go.
Complain about this comment
'The BBC doesn't want to be seen to side with the Palistinians'
So does Palistinian=Hamas terrorist? They aren't sideing with the terrorist they would be siding with the people caught in the middle. They seem to been the victims confused with the perpetrators. Side with the victims.
Complain about this comment
I am a life long-supporter of the BBC and of Israel's right to exist.
I think the management have made a bad mistake in not publicising the DEC appeal for Gaza, and they should have the courage to admit it.
Complain about this comment
Anyone with a brain can see the BBC are surreptitiously promoting the DEC appeal by making it headline news and providing links to the DEC site.
The BBC are manipulating the public with this stunt.
Absolutely disgusting and you should be ashamed.
BBC has become Hamas' media arm.
Complain about this comment
It's simple BBC. You state that you are making the broadcast on humanitarian and not political grounds, based on the public concensus that you should make the appeal on humanitarian grounds. It's just a matter of time - but how many more have to suffer while you keep waiting for the inevitable public crescendo of criticism.....sorry to arc on about it....
Complain about this comment
This is a mistake, you should look at it again and broadcast the appeal.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson should accept that he has made a huge mistake or resign. The BBC has taken a partial stand and whats worse it has refused to back down in the face of the nations disgust. Anyone who pays a license fee can tell the difference between an appeal made by the most respected charities in the world and a political statement by the BBC.
Complain about this comment
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons"
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Complain about this comment
I just want to say you are 100% right not to show a appeal for the Gaza problem. Its very sad but you should not get involved. Dont do it , ok...Thanks....Graham
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The BBC is deliberately making this a political issue.
In this case the causes of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza are irrelevant - the reality is that people are homeless, hungry, injured, hopeless - through circumstances over which 99% of them had no control whatsoever - what sort of organisation is so corrupt and lacking in compassion that it makes up spurious excuses as to why it will not do the bare minimum to help?
The BBC is haemorrhaging credibility by the second - how dare they cherry-pick the causes they will espouse? And what political message are they choosing to send by refusing to screen this appeal?
Complain about this comment
It's hard to know if you realise how badly wrong you are but are toughing it out, or if you actually think you've made the right decision here. I'm not sure which I would prefer it to be. But either way, it's clear that you are not up to the job and you should go, now.
This is the worst in a long line of rotten decisions from the BBC and follows on from the appalling editorial line over the Gaza massacres. But somehow this is even worse. To decide that more people will suffer and die because you are scared of criticism from Israel and its friends is truly to hit the depths.
Shame on you, Mark Thompson. Resign.
Complain about this comment
Mr Mark Thompson you simply need to resign. You have earned a bad name for BBC but managed to please zoinists. BBC refusing a human appeal , what a shame.
Complain about this comment
You are not very clear thinkers. Of course the conflict in Gaza is a contentious and political issue. But it is not contentious that hundreds of people have been killed, including many children, more injured and much destruction done. This is not contentious - it is a fact. The DEC appeal is a humanitarian one, to deal with the needs of the people there. It has nothing to do with taking sides on the political issues. If you cannot see that you really cannot think clearly.
Complain about this comment
Absolutely disgusting and a disgrace on part of BBC for not having joined the good cause. What is about being impartial allowing thousands of people especially women and children suffer & die because of humanitrainian crisis created by israelis in Gaza. Is BBC supporting the israeli act in Gaza?
Complain about this comment
An outrageous and cowardly decision; the BBC,as is the case with pretty much all main-stream media,is afraid or unwilling to report the truth of what Israel's brutal regime has done (and not just in Gaza). Israel is clearly a terrorist state, able to flout international law given the blind and unwavering support both military and economic of the United States. The vast majority of those killed (murdered would be more accurate) were civilians; Israel invaded not merely knowing this but intending it.
Mr Thompson, your excuses are feeble and, frankly, you should consider your position; your decision means that less aid than would otherwise be the case will reach the injured and homeless in Gaza.
Complain about this comment
Get off the BBC's back, everybody. The schedule is so full of holocaust archive broadcasts (announced on the BBC main page today) that there simply isn't enough room between them for the Gaza appeal.
I do hope that Mark Thompson reads each of the comments and doesn't just ignore them, but realises how outraged a huge chunk of the public is. This is about humanity, not politics.
And why, in the digital age, can't we, the public who pay for the BBC, vote on-line to choose how we want the BBC to act?
Complain about this comment
Quite simply it's about showing some humanity. Are you saying you should only report the suffering but do nothing to help alleviate it because the perpetrators might be upset or feel slighted in some way?
There is a bigger fault behind the decision not to broadcast the appeal. The suffering was caused by a crime so atrocious. The Israeli Gov't and army are implicated by default.
That is why I believe the choice to broadcast was refused.
There is no amount of intelligent and rational arguments that support DENIAL.
I have full respect and appreciation to the very good work the BBC does. It has integrity and demands respect but on this occasion you made the wrong call.
Most people are intelligent and compassionate enough to make sound judgements.
Complain about this comment
The BBC’s refusal to broadcast the DEC appeal for Gaza refugees would seem to be without substance, after all the Israeli government themselves agreed they have no quarrel with the Gaza population, only Hammas.
Are the BBC doubting the many long established charities involved can deliver aid and remain impartial as is their remit requires? I suggest the BBC’s stance to be totally unacceptable, maybe not by design but implication they are causing DEC unnecessary embarrassment. Mark Tompson needs to think again before the corporations own integrity and impartiality is questioned.
Complain about this comment
Let's ask the public, shall we? How many complaints have the BBC received about their attitude on this? They were quick enough to tell us how many complaints they'd had about Brand/Ross - come on, let's have some numbers!
Complain about this comment
People here are speaking from an emotive point of view and not listening to the Director General. I am pro-Palestinian and abhor what has happened in Gaza BUT the BBC is also and always has been Pro-palestinian - as well as pro-NuLabour and utterly socialist. When the DG says they have to be impartial on this occasion he must be believed.
Complain about this comment
Mark, your argument about whose 'fault' it all is and what should be done now just does no hold water. If every time you could do something to help people in terrible circumstances and yet held back for those sorts of reasons you would be a monster, and I don't think you are. It's an appalling misjudgment, and I wonder who is really responsible. Advertising the appeal would not have compromised your impartial reporting one bit. The only upside is that scores of people who might never have got round to sending money to DEC are now rushing to do so...And thank goodness for Ed Stoughton and TODAY for calling in Benn, and to Benn for announcing the address of DEC. Meanwhile It's not too late for you to change your mind - not in a weasily way but wholeheartedly.
Complain about this comment
What I found stomach churning was listening to the BBC's 'Operational Officer' on Radio 4 this morning. She claimed that the BBC was doing its bit by reporting the crisis, and this was more important than giving people the humanitarian aid they need.
Thats ok then.
Complain about this comment
It is shameful that the BBC will not broadcast this appeal. I hope the decision is reconsidered in light of the change in position of the other broadcasters. There is a crisis in Gaza and the people need aid urgently. The BBC has a responsibility to bring such appeals to public attention.
Complain about this comment
Mr Thompson,
I really do not believe you. Sorry but I do not buy that. The aid is getting through and your suggestion that aid might not get through is incorrect.
You are worried about public`s confidence in BBC. Just imagine how much damage has been done, just look around you and listen and read. I think if you really want to win the public confidence tell us the truth, how this decision was reached. Did the trust members who were in the meeting announced the conflict of interest. There should be an independent inquiry with no Pro Israeli/ Jews or Muslims on the panel. That is how you will win the confidence back.
Complain about this comment
Why did it take the BBC until 6:38 to allow people to comment on their actions?
Complain about this comment
The BBC are truly out of step with a very lage part of the UK population, which is worrying. There is huge support for the people of Gaza, simply because it is clear that their suffering is apalling. In reaching this view most people are mature enough to know that here and now it does not matter who is responsible for the suffering, or what are the circunstances that have bought it about. Many people simply want that suffering to end.
The BBC should trust us all (a) to make our own mind up on the issue of rights and wrongs (b) to decide for ourselves whether we want to risk our money not reaching its intended recipients (c) to understand that at the end of the day the appeal footage was not made by the BBC, and so does not carry the risk of being seen as the BBC perspective.
Please, BBC, you are such an important part of the fabric of the UK and its values . It is so important that you do not stand back in any way from this issue.
Complain about this comment
"Does the BBC think we are stupid? There is NO WAY that the great British public will confuse the offer of aid with the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality ! This STUPID decision has so incensed me that I have now made 3 times the donations to NGOs to assist in Gaza! The BBC have never gotten it SO wrong! Shame on YOU ! Shame Shame Shame!"
Its not the views of the British that they are concerned about but the views from other nations. For example, a nation such as Israel can easily take the view that the BBC is one sided and prevent BBC journalists for entering conflict zones or getting important interviews.
I personally think the BBC have done the right thing and that they should never back down from their stance. The BBC can not be seen to be taken size
Mark Jackson, Oulu, Finland
Complain about this comment
I am appplaed at your inhumane decision not to broadcast the Gaza appeal.
It is has become more apparent to me that your coverage of the Israeli onslaught on the defenceless civilian population of Gaza was very much biased and a platform for the Israeli propaganda machine.
I am a licence fee payer and I’m outraged that my money is contributing to your one sided pro Israeli coverage and your kowtowing to Israeli war crimes.
I, like many others have switched to other sources of media to get a more balanced coverage to the criminal attack on Gaza.
Complain about this comment
I have never commented on any issue connected with the BBC before.
But I'll make an exception in this case.
The appeal should be broadcast and Mark Thompson should resign.
Your viewers are intelligent enough to separate any conflicting issues.
I predict that 'events on the ground' will change and you will conveniently give that reason for a decision change.
Complain about this comment
This decision shows the political bias it is trying to avoid. It sends out a message that the victims in Gaza are second-class victims. It is gutless and spineless. It should be reversed as soon as possible. Mark Thomson must resign. He is incompetent.
Complain about this comment
From No30
"If i could refuse to pay the licence fee without risk of prosecution"
Please stop writing this everyone. It sounds so silly. You don't have to pay the TV licence fee if you don't want to. Just don't have a TV in the house. Maybe you could spend more time with the family, read a book or listen to the radio which is free. Do all this and you can easily save yourself over £100
Complain about this comment
I think the BBC's decision not to advertise is the correct one. Whilst,I can sympathise with the suffering of the people of Gaza, one must also ask why this war was waged. If the people of Gaza did not vote in Hamas the root cause of their suffering we would not be debating the subject. Also, why is it that every time there is a crisis we in the west have to stick our hands into our pockets to help out. What about all the super rich Arab countries who are quite willing to send fighters but not too willing to help out with aid. It is appalling that we are all made to feel guilty over the plight of the Palestinians, when the bulk of their problems are self inflicted. If the people they choose to govern them are momomaniacs then peace will never come about in that region.
ON THIS OCCASION THE BBC IS CORRECT!
Complain about this comment
This article by a senior person in the BBC defies belief does he not even read his own reports..there is no chance of being accused of bias if he airs the appeal and there is atotal chance of bias if he does not..has he not noticed the total devastation of Gaza against the much smaller craters in open ground caused by Palestinian rockets has he not noticed that there are many many thousands of dead and injured in Gaza compared with less than 20 in Israel has he not noticed that there is no food or water or power in Gaza but that Israel has all these things and are denying thorofare of them to Gaza..so never mind the politics who needs the help what sort of BBC do we pay for .
During the recent conflict I wrote many hys in strong terms to try to get the BBC to be more even handed relative to the excess force used by Israel but none were published so how can bias be shown one way and not another...There is a severe Western problem that exists where Israel cannot be critiscised but all others can . In this case Israel must be very close to having committed serious war crimes and if the BBC cannot even put out an appeal to help people who have suffered from suspected war crimes then heaven help us.....I have always been a strong supporter of the BBC but decisions made in the past few years make me wonder about the quality of its management so if a vote were taken today re the licence I would vote to get rid of it and let the BBC fight it out with the others...you see BBC that is the cost of bias
Complain about this comment
I am disappointed in the lack of humanity shown by the BBC and find their excuse about the fact that the Gaza conflict is ongoing quite shocking. Surely we should be prepared to provide humanitarian aid where it is needed regardless of judgemental opinions on the rights and wrongs of a situation. As an ordinary person watching the news supplied by the BBC I wish to respond in a humanitarian way to the suffering which I have seen. The BBC is willing to show the suffering but unwilling to provide the viewer with the address of the charity appeal which is attempting to help.
If the Israeli government was unable to care for the its civilian casualties of war, the principle would be the same.
Please change your mind.
Complain about this comment
I was very disappointed by the BBC' s decision. In fact the BBC did NOT not want it political but in fact they made it more than political decision. However the decision by not broadcating a "Humanitarian" appeal regardless for who it is, gave Gaza and it's people more publicity which means more donations for the vulnerable children of GAZA. Thanks for the BBC!!!
Complain about this comment
I would be concerned that any donation would find its way into the control of Hamas, who are right now controlling aid in a political way.
The BBC is right to be cautious and the Government is wrong to pressure.
A snapshot of the "protesters" outside the BBC reflects the Arab/Palestine lobby.
DO NOT favour these Hamas supporters.
Complain about this comment
BBC can serve better by convincing its audience and patrons how it has managed to maintain neutrality on following accounts: When access to Gaza was denied, what pragmatic, proactive and timely actions were taken that the audience does not end up with an unbalanced if not unsided story.
For sake of clarity, BBC can easily give the number of appearances and duration form 26 December 2008 and 17 January 2009 for those appearing across its various channels in different bulletins/news programmes:
Mark Regev
Avil Leibovich
Issac Herzog
Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and others.
For establishing a comparison, (even if there were restrictions on entering and reporting from Gaza), how many times genuine, credible and qualified professionals were interviewed, quoted and shown i.e. persons including:
UNRWA director John Ging John Holmes, UN Humanitarian Affairs, Donatella Rivera, Amnesty's Jerusalem investigator, Navi Pillay UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Katherine Ritz, ICRC,
Norwegian surgeon Erik Fosse Norwegian anesthesiologist and professor in emergency medicine Mads Gilbert
Such comparison is necessary especially when in bulletin after bulletin Israel's spokespersons were (and still are) given airtime. So how does the tally looks like vis-à-vis human right activists and medical experts in urban casualties?
How much interaction, consultation BBC had to provide the version of civil liberty advocates from groups such as B'TSELEM - The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories were consulted and interview as to how BBC can verify reports about civilian killings in Gaza? How many representatives from Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders and other emergency assistance networks were interviewed?
How many medical personnel with experience of humanitarian relief and medical assistance in urban war settings i.e. Serbia, Bosnia were interviewed to help BBC audience get a comparative perspective of consequences of armed incursions into civilian areas.
BBC claims that because of restrictions imposed they could only cover the incursion on Gaza from what many name as the hill of same since most coverage despatched from the same spot in Israel overlooking Gaza's outskirts.
How many times did BBC air reports from the Palestine-Egyptian border in Rafa from the Egyptian side which would have served to bring a new dimension to provide the story from more than one restrictive angle?
Why a comprehensive picture of the gravity of the situation at hospitals in Gaza
is not being given? What is the daily pressure on the medical personnel?
What kind of shortages are they facing?
What prevents BBC from using commercially available satellite images for a then and now perspective to allow the viewers have an idea how the sea side strip has changed say from 25 December 2009 and today.
Perhaps an exercise similar to the above will prove helpful to clearly determine if BBC is fair, neutral and objective in covering Gaza.
Complain about this comment
I appreciate that the BBC is in a difficult position on this one but am grateful to the DG for taking the time to explain the thinking on this. As far as I am concerned, it's as good as an appeal as it highlights the issues at stake and the appalling conditions that so many have to live in.
Palestine deserves peace and I pray that the blockheads in the leadership of both Hammas and Israel can put peace at the forefront of their thinking and confine their history to the textbooks.
I am happy to already have donated. If the DEC are asking then conditions must warrent it.
Complain about this comment
The arguments put forward by Mark Thompson to justify the BBCs decision not to screen the Gaza appeal are untenable and must be urgently reversed. He suggests firstly that difficulties in getting aid across the border into Gaza constitutes a reason for not broadcasting it. This is an extraordinary and insulting suggestion given that the DEC, who are making the appeal, is comprised of many major charities with extensive experience in similar situations.
His second claim, that broadcasting the appeal would compromise the BBCs impartiality beggars belief. This is a charitable appeal for aid urgently needed in a humanitarian crisis. It is nonsense to suggest that an appeal cannot be shown whilst the BBC is still covering the story. It is not a political appeal, charity law prevents that , it is an appeal for aid needed now and it cannot wait.
The BBC is wrong about this issue and must reverse this decision today. The appeal must be broadcast giving the best possible opportunity to raise money for the people suffering in Gaza. Failure to do so really will compromise the BBCs impartial image, and for that Mark Thompson will carry the can.
Complain about this comment
When civilians are dying and desperately in need of medical supplies, food and shelter, isn’t it our duty to help them and save them from more suffering? The BBC claims impartiality but all it does it gives support to Israel by letting civilians (women and children) die without carrying. I understand the right for impartiality but this is simply wrong. We have to help these poor people and in the best way we can and in the case of the BBC it means broadcasting an appeal. Who cares whether Hamas or Israel started it ultimately, we have to stop their suffering.
Didn’t the BBC broadcast the appeal for Lebanon when Israel destroyed half of the country?
Complain about this comment
Poor Mark Thompson - in a hole of and digging himself deeper with every sentence.
You say you have concerns the aid wouldn't get through. You neglect to add that the only impediment to aid getting through is the illegal blockade of Gaza by Israel. The same blockade whch BBC news has failed to report on.
You say you can't braodcast the appeal as you are already covering it in news bulletins. Did this prevent you broadcasting appeals for Dafur, the tsunami victims etc?
The fact that you regard neutral opinion as impartial shows just how deeply entrenched the the pro-Israel perspective in the BBC really is.
With this episode the BBC has outed itself as wholeheartedly in the Israeli camp and tarnished its image throughout the world. The illusion of impartiality, rather than being upheld, has been blown apart.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As a member of the British public and a licence fee payer, I am utterly disgusted and ashamed of the BBC's cowardly decision to bow to pressure from the Israeli
lobby, in refusing to broadcast a HUMANITARIAN appeal for those suffering in Gaza.
For the BBC to claim that in doing so it would compromise its impartiality is a
joke, for the BBC's reports are always so very clearly partial towards the Israeli position anyway.
The BBC needs to change this position or I suspect many people like myself will protest in more forceful ways than simply emailing you, and will be left with no other choice but to withhold our licence fee in protest.
Shame on you and the higher echelons of the BBC who have made this cowardly decision.
Make no mistake Thompson, children will die because of your disision, and that is a fact regardless of which 'side' of the story you're on. I hope you sleep well at night - shame on you.
Complain about this comment
When civilians are dying and desperately in need of medical supplies, food and shelter, isn’t it our duty to help them and save them from more suffering? The BBC claims impartiality but all it does it gives support to Israel by letting civilians (mostly women and children) die.
I understand the right for impartiality but this is simply wrong. We have to help these poor people and in the best way we can. In the case of the BBC it means broadcasting an appeal to get funds in. Didn’t the BBC broadcast the appeal for Lebanon when Israel destroyed half of the country?
Complain about this comment
The BBC has taken a brave and tough decision here and I applaud them for having the balls to do so.
Complain about this comment
Please stay stead-fast on your decision. Your second point is, as you say, "fundamental" and no matter how many protest in London against your decision you should not change it.
Complain about this comment
"Impartiality" seems to mean concealing the truth about what happened in Gaza. I suggest that if this issue involved any country other than Israel, then there would be no discussion here.
Shame on the BBC for abandoning morality in the face of lobby pressure!
Complain about this comment
You are spineless Mr Thompson. You decided not to sack your golden boy, Mr Ross, and now this. Your viewers, in the main, are intelligent enough to differentiate between an appeal for help for desperate people, and taking sides in a political battle. You, it seems are not. You have also handed ammunition to those who claim that the media in this country is controlled by Israel and its supporters. If you had any decency in you, you would resign. I expect this will not be published.
But I will not be renewing my TV tax until you resign anyway.
Complain about this comment
Did you say ? the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict?? both sides? After all what you showed on your own screen and you still saying victims of both sides?
Being at equidistance is NOT being at equilibrium position.
Victims are still bleeding; murderers are still on the scene with their smoking guns and the BBC WORLD continues to wonder who is who? What is it cynicism or taking people for damned crazy?
Complain about this comment
Since Mark Thompson and the BBC's Chief Operating Officer Caroline Thomson both earn HUGE salaries (and have received very significant bonuses in previous years), are they now going to put right their nauseating, disgusting decision to prostrate themselves at the feet of Israel by donating at least 50% of their gross salary/bonus package for 2008 to the Appeal?
If they do I might now feel slightly less negative towards them.
Complain about this comment
We have had two senior BBC executives explain how deeply they have considered this matter. They have misread the situation badly, and show not the slightest awareness. If they are not ashamed, I am. The BBC Trust has 24 hours to pull this out of the fire, though huge damage has been done. They Trust absolutely must meet.
Complain about this comment
One reason was "the concern that aid might not get to the people" - why not? Because Hamas wouldn't give it (based on what proof? Hamas was elected partly due to their charitable work, which is undisputed) or because Israel wouldn't let it in? In which case surely this needs to be said aloud! first they destroy the place, then they refuse to let others help rebuild it!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Well done to the BBC in not showing the appeal.The BBC must remain impartial and should not cave in to external pressure.
I do not remember appeals being broadcast when Israeli teenagers were being bown to pieces in Pizza restaurants.
Nobody likes to see innocent children killed or injured.However our goverment has pledged £25 million,and the Palestinians must be the biggest recipients of international aid in the world.
I believe people on both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict just want peace.
Hammas has shown on numerous occasions the only thing it wants is the annihilation of the Jewish state.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
WEell done the BBC for standing up to the sheep. An independent BBC is the only BBC. Please don't be bullied by the likes of Galloway and Benn. Even if your reasons may leave a question mark you are right to stand up to your critics.
Complain about this comment
I think it is a good thing that for once the BBC actually has an independent opinion. For one thing, Hamas has already had more money and attention than they should have had. Which other terrosit group that has behaved like them gets that much money and attention thrown at them?
Why did nobody mention that the IDF always warns people when and where they are going to bomb a house/area? But Hamas prevents people from eaving, setting up in school on purpose. If that isn't sick, then I don't know what is. Also, some people choose to stay, can you believe it? But we are never told that by the media, now, we are asked to feel sorry for them and their kids (which of course we do, no one wishes that sort of thing on anyone!!) And it is always the children who suffer and are made to suffer most. By their parents and neighbours and leaders who use them as human shields, in order to be able to turn to the West, and say: look what those horrible jews did to us, now please send us some money. And we in the West, who cannot for one minute comprehend such actions say: of course we will help you, you must be the poor victims in this war, even if you started it, and we will help you.. The fact that the lorries with aid will probably hardly ever reach the people, or will be used for other purposes again will not occur to us, because we wouldn't do it, we can't imagine anyone else doing it. But not every one in the world is British... Not every one queues at the busstop, and smiles and says: after you, dear....
Complain about this comment
I fully support your decision not to broadcast this appeal. I feel there are rights and wrongs on both sides of this conflict but to be party to publicising an appeal for just one of the sides would definitely mean that you were taking sides. I personally would be outraged if you were to broadcast this appeal. I also strongly condemn the parties who are making political capital out of your decision.
Complain about this comment
With very few exceptions, such as the Tsunami, all of the media should refrain from making appeals. The BBC is right. Any appeal related to Gaza has to be politically motivated and not impartial. Incidentally, my television fee is not paid to support any cause, worthwhile or not, but to give me impartial news and quality entertainment.
The people of Gaza are undoubtedly in need a lots of support, but so are countless thousands in Africa and S.E. Asia. Let the aid agencies do their own advertising to raise funding.
Complain about this comment
Your second reason : if Gaza being an ongoing unresolved story is the issue, why were appeals for Darfur broadacast? I didn't realise the situation had been resolved there at that point.
Such nonsense. The BBC has brought shame on itself.
Complain about this comment
I'm fully behind the BBC's position on this.
For many years the corporation has been rightly criticised for it's anti-Israeli stance. Then, a year or so ago, it conducted a thorough review of the matter and came to the conclusion that it had indeed failed in it's goal of being impartial. The current decision regarding DEC is a brave attempt to be impartial in the face of hate-filled anti-Israeli mob pressure.
All these people screaming like spiteful sheep on behalf of Hamas should be ignored because their emotional antipathy against Israel prevents them from using their common sense.
What's the point of rebuilding a state that is run by a terrorist organisation, unless that terrorist regime is removed from power? Hamas is committed to the destruction of Israel. That's why Gaza has been under sanctions from the international community these last few years.
If Hamas stays in power, it will continue to smuggle weapons from Iran and elsewhere, and it will continue firing rockets indiscriminately into the civilian population of Israel. Then Israel, like any other responsible state would do in the same situation, will respond with force to defend itself. Gaza would be wrecked again.Then, the purblind sheep will all bleat against Israel again, Israel will be pressured into withdrawing before she can change the regime in Gaza, Gaza will be rebuilt with terrorists still in power, and on, and on, and on it will go.
No progress can be made as long as the regime in Gaza deny Isreal its right to exist. Honestly, it's true. There's no getting away from this logical conclusion.
However much Israel bends over backwards to international pressure, however many concessions it makes, if a neighbouring state is committed to destroying Israel then there can't be any peace until that rogue regime is removed.
Remember, Israel gave up Gaza as a concession. Israeli troops had to forcibly remove its own citizens from their houses. Back then, critics of the move said it would mean Gaza being used to fire rockets at Israel. And of course, that is what has happened (although of course, you would have to have been a fool not to foresee it).
There cannot be peace as long as there is unending hate towards the Jewish state. Misguided people in Britain and Europe, protesting in favour of evil terrorists against a democratically elected state with proper 'liberal' laws, are not helping the situation.
Therefore the BBC are making a stand, saying 'Enough is enough. Time to wake up and think clearly'.
So thank you BBC. I speak for many who applaud your honourable decision.
Complain about this comment
In this situation it cannot be controversial to give aid to the 10's or hundreds of thousands of innocents. It's also not controversial to refuse that aid because some of it might go to combattants: such a refusal is despicable.
This kind of thinking by the BBC is not worthy of "public service broadcasting". I've lived in Britain for nine years and with all the disagreements I've had with the BBC, I have always argued fiercely for the license fee because of the immense difference it makes in discourse in the media. This is the first time I have thought the BBC ought to be fined because of it's behaviour in violation of the spirit of public service broadcasting.
Complain about this comment
During the Cold War, the two super powers representing two idea systems fought their ideological battles globally and used surrogates to fight on the ground, as they did, for example, in Angola.
Today two different ideational systems are engaged in a global ideological/religious confrontation. This time the epicentre for their war on the ground is Israel/Palestine.
It would be foolish for the BBC to enter this territory. Nay, it would be totally wrong to do so. The BBC should do, as it is and has done, report on events in these territories; it can make documentaries, which will be subject to strict editorial controls; but it should not be drawn into the ideological battle, which the request to broadcast the appeal would force it to do.
Mark Thompson should stand his ground and preserve the BBC's neutrality.
Gregory
Complain about this comment
Why doesn't the BBC provide any historical background to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict?
Most British people think the Palestinians are refugees from neighbouring Arab nations and Israel provides refugee camps for them.
British people also think the Israelis are tolerant for not sending them back to their home countries.
Tell the British people the truth: they came from a country called Palestine and were forced from their homes at gunpoint by Jews, who then stole that land.
Complain about this comment
Well done BBC! Brilliant spin.......refuse the DEC ad and manage to double the impact of the appeal!
Complain about this comment
The BBC were right to say no. If Hamas recognised Israel's right to exist and stopped sending 10 or more missles and mortars per day into Israel this war would not have taken place. Perhaps the exceedingly rich Arab States could contribute to the rebuilding of the country instead of rearming a very destructive force, ie Hamas
Complain about this comment
This decision by Mark Thompson is a disgrace. Since when has helping to shelter the homeless or provide medical care for the injured threatened anyone's impartiality? Far from protecting the BBC's impartiality, this decision makes it clear that Mark Thompson takes an entirely partial approach, refusing to air an appeal for help from the destitute, least doing so might offend those who made them destitute in the first place. That sounds entirely partial to me. For the sake of the BBC and its status, Mark Thompson must resign or be dismissed.
Complain about this comment
I get the feeling that the BBC realises the anti-Israel coverage it has pumped out over the last 3 weeks and is now desperate for some damage control with this refusal to air the DEC appeal.
Sorry BBC, one crumb from a whole loaf is not enough to repair the damage you have done with the likes of Jeremy Bowen and his fawning reportage of Hamas and Palestinians in general.
Your reporting has been shocking, and the BBC news website has been ever worse.
Interesting that you use a plethora of Arab journalists, yet I don't see any Israeli BBC journalists - odd that one, eh?
Correct decision, but too little too late.
Complain about this comment
Those are Hamas figures. Not independently verified.
A humanitarian crisis by any definition:
More than 1500 Palestinians dead, over 436 children,
109 women, and more than 5,500 wounded
More than 4,000 buildings destroyed in Gaza, more than 20,000 severely damaged
50,000 Gazans homeless and 400,000 without running water
Shame on you BBC!
Complain about this comment
I am extremely disappointed by the BBCs decision not to air the appeal for Gaza. Why? Impartiality? This is a humanitarian crisis. This is not about Gaza. This is about people who are suffering as a result of a war, over the last three weeks, which has seen over 1300 hundred people lose their lives together with thousands reported injured and all the destruction and devastation (including homes, schools and hospitals) that came along with this. There is now a humanitarian crisis. The UN and aid agencies are appealing for help and donations to be able to get food, medical supplies etc. to reduce further deaths and
to help recovery from this crisis. I think if the BBC does not reverse this decision not to air the appeal, it will be labelled as an organisation who betrayed a suffering people in the midst of a humanitarian crisis.
Complain about this comment
£140 a year to pay for the privilege of: today- the National Lottery, Casualty, and a whole host of other tat. And next week, your BBC-made-multimillionaire is back after a 3 month break. Meanwhile, you haven't even got the guts to show us the telephone number to donate to the DEC Gaza appeal. And people think the Labour government has lost its way- that's nothing in comparison to you guys.
Complain about this comment
I'm not really surprised by how out of touch with public feeling the BBC actually is. The US appointment of George Michell to the Palestine issue is a huge step forward and an obvious signpost that US pro Israeli foreign policy has run its course and like the Ulster Unionists (a faction the Israelis have always supported along with their historical support of the South African Apartheid regime), Israels time for accountability for its crimes has come. No doubt the UK and EU will now fall into line. Is the Zionist lobby really that strong that it can turn the morals of one of worlds leading broadcasters? Does the UK national broadcaster really take the line of a foreign (nuclear) power instead of the wishes of its citizens? The tide has turned with the Gaza war crimes of recent weeks, the BBC should wake up to a humanitarian reality. Well done to all those who protested today and very well done to Tony Benn, one of the few left with any balls.
Complain about this comment
The BBC's decision in not airing the aid appeal for Gaza is absolutely disgraceful. Why is a former-respected public sector choosing to be 'impartial' when by saying so it is obviously siding with Zionists of Israel.
Mark Thompson - GROW A HEART! Re-position your stance in regards to the Gaza Appeal aid OTHERWISE I shall refrain from paying my license fee to you along with masses of other people who shall agree with me!
Complain about this comment
I log onto the BBC website every day in a both a personal and a work capacity. I am a huge fan of the BBC and have worked for the corporation in a previous career. That said, I have read stories in the past which I have found biased and of questionable quality, but tonight for the first time I have bothered to register so I can make a comment about this issue. Sometimes you just have to do the right thing.
I have no political links or sympathies with the Palestinian cause or Hamas. But the Israeli military strategy of killing and injuring civilians, including children, shocked and appalled me. For the BBC to then deny some of the most respected charities in the country to appeal for aid to help these victims, leaves me almost speechless.
Mark Thompson's explanation is weak and embarrassing. And yet again the BBC is in the news for all the wrong reasons - incompetence, arrogance and stupidity. Another bleak day for public service broadcasting.
Complain about this comment
i very much agree with you. But it looks like your editors on News24 don't support your decision. It is the only explenation I can give to the obsessive coverage the subject got in the past 12 hours.
The subject gove so much coverage that one might be mistaken and think that there are no REAL news all day.
To hear all day long every newscast starting with the BBC's decision, followed by someone or other who can tell us all over again his/her views against the BBC's decision is really a bit much.
And of course with so many speakers each is trying to out do the previous and tell the viewers more exaggerated stories about the children who are duying due to the fact that the BBC does not broadcast the call for donations. Only this week Gordon Brown announced some 30 millions to Gaza. Have the NGOs managed already to spend all that money??? It is all so over the top...
Complain about this comment
"When we have turned down DEC appeals in the past on impartiality grounds"
So, whicg appeals have you turned down in the past? A little more detail would maybe make your story more credible.
Complain about this comment
I have never been this disappointed in BBC.
This letter has effectively exposed BBC's notion that it is impartial.
What does the editor mean when he says :
"This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious."
Is he trying to compare the 1257 Palestinian deaths to the 13 Israeli deaths? Surely more people die from car accidents in the UK yet there is no out cry to have news items against the car owners in the balance of proportionality.
And what does he mean when he claims the suffering of combatants on both sides? There has been no report on what Hamas fighters face. Not one !
I had been one of the biggest followers of BBC but after today I don't think I can ever see it in the same light.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should be ashamed again its executive has shown that it cannot be trusted to make decisions fairly and as such the whole lot should resign.
Let's face it you haven't really recovered from your sense of betrayal towards the British public since the Blue Peter scandal; the connection is that we have no underlying trust in your decision making process.
To say that you are impartial is arrogant in the extreme, you do not have the morale ground to even think of claiming this; we will tell you when you are impartial.
Complain about this comment
The decision of the BBC not to air the appeal for donations to the Gaza disgusting. The humanitarian disaster of israel's attack on Gaza transcends any aqrguments the BBC may have about impartiality. Change this decision immeidiately, the genaerl apublic is not eith you.
Complain about this comment
My reaction can be summed up on three words which so many others have used:
SHAME ON YOU
I suggest you watch your own News broadcast tonight, with the little girl crying for her dead brother. Only a heart of stone could fail to be moved.
It beggars belief that you can be so mealy-mouthed to spout out words about 'being impartial' whle children suffer. The welfare of children must come above your decsire for 'impartiality' and 'political correctness.'
I say it again:
SHAME ON YOU
Complain about this comment
Well done BBC for lending your support to the Gaza fundraising appeal by allowing Tony Benn to make an impassioned plea on behalf of this cause and allowing him plenty of time to give details of how and where to make contributions and well done for repeating this appeal on subsequent news items.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I aggree totally with the BBC. They have been asked nicely and they have said no nicely so why are the GOVERNEMENT still pushing for them to show it? this is a democracy correct me if im wrong and BBC has said no. So that should be the end of it. This is like when the Irish voted no on the Lisbon Treaty baring in mind Ireland is a democracy but the EU where in crisis mode over the no vote! Now the EU are asking them to vote again till they get a yes vote and im sorry but thats not verry democratic now is it?. The BBC are a independent orginasation and they should stay like that, so i aggree dont broadcast it and whatever you do dont buckle under the pressure of 10,000 complaints becouse there is 62million of us who wont complain. Serve the majority and not the few.
Complain about this comment
The decision of the BBC not to air the appeal for donations to the Gaza disgusting. The humanitarian disaster of israel's attack on Gaza transcends any aqrguments the BBC may have about impartiality. Change this decision immeidiately, the general public is not With you.
Complain about this comment
I'm absolutely disgusted with this decision. Did the bosses not look at their own watered down images of the horror of it all? With the BBC's attitude, the road to recovery for the Palestinian people will indeed be long. I can't do much about world affairs but I can offer my response to the BBC policy on Gaza. As soon as contractual obligations are over with my TV supplier, I’m selling my Television, terminating the Direct Debit for fees and blocking all BBC websites. This will also increase my disposable income, beat the credit crunch and I’ll be able to send some support to Gaza. If more follow then we will all save the economy with our increased spending power, help the Palestinian recovery, and end public funding for an entity which should have gone commercial years ago.
Complain about this comment
The BBC has decided that maintaining its editorial integrity is a more important moral stand to defend then helping relieve the plight of traumatised, suffering and desperate human beings. In as much as it is a broadcasting organisation that has some value. In as much as it is an organisation comprised of human beings it is a grotesque and disgusting choice of morals to adopt. As someone else has commented, I will be more than happy to pay a reduced licence fee to watch anything BUT the BBC, what is their moral stand on that?
Complain about this comment
Mark, I am afraid to say that I am not convinced by your argument on this one. There are people - women, children and innocent bystanders - who are suffering in Gaza. Their plight is horrific and the BBC has the power to enable those seeking to meet their needs to raise the funds which they require for their work.
Your stance now looks like bureaucrats refusing to admit that they might have got it wrong, becoming indifferent to the impact of your intransigence and unwilling to lose face. Far from being impartial, I am now meeting people who assume that you are supporting the Zionists and I have sympathy with their assesment of your stance.
Please put the plight of these people in the Gaza before your pride and accept that you have made the wrong decision.
Complain about this comment
Did you see any of the Israeli victims with amputations, burns or shrapnel wounds?
In fact, did we even see one Israeli hospital?
The BBC looped pictures of injured Arab kids for 3 weeks. They don't gratuitously show dead bodies no matter how much you Arabs love to show them.
We have a bit more respect in this country.
135. At 8:35pm on 24 Jan 2009, ebyard wrote:
The BBC is anything but impartial. It's shown clear bias on many events, the last few weeks have demonstrated this with the volume of pro-Israel coverage. Where are the pictures of the children literally cooking in their dying skin from the phosphorus weapons?
Complain about this comment
I totally agree with the BBC's decision, apart from the fact that our government (and so by extension we ourselves) is already providing monatary aid (dispite the fact we are in a recession and desperatly in need of that money for our own hospitals, education, citizens ect).
I am sick and tired of other countries governments putting the precurment of weapons (missiles, ammunition etc) above the need to feed, educate and provide medical supplies to their own population expecting the rest of the world to pick up these pieces.
This humanitarian crisis is souly down to the Palistinian and Israli governments and it sould be down to them to repair it after all they choose to buy, arm and shoot the weapons in the first place.
Complain about this comment
I just can't understand why the BBC (the most respected organisation I can think of) is being by people with such terrible judgement.
Nor can I understand why Mr Thompson can't understand that he is blatently politicising human misery, suffering, pain and death. Take about irony.
The truth is, BBC, you will have blood on your hands if you don't reverse your inane and heartless decision... and you know it.
Complain about this comment
I do still value the BBC, compared to some broadcastors they are pretty impartial.
Some of their reporting and coverage is commendable.
However i am dissappointed by BBC's refusal to merely give this HUMANITARIAN APPEAL a platform. Allow the public to know of its existance and allow them to decide if they want to help or not.
This is not political support , its humanitarian support.
Complain about this comment
If we discount any conspiracy theories, it seems probable that the BBC editors have been guilty of cowardice in their decision. That's bad enough, but when the need for relief is so clamourous, to feign deafness is unforgivably cold-hearted.
Complain about this comment
During the Cold War, the two super powers, representing two different and opposed ideational systems fought their ideological wars globally; they used surrogates to fight their battles on the ground, as they did, for example, in Angola.
Today, two major ideologies/religions are competing globally; the epicentre for their conflict on the ground is Israel/Palestine.
It would be foolish for the BBC to become engaged in this battle/conflict/war. Nay, it would be totally wrong for it to do so. The BBC should continue to report on events in the territories as it is doing and has so far done in the past.
The BBC must stand its ground and remain neutral: to broadcast an appeal as is being demanded would be to abandon neutrality and to be drawn into a propaganda war, which would be to the long-term discredit of a broadcasting organisation of which I am proud - despite my reservations about some of its policies and reporting.
Ulybka
Complain about this comment
Mark,
Your decision is disgraceful and inhuman. You are just doing the bidding of the Israeli Government and further contributing to the ethnic cleansing/genocide of the Palestinan people of the Occupied Territories by preventing aid reaching desperate people.
As Tony Benn say "People will die" as a result of your despicable decision and you will have to live with that. I hope your conscience leads you to allow this appeal and that you that you then have the decency to resign.
Shame on you. You are without pity.
Complain about this comment
First of all, I must say that, as a German, I am appalled by the number of only thinly-veiled anti-semitic stereotypes that have been allowed past moderation in many of the above posts.
Secondly - independent of the question whether one agrees with the logic behind the BBC's decision-making in this case - I support the BBC's right to take the independent decision it has taken. And I am truly scared by the way in which government politicians are eroding the traditions of a free and civilised democracy by running a populist propaganda campaign against an important corner-stone of the free media.
I'm just not sure whether this is pure insensitivity on NewLabour's part, or pure tactics: burden the BBC with a barrage of pointless anti-semitic hate-mail, so the government can "bury some bad news" in the mean-time.
Complain about this comment
Shame on you.
This is cowardice of the worst kind. Israel continually says that it is not the enemy of the people of Gaza and has not targetted civilians.
Whats the problem in screening an appeal for aid, and letting people make up their own minds.
You need to reconsider this pretty quickly - the clock is ticking.
Complain about this comment
The decision to launch the appeal is the responsibility of the DEC. The news item is the DEC appeal, addressed to the UK public. The BBC should broadcast this news item. Not to do so is censorship by the BBC.
The BBC should not be second guessing the DEC. This is arrogant of the BBC.
Surely the BBC could still broadcast the humanitarian appeal without appearing one-sided on the politics?
I am disappointed in the BBC's stance.
Complain about this comment
The BBC sacrificed its impartiality the day it allowed the Israeli army to dictate from where it might report the crisis in the first place. BBC reporters wearing flak jacket supplied by the Israeli army, doing pieces to camera with Israeli tanks in the background, while accepting that they were not allowed into Gaza to report from the other side, were effectively giving us the Israeli-eyed view of the bombing.
If the BBC truly wished to be impartial in its reporting of the crisis, they should have refused to report a single statement by the Israelis until and unless they were allowed to cover the war even handedly from both sides of the wall.
So to cite impartiality as the reason not to broadcast this appeal is just more sickening evidence of how under the Israeli thumb our national broadcaster is. How has this happened?
Complain about this comment
I have seldom been so angry about decisions taken by the BBC (sacking Ed Sturton instead of Jonathan Rossand pales into insignificance). It seems the BBC has caved in to the pro-Israeli lobby.
What would the BBC have decided if Iran had nuked Tel Aviv?
The only good to come out of this row is heightened publicity for the appeals to help the now defenceless people of Gaza.
Complain about this comment
The BBC's stance is disgraceful. It is totally out of line with with commonsense and commmon humanity. Mark Thomson's strange and uncaring arguments do not represent the views of the great majority of the British people. The BBC should broadcast the DEC appeal, and Thomson should resign.
Complain about this comment
RESIGN!!!
No one believes the empty pack of lies you've told to justify your idiocy.
GO NOW, AND GIVE US OUR BBC BACK. You have been inadequate for this job from the outset. Now you've proved it.
Complain about this comment
I have written to my MP and have asked that the conduct of the BBC be questioned in Parliament. It is time that the BBC understood the British people's compassion towards others when in need and not some dreamt up answer that they are impartial. In my opinion they must have another much more provocative excuse because the one they have doesn't stand up to scrutiny, after all it is the charities themselves that came to gether to organise the appeal after they made an IMPARTIAL DECISION!
Somebody needs to resign or be sacked over this
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
If you follow the same logic, then Children in Need should not be broadcast, because it may influence future reports on child poverty.
Comic Relief should not be broadcast because it may influence future reports of poverty.
Complain about this comment
Actually this time it was the BBC that has shown its bias but this just highlights the broader problem of the West turning its back on the suffering of the Palestinian people for too long.
In general, I hold the BBC in great esteem so I hope they will quickly change their mind on this.
Complain about this comment
Shame on the BBC. This stance is not only unhelpful but is detrimental, giving the impression that the BBC councels against giving aid to the people of Gaza.
Complain about this comment
By the way, the BBC is making this worse by affording headline status to the ragtag mob outside of their building.
If I wasn't so cynical, I would think you're trying to promote the DEC campaign even more than you would have done through broadcasting it.
Complain about this comment
It was purely the fear of the response in the US and the various Jewish lobbies that prevented you from airing the appeal.
Who cares about what they'll think in the US? they don't pay your license fee - we do.
Complain about this comment
It is a nonsense to link humanitarian aid to the politics of the region. Mark Thompson has allowed politics to influence his thinking. It is akin to allowing the injured and dying after a war to remain untreated under the guise of impartiality. It is really bordering on a crime against humanity. The BBC should hang its head in shame. I for one will switch to the other channels during this period.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson's fundamental reason for withholding the Gaza appeal from his station is that he believes it will reduce public confidence in the BBC's impartiality. As a member of the public (making my first post here) I can only say that the decision reduces just one thing: my confidence in the BBC's humanity. I urge the BBC to reconsider the real humanitarian crisis in Gaza and meet its moral obligation to agree to broadcast an aid appeal as the other stations in Britain will be doing. I'm sure that, as has been shown in the past, the popular will of the compassionate majority will turn this decision around. Please keep writing in.
Complain about this comment
Who are these Thom(p)son twins who have appointed themselves arbiters of whether more children will die than might otherwise have done? I have all my adult life defended the BBC against Murdoch and Co and some Tories who would abolish the licence fee, dumb it down and hand it over to commercial interests - now I just don't care, let them have it. The worst betrayal imaginable. This guy Thompson must go, his position is simply untenable.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Words fail me. The BBC had no such objection to the DEC's 1999 appeal in respect of Kosovo, but here, where the perpetrator's a client state of the West, the BBC pleads "impartiality".
Remind me never to renew my TV licence, Mark.
Complain about this comment
The BBC got it wrong. The people of Gaza need help, the DEC deserve our support.
The vast majority of Palestinians are not interested in conflict, they are honest people seeking only peace, jobs, passports.
The Israeli's imprison them in the ghetto called Gaza; deny them trade, travel, medicine, food, fuel, votes, water.
Is it any wonder that Mamas flourishes in such an environment.
Winston Churchill said "We will fight them on the beaches, in the countryside, in the towns and cities. We will never surrunder" The people of Palestine are doing as Winston advised. Israel is the evil occupier, the murdering oppressor, the wicked enemy. The Palestinians have suffered for 60 years, and they will continue to suffer whilst Zionists rule the BBC.
Complain about this comment
Your argument makes no sense. If you'd refused to promote an appeal on behalf of Hamas many would have understood but refusing to promote a legitimate appeal on behalf of the DEC (an agency of the British Government) to assist civilians, in what is quite clearly a humantirian crisis, places you in the position of judge and jury. Call that impartiality? I dont think so!
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson wanted to explain his thinking. Well, all I read is that the public are stupid and the BBC will continue to treat them as such.
You lossed your impartiality long long ago. Do you really think that the majority of the public believe the BBC to be impartial. If you do then all I can recommend is that you keep on taking the tablets.
Complain about this comment
It is clear from the volume of comments recieved that to refuse to screen the DEC appeal is seen as equally partial as to to screen it. Given this obvious truth then the balance of benefits of raising funds to provide aid to those suffering in Gaza should be enough to persuade the BBC to step back from the untenable position that they have made the mistake of adopting.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark
Military forces at war (who abide by the Geneva Convention) treat wounded enemy combatants exactly as they treat their own wounded solders.
This is a conceptual line, one side of it partial the other impartial.
The decision not to run the DEC appeal is partial. You need to draw your own conceptual line.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This is a heartless, cynical and at the same time deeply disturbing decision. Irrespective of what your political views are, the overriding imperative in a situation such as this is to ensure that aid reaches those who need it and reaches them fast.
Unfortunately the BBC appear to have lost sight of this and in the process have arguably denied a very basic human right to the population of Gaza.
I have read the comments written by Mark Thompson and listened to the interviews given by Caroline Thomson to Radio 4 and BBC News several times, in part to make sure that I was fully understanding their reasons for not allowing the Aid appeal to be broadcast. On each occasion I come to the same conclusion, namely that their decision is just plain wrong.
The arguments that Mark Thompson puts forward come across as being incredibly patronising and cynical, his two main points being concerns over the "practicality of the aid" and over the fact that "Gaza remains a major ongoing news story". First of all, is he really trying to tell us that he knows better than organisations such as the Red Cross and Save The Children. Second, has he now instituted a new editorial policy such that people caught up in war zones are not entitled to support until such time as they have disappeared from our news screens? And as for the feeble excuses put forward by Caroline Thomson, the least said the better.
Should we, however, be totally surprised by this decision by the BBC senior management? After all, this is from an organisation whose editors initially deemed it perfectly acceptable to broadcast messages containing rude and highly offensive language on the answer phone of Andrew Sachs but who have now deemed it unacceptable to broadcast a message appealing for aid to help the population of Gaza, who have been ravaged by the effects of war.
Such a response unfortunately appears to have become all too typical under Mark Thompson's tenure as head of the BBC. Indeed, in the inept way in which they handle situations such as this, he and Caroline Thomson are increasingly coming to resemble Thomson & Thompson, the legendary but totally incompetent detectives in The Adventures of Tintin.
Of course the ultimate irony of all of this is that, by their decision NOT to broadcast the aid appeal, the BBC has simply succeeded in giving it significantly greater publicity than would have been the case had it simply been broadcast without any fuss in the first place!
Complain about this comment
I have never commented on anything I have watched on the News except to the person I am sitting next to. I do not believe in taking sides in a dispute of any kind. I believe we all fundamently believe in one God, although under many names. Therefore I am astounded by the stand of the BBC. I think they are not being impartial at all, but taking the side of Isreal by refusing to the appeal. This appeal is to help desperate humans, desperately suffering children. NOT A CERTAIN NATION BUT HUMANS. They say what goes round comes round and future History will prove this to be true.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should be wary of 'internet campaigns' and a few noisy old socialists and Islamists standing outside their building.
The vast majority of the British public are sitting at home completely oblivious to the fuss, or who don't want you to broadcast the appeal but don't feel as strongly as the pro-palestinians or aren't as well organised as them.
Just be aware that in the grand scheme of things, you're dealing with a small amount of people and you should stick to your decision.
Complain about this comment
Mr Thompson,
You talk about "running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story".
Frankly, it' a little late for that now. The BBC's reporting of this tragic conflict has been very poor and almost no opportunity missed to further the Hamas point of view. Jeremy Bowen's reporting has been particularly disappointing.
Many people (not in the BBC obviously) would argue that this tragedy was entirely precipitated by prolonged terrorist attacks by Hamas against the civilian population in Southern Israel.
That said, there is unquestionably now a real humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
The BBC's attempt to prove its impartiality by blocking the DEC appeal is misguided. I believe the BBC does indeed have serious questions to answer, but this is a separate issue.
The BBC will not be able to dismiss the concerns of bias by preventing this DEC appeal. If the BBC genuinely wishes to prove its impartiality, then why not publish the Balen Report? If there are lessons to be learnt, the licence fee payers have a right to know.
In the meantime, the DEC appeal should be allowed to go ahead.
Complain about this comment
Mark, you are spot on!
Those who oppose the stance of the BBC are being purely sentimental and do not give due consideration to the reality of this conflict you quite rightly outline!
To get caught up in emotion, and pictures have already done this, and ignore the real tensions that are behind the causes of this ongoing conflict, would without doubt bring political partiality as is already being displayed against the BBC.
It is hardly justifiable anyway, it is not like aid is not being sent,given, collected or distributed, and the civilians are being left to their own devices!
All the schools have already re-opened, that is not a "humanitarian crisis", schooling is a not an essential need, yet this is where things are at in Gaza.
You have done the right thing! Those who are calling for you to resign and shame on the BBC, justify you comments in reality, not your emotional sentiments.
Complain about this comment
Mr Thompson
Please cut the ... rubbish.
1. You said "We usually - though not always - accede to the DEC's request and as a result have broadcast many DEC appeals over the years."
According to this morning's Today programme, I am led to believe you have NOT acceded TWICE to requests to broadcast DEC appeals. Now, for Gaza, after a catastrophic invasion by Israel. And in 1982 ....... after a catastrophic invasion into Lebanon by Israel; remember Sabra and Shatila?
It is of course COMPLETE coincidence that the BBC has TWICE refused to broadcast DEC appeals where it concerns the humanitarian aftermath of Israeli invasions.
2. You said that the BBC has "a concern about whether aid raised by the appeal could actually be delivered on the ground."
That's a "bit" more nuanced than the statement by a member of BBC staff on this morning's Today programme.
She was far more blunt - the DEC with its 45 years experience, and their member agencies with God knows how many years of professionalism and experience, could not guarantee that the donations would reach the people for whom it's intended.
Your member of staff made, imho, an extraordinarily provocative, unevidenced, and highly political statement - reflecting the politics of somebody in a small town street avoiding a tin-rattler. Fair play to the person in the street - but a desperately sad comment on the BBC and their senior managers.
I think that's your call - it's up to you to show that the Red Cross, Oxfam, Christian Aid, ActionAid, Merlin, Tearfund and all the rest make a habit of misusing donations made in good faith?
3. You said "But there is a second more fundamental reason why we decided that we should not broadcast the appeal at present. This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious."
Excuse me for being so short-sighted and terminally thick, but EXACTLY the same pusillanimous, self-serving, weasel-words could have been used by the BBC to prevent the broadcast of any DEC appeal in the last 45 years since it was established?
Or ... perhaps you can show us objectively just why conflicts involving the IDF are so different from any other?
4. Which brings up your vicious and malicious "The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story. "
Ouch. I ferociously contest your self-satisfied and smug assumption that this may be a trait unique to the BBC - and I challenge you to demonstrate that the the DEC and its member agencies are ignorant of such dangers.
Sorry, Mark - just how stupid do you thing the DEC and its member agencies really are? Or perhaps the BBC knows exactly how to run energency relief programmes.
5. You said the BBC has "a very strong track-record in supporting DEC appeals and more broadly, through BBC Children In Need, Comic Relief and our many other appeals, in using the BBC's airwaves to achieve positive humanitarian and charitable goals."
Fair enough. Transparency and honesty? Or FOI calls and research?
Sorry, Mark. The BBC does have a strong record - EXCEPT when it involves the humanitarian effects of acts of aggression and invasion by the government of Israel.
Your call.
6. You said "Finally, it is important to remember that our decision does not prevent the DEC continuing with their appeal for donations and people are able to contribute should they choose to."
True - but as an example of hypocritical weasel words, "apparently" ignorant of their effect, this takes some beating.
Sorry, Mr Thompson - your vacillating, self-serving, vacuous post leaves the BBC even more exposed than it was.
Complain about this comment
It is an insult to the intelligence of the viewing public for the BBC to pretend that the refusal to broadcast the DEC appeal is based on "the need to preserve impartiality." The decision is partial, it is an endorsement of the Israeli line that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza and as such an endorsement of the barbaric action taken by the Israelis against the Palestinian civilian population.
This is evidenced by the fact that the other broadcasters have all reconsidered their position and will now broadcast the appeal. Clearly they do not take that biased, anti-Palestinian view. Clearly they find the suffering of the innocent civilian population of Gaza unacceptable, even if Mark Thompson does not.
Does Mark Thompson perhaps not see beyond the dramatic images the conflict provides? Does he think they provide good television and hope to encourage the Israelis to provide some more?
The BBC has always joined in broadcasting DEC appeals in the past for the victims of conflicts elsewhere in the world. Why is this one different? When has the BBC refused in the past to broadcast them?
Oh yes, I forgot. It was after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Does anyone note a trend...?
Complain about this comment
By not broadcasting the appeal, the BBC
has effectively eliminated public confidence in its impartiality.
Mark Thompson states "logistical problems" with delivering aid - a convenient euphemism for Israel's continuous blockade of Gaza, inhumane as it is.
The BBC is guilty, if not legally, morally at least,of denying urgent help to those suffering in Gaza.
I find it shocking and disturbing and am quite worried now how Children in Need money is being distributed.
Are Palestinian children excluded from that, too?
Complain about this comment
I am disgusted with the BBC's stance.
You must not judge the ability of the aid agencies to deliver aid - that's not what I pay you to do.
You must not judge whether or not a situation as dire as the plight of the Palestinian people in Gaza, is a humanitarian issue or not - the UN have stated that it is. And you have ignored the UN, just as Israel has. Who do you think you are?
Here's how it looks:
You are not showing impartiality at all, you are showing bias to the purposes of Israeli terrorism, occupation and murder. That is evident by your obsession with the Holocaust.
Not in my name. I am no longer paying you to be an indirect instrument of a terrorist state.
We are reminded of Israel's past, time and time again. "We must never forget" or "it must never happen again" is drummed into us by powerful people with their own agenda, including you and your senior 'sources'. And so we feel guilt, and ignore Israel's actions when we should otherwise condemn.
Enough is enough. It's time for the world to call Israel to account. Stop the killing, and they might earn back our respect. But we do not feel guilt any more, instead just utter disgust. The BBC must rise above the war crimes and propaganda, just as you must rise above terrorism on ANY side, if you think you are to remain "impartial".
Complain about this comment
It strikes me as strange that in arguing this decision, everyone seems to be forgetting that the common person is not completely stupid. I understaind that fundraising campaigns can make a huge difference to a cause, however, in the current case news reports show that it is blatantly obvious that a humanitarian crisis is underway. Most people, if you take the time to ask, can name four or five aid organisations off the top of their heads. Those same most people have some idea of how to get in touch with these organisations to offer aid. The last time I checked, which was in Auckland a couple of days after the tsunami shook my Christmas vacation to a quick conclusion and swift return to Thailand, the Red Cross is listed in the telephone book. Surely the DEC knows by now that the controversy surrounding its appeal has generated greater publicity for its cause than any broadcast could have.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should show the appeal. If it does not wish to show video then it should simply announce and show the phone number.
The fact that the BBC is being criticised by Govt, Opposition and public opinion indicates that the BBC's judgement is suspect.
The arguments presented by Thompson are weak and should be reconsidered, bearing in mind that:
1. The conflict is now past.
2. The BBC is in no position to be the arbiter on whether or not aid is likely to be able to get into Gaza in the next few days. That's for the DEC to decide.
3. Public interest in the charity appeal will decline as Gaza fades from the headlines - it is important for charities to be able to raise funds when public awareness is high.
Complain about this comment
As someone who once used to be a big supporter of the licence fee, the antics of the BBC since the 2003 Iraq War have turned me around completely.
"This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious."
So in other words, we should wait to help people until after they cease to be news stories, and are safely dead.
As the head of an organisation you are morally reprehensible - tender your resignation now and allow someone else the opportunity to redeem the Corporation before it's too late - both for the people of Gaza and the BBC.
Complain about this comment
both arguments have no basis on reason or kindness. how aid is delivered is not your concern, that's what the DEC is for, and the UN.
in terms of impartiality, the most impartial thing you could have done would have been to, as you said, cover the human side by allowing the appeal to be seen.
I'm sorry, this decision stink of politics, not humanity.
I always thought the bbc was impartial, I guess i was wrong, terribly terribly wrong, and so were you.
Complain about this comment
I'm looking for the message that agreed with Mark Thompson??
Apparently there was one? Probably made-up by a BBC Employee keen to ingratiate himself. Just like the new name for the Blue Peter Cat.
So, who is going to be DG after Thompson's been fired?
Complain about this comment
Dear Mark Thompson
You should not have a job in BBC ,you have made the most stupid decision ever, I have no idea where your rational come from ,the last four weeks you must have been living on Mars, as licence payer to BBC i demand you will be dismissed ,you are not fit to make any sound judgement and a rational decision .
I would encourage other people who agree with my comment to stop paying license fee too BBC till you are demised .I am no longer going to pay my license fee till you are out of BBC ,you can sue me now I am happy to go to prison for this cause ,by announcing your decision no to broadcast ,you have taken side .
You have taken side by this decision ,and i would strongly urge the governor of BBC to dismiss you, you must know your own limitation and i am sure your not good enough for this job.
In the name of GOD go.
Sam k
Complain about this comment
Thompson - you should consider your future! The BBC is now totally isolated by other broadcasters, it has woefully ignored the demands of the charities, the government, and if you look at 99% of you blog entries, you have ignored the public and your audience by your inept decision.
I suppose the Israeli lobby got at you like they got to that other weak leader Bush.
You should be ashamed of yourself
Complain about this comment
Let me address this question step by step. Firstly you question wether aid can be distributed. The Aid can be distributed if Israel lifts its stanglehold blockade of the Gaza strip, which it appears to be unwilling to do. Do I hear any words of encourage that from our foreign secretary David Milliband or even words from him deploring the damaging of UN missions in Gaza? Simply No-we are left with Mr Alexander and we all know where his interests and those of the Government lie and they are not with the Gazans. In fact President Olmert has effectively silenced criticism from the UK by telling British reporters that British opinion is valueless. Ergo we say nothing, we do not even support the UN.
The second point is that because of British foreign interests are contrary to those that would normally have taken place on a humanitarian basis, the BBC -which is now the Government's creature ( No I haven't forgotten Andrew Gilligan, dodgy dossiers or David Kelly or the effect of the court cases against Alastair Campbell) the effect of which was to reign in the independance of the BBC. How the BBC can claim that this will impugn its integrity is nothing short of farcical. Do the appeal NOW. We owe it for the integrity of the English if for nothing else.
Complain about this comment
The BBC are entitled to do what ever they want re the gaza appeal. on the other hand I suggest that all those people who feel strongly that the BBC are doing the wrong thing should withold their license fee for the next year. Cancel your standing orders, direct debits etc... and stand together. Form an organisation, give it a name.... Mass action (if it caught on) would not only make a diiference but also be very difficult for the BBC or the goverment to do anything about (if enough people do it).
On the other hand we could all just write "outraged" blogs, wring our hands and go to bed safe in the knowledge that we've done nothing to correct a blatant and hurtful injustice.
Complain about this comment
Does the BBC really believe that it's viewers are too stupid to differentiate between a humanitarian appeal and war reporting? Stop patronizing your viewers and abusing your power. Broadcast the Gaza appeal and let us make up our own minds about what we wish to do - that would be the impartial option for the BBC.
Complain about this comment
You have quite clearly given in to political pressure from the Israeli government. The "reasons" you have given for your decision are obviously false. All the other news media have been brave enough to do what is right, whereas you've simply bottled it.
The irony of you claiming that airing the DEC appeal would damage the BBC's impartiality is huge, as your actions show that it is anything but. Whilst your implication that organisations such as Oxfam, the Red Cross, and Save the Children, would be unable to deliver aid into Gaza in an impartial and non-political way is an insult to those organisations for which you should be ashamed.
Your reign at the BBC post-Hutton has seen the BBC become an emasculated, self-flagellating and frankly pathetic, organisation and it is high-time you resigned or were sacked.
It's truly sad what has become of the once proud BBC under your leadership and this latest incident is an utter disgrace.
Go, now, and let us have our BBC back.
Complain about this comment
There is enough aid getting through anyway.
The appeal is political propaganda. The Palestinians get more aid than anyone else on earth.
From the UN:
==============================
==============================
"We have had good cooperation from the Israeli authorities in the last few weeks, actually paradoxically better than we had before the hostilities started," Holmes said.
Holmes added that Israel was allowing the daily transfer of 120 truckloads of food and medical supplies into Gaza, most of whose 1.5 million Palestinian inhabitants are aid-dependant. "
Complain about this comment
I am totally shocked at the BBC's decision. Surely by not airing the appeal, the BBC's claim of impartiality is being compromised. This is human suffering at stake, not taking sides.
Complain about this comment
Louise Ellman MP (Friends of Israel parliamentary group) this evening, on BBC Radio 5, called for the appeal to be broadcast.
That is how wrong you are, Mr Thompson.
Complain about this comment
I find the biased reasons put forward by some individuals for supporting the BBC's decision to not air the appeal quite baffling.
The whole issue of aid is not about being seen to be supporting Israel or Gaza - it is about inncoccent people suffering and dying and what we can do to help.
Some people have raised the issue of why there is no aid appeal for the Israeli cause. Quite frankly if many hundreds of innocent civillians had been killed in Israel and hundreds more injured, with homes and infrastructure destroyed as they have been in Gaza, i would fully expect everyone to do what they could to support them. As I understand it the dead and injured in Israel are relatively insignificant in number compared to Gaza although even one loss of life is one too many.
I also find it annoying that Israel appears to be able to get away time and time again with killing innocent people using inhumane and possibly illegal warfare without any real consequences from the international community, e.g. the use of phospohorous weapons in built up civillian areas. What adds insult to injury is the way they lie about such matters with their story changing constantly, e.g. they denied using Phospohrous first, then acknowledged using it and that they would investigate. No doubt such investigations will come to nothing as usual. If Hamas did the same, no doubt the reaction would be totally different (and rightly so).
For all those people suggesting the BBC has been biased in favour of Gaza, perhaps they are just highlighting a greater percentage of the injustices carried out by Israel simply because over time these have simply been increasing, so much so that Israel now feels they can do what they like without any adverse consequences.
Wrong is wrong and it doesnt matter which side your on. Hamas is a terrible organisation but sadly I am not sure Israel or its supporters are much better - only they do it more cleverly.
Complain about this comment
Mark thompson and Caroline Thompson should be sacked for a complete detachment from the views of the majority of the British public, a lack of clarity of thought, obstructing aid to human beings in desparate need, and a pro-Israeli stance.
The BBC should simply ask the following question:
Has there been a major humanitarian disaster and do human beings (in this case Palestinians) desparately need help?
If the answer is yes, then the BBC should broadcast the charity appeal.
It is as simple and consistant as that.
No other feeble arguments for not doing so in this specific case should surpass human decency in helping other human beings in desparate need. SHAME ON THE BBC
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson and the BBC have clearly taken sides by turning this humanitarian disaster into a political issue. The BBC is meant to be unbiased and impartial. Time to reflect on your values and the service you are paid to provide.
One good thing that will have come out of this PR disaster is increased coverage and awareness.
Complain about this comment
A brave decision indeed - well done for taking a stand. Although it is somewhat ironic that this has now dominated the news headlines far more effectively than any appeal would have been able to do.
We all pray that this conflict may be speedily resolved and that the Gazan leadership will decide to actually support their people rather than bring war upon them.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I forgot to add that as the BBC does not seem to consider itself accountable to the public any more (by refusing to air Gaza appeal), this matter should be referred to Ofcom, like Jonathan Ross's.
Here are the details:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/complain
Tel: 0207 981 3040
We need an independent investigation into this matter and if the BBC is fined, they should pay to DEC Gaza appeal.
Complain about this comment
Indeed, Palestinians are getting an appeal even though they get more aid than anyone else on earth - while the Afghans dying in greater numbers get nothing.
Why? because this is about politics not aid. This is about being anti-Israel.
----------------
173. At 9:00pm on 24 Jan 2009, ClarenMilo wrote:
Comments 73 and 78 say it more eloquently than I can. Palestinian case is being treated differently than other cases needing humanitarian aid, and that is appalling.
Complain about this comment
Director general Mark Thompson needs to resign, he is out of touch with the people. He is clearly under the influense of the Isreali and Jewish lobbies.
Ironically the BBC have just launched a Farsi service for the Iranian people, this claim to be impartial is not now believed in the UK, how on earth can we expect other countries to believe it? Scrap these services as you have no credibilty in the UK or beyond. Thomson and the Trust need to resign and the BBC slimmed down.
Pradip
Complain about this comment
This is an unbelievably sad decision by the bbc. Nobody is thinking that either the aid agencies or the other tv channels have any bias - they are simply wanting to give the basics for survival to people after a war, a massacre, who happen to be almost entirely from one side of the conflict. Thats it. Just basic humanity. Which the BBC clearly are without. In 2009, when it is time to renew your TV licence, everybody who agrees (which is most) should refuse to pay up. BEGIN THAT CAMPAIGN NOW!
Complain about this comment
I have no complaints about BBC coverage of the Gaza conflict. I regard it as first class and balanced, as I think you would wish it to be seen. However, your refusal to broadcast an appeal by a respected, impartial aid agency that seeks to help the largely innocent collateral victims of this tragedy is not consistent with this. It is shocking, callous and essentially compromises your impartiality. Your editorial on the issue fails to convince me otherwise. I urge you to think again, and then again if necessary.
Complain about this comment
For goodness sake if Haifa or Tel Aviv were in ruins and thousands of their citizens homeless an appeal for humanitarian aid would in no way amount to support for Israel.
There is no difficult decision to be made here. The BBC and Mark Thompson have taken leave of their senses; it's a no brainer.
Complain about this comment
To Mark Thompson.
I have just read your reasons for refusing the appeal and I cannot understand how anyone with even limited powers of reasoning could post such nonsense.
Your first reason:-
"One reason was a concern about whether aid raised by the appeal could actually be delivered on the ground".
First, I'ts not up to you to make this judgement, the DEC have asked for it, therefore you are saying that you know better than they do. Second, let the people who own the BBC i.e. the public decide whether or not they want to contribute, given the information that is available to them.
Your second reason:-
"the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious".
Obviously you and others at the BBC think that "who is responsible for causing it" is contentious but most of us have no doubt whatsoever, however this is not the point.
It is not in the slightest bit contentious that there are thousands of people in Gaza who need urgent help because of their desperate circumstances and if you think that you can be impartial to their plight, you should not be in your present position and should have the decency to resign immediately together with Caroline Thomson.
Because your reasons are so clearly false, it is patently obvious that your real but unspoken reason for not allowing the appeal was because you are terrified of criticism from a vocal but influential minority.
That is cowardice of the worst type because it is denying aid to those in need. What a terrible shame that we have people like you and Caroline Thomson in charge of one of our most treasured institutions.
Complain about this comment
You have to take your hat off to the pro-Zionist lobby. Their work is surely done as they no longer even have to send their emails of complaint. Having a moral pygmy running the BBC must have made it easier for them though.
Complain about this comment
I Totally disagree with the BBC position on this. The DEC appeal is as, so many have said, a human response to a major human disaster, and it does not matter now how that disaster came about. People are suffering and dying in Palestine and need our help; your own impartial reports are making that more clear with every news bulletin. Broadcasting an appeal like this does not diminish what has happened to Israeli victims of this war - but the scale of their problems are not those of the Palestinians - your reporting also makes that clear in a most impartial way.
My intelligence, and that of most of the BBC licence payers is insulted if you think that we cannot differentiate between the causes of war and the human aftermath. And where is the logic in putting information about the DEC and linking to its website on your website but not broadcating anything on TV? How does the website remain impartial? The only good thing out of this is that all the publicity may have heightened the awareness of the appeal anyway!
I urge the BBC to follow the commonsense and humanitarian approach of the news stations that will broadcast the appeal.
Complain about this comment
It is ironic that after feeding the British public a mass of impartial pro-Palestinian imagery and news reports from the likes of Jeremy Bowen, all those who have seen the images now are outraged and yelling for blood that the BBC is seen to be siding with the 'evil' Israelis.
But for the people yelling 'shame on you', and 'resign' to Mark Thompson - please - take a step back and think. The Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera has already quoted officials from a Gaza hospital claiming that no more than 600 (a great number Hamas militants) people were killed, far from the 'official' figures spouted by Hamas. If we can't even trust the figures coming out of Gaza, how can we trust the Hamas officials to safely distribute the aid to those who needs it???
And for those claiming people will die because of this BBC decision - oh please!!! The awareness of the DEC appeal will have trebled by the time this furore has passed.
All of this mass hysteria is playing right into the hands of Hamas and those who want Israel destroyed. The real shame is for those who cannot see past the propaganda stemming from Hamas.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should trust the judgement of the DEC and always let them make an appeal when these 13 aid and charity agencies think it is appropriate.
Well done to the other broadcasters who have made the right decision.
Complain about this comment
Because Israel is able to extract Palestinians needing care and make sure they get it. Whereas aid convoys are at the mercy of Hamas.
So some 80 year old sitting at home seeing the appeal on the BBC might part with 20 quid of her pension money, unaware that Hamas are about to hijack a lorry and eat the cookies she bought.
180. At 9:03pm on 24 Jan 2009, EnjoyingLifeInUSA wrote:
If Israel took in hundreds of injured Gazans to be treated in Israeli hospitals, I fail to see why the BBC would not consider giving its voice in requesting donations for the victims of this war.
Complain about this comment
How refusing to help with humanitarian aid to people who need it can be related to editorial bias is beyond me. This is not a plea for military assistance. By all means say that you will support appeals for aid to all who need help in the region. However the facts are that the people in Gaza are in desperate need of help, now; the Israelis are not.
I seriously think you have lost the plot Mr Thompson.
Complain about this comment
the whole thing is just beyond comprehension! This is not about "taking sides", it's about saving innocent people's lives - you've carried the DEC appeals many times before when people have been left in similar situations after other conflicts, with nary a murmur about "taking sides"
I dislike on principle agreeing with Ben Bradshaw, but even he was moved to say the the BBC should stand up to Israel once in a while........ This is happening because the BBC has been leant on heavily by rich and powerful people, and they are cowardly enough to have succumbed.
I think the time has come for a purge of "Thomsons" at the top of the Beeb
- Caroline Thomson, who has been running around strongarming BBC staff not to push for the DEC appeal, and that blithering incompetent Mark Thompson the DG, who has already demonstrated his "headless chicken" style of management over the "Wossgate" affair - both should be ejected without ceremony, (or pay) as being in clear breach of their contracts........
Complain about this comment
Even on this topic I see the pro-Israeli lobby bringing politics into the issue to try and obfuscate matters as they usually.do. Talk of left-wing bias etc, etc. Most of the comments here address the humanitarian position (and don't express a political one) and the gross error of judgement the BBC has made about the DEC appeal and the way they have now painted themselves into a corner.
The reality is that the suffering is now and is urgent. If it were not for that it would be more pertinent and entirely reasonable for the UN and US to demand Israel alone pays for the reconstruction of all civilian installations it destroyed in Gaza under the pretext of destroying Hamas.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark Thompson - What a weak argument you present.
Why not say the the truth - you are scared of the pro-Israeli lobby?
Complain about this comment
Far from reassuring the public, in refusing to air the DEC appeal the BBC has grievously damaged its reputation as an impartial broadcaster. The stated reason offered by the director general Mark Thompson for not transmitting the appeal is disingenuous.
I am starting to realise that there is a distinct pro-Israeli bias to the BBC’s coverage of the Middle East in general (as exemplified by the BBC continuously and erroneously referring to Hamas as a militant organisation, when they are a democratically-elected government, mandated by the Palestinians to resist Israeli aggression) and this specific episode has done nothing to assuage my suspicion.
I am horrified that the BBC would, in their refusal to air this appeal, exacerbate the suffering of an imprisoned, starved and war-torn population to save offending Israel.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The BBC got it so wrong and you are doing more damage to the BBC now than anytime since 2002/3. Dreadful.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson - by your words and action you have demonstrated that you lack the intellectual judgement, reasoning ability, and sheer human decency to be the head of the BBC. The BBC is one of the few remaining great British institutions, which you seem hell bent on destroying. You are out of step with both ordinary people and the government. This is an extraordinarly callous and inhumane action, which must destroy any respect for you by ordinary British citizens or your own staff.
Resign now, or face being hounded out of office. You won't be forgiven for this action.
Complain about this comment
Wounded children there need surgeons, doctors working in their hospitals, lots of operations to be made and no sufficient qualified staff. I think DEC can get there why not? many doctors flew from various countries and operate there, our (Russian) trauma docs team cut and patch and operate non-stop but say it's a drop in the bucket, not enough hands. If they let in separate docs to work surely they will let in DEC with money and then your British DEC will do their work on the ground. Surely they are experienced and had lots of times in the past to do it, if separate individual medical people find their way in and are let to work an organised organisation I mean, will find a way.
Complain about this comment
Caroline Thomson should be found less onerous duties, or perhaps should be sent to Gazza to see for herself the misery inflicted by Israel. I am not Jewish nor a supporter of Hammaz. I am a human who has seen the carnage inflicted by cowardly Israel and the need for humanitarian aid. Thomson is obviously in the thrall of the USA, Israel and Britain and has been told to hold the political line. The BBC is a disgrace; we, the great unwashed, know the difference between impartial reporting and human need, something that Thomson and her little friends quite evidently don't. Try catering or health and safety, Caroline, anything that does not involve you in serious decision making. We can really do without 'PC' in serious broadcasting.
Complain about this comment
I am not in the habit of sounding off about the BBC. I have great respect for the dignity with which it normally conducts its affairs but sadly I find myself in agreement with the majority of comments in this thread.
In normal circumstances of course the BBC should try to maintain impartiality - but these were not normal circumstances and without going into the rights and wrongs on the ground, the case for supporting a humanitarian action is inarguable.
The main concern of those backing the BBC's decision is probably the implication of a huge public response, something the BBC is well able to bring about, and which may then be interpreted as proof of anti-Israeli sentiment in the UK. It is an argument that may have swayed the decision makers but I hope not.
I hope they will find courage to rise above the politics and think only of the women and children and yes, a not insignificant number of men too.
After all, it was Western governments that designed, made and to a large degree freely provided the weapons that inflicted such grievous damage.
Complain about this comment
In fact Russian docs there say the best way if many countries each take a bit of kids homes, to operate in normal hospitals in own countries.
Complain about this comment
I spoke to a BBC journalist today who said the decision was "stupid and craven". And that this is a widespread view amongst BBC journalists. It is clear that BBC management did not listen to reporters on the ground but only to other parts of BBC management.
And by not carrying the appeal the BBC has done far more damage to perceptions of its impartiality then carrying it would have done.
By happy circumstance I have to renew my licence fee soon. But I ain't paying and I would urge everyone else to follow. If you need any further encouragement then remember that Caroline Thomson, their pathetic spin doctor, earns £10,000 per week (yes, per week) of your money.
Complain about this comment
Here's where to complain:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaints_stage1.shtml
Complain about this comment
I disagree with the decision not to air the appeal for Gaza. If airing an appeal for Gaza shows partiality how is it that the BBC supported the appeal for Burma, Georgia, Zimbabwe or Tibet? All of these were (and still are) ongoing political conflicts? Is it just because the people of Gaza are mostly Muslims? It is a humanitarian appeal not a political appeal...
Complain about this comment
The issue is simple. The BBC is scared of how running this will play with the Daily Mail. In that context the decision works.
In any other context it does not. The BBC now looks partial. The UK's biggest and most respected Non Govermental Organisations including Save the Children, the Red Cross and Christian Aid say that there is a humanitarian disaster in Gaza. (Who knows that might well be linked to it being bombed heavily for three weeks? Is that contentious?) They wish to appeal for support for the people who they believe are at risk. Now the other broadcasters are to show the appeal in the name of basic humanity what are the BBC to do?
When the Ross nonsense kicked off it became very clear that as lots of people protested the BBC changed it's stance. Well lots of us are now protesting. The choice is now very very simple. Do the right thing. Show the appeal. Tell the Daily Mail and all the other right wing lunatics where to get off. OR dismiss that idiot Chief Operating Officer (who no-one knew existed) who can't even speak proper English (drawback in a broadcasting organisation surely?) and then Mr Thompson resign. Resign by Monday morning if you haven't shown the appeal. As I say a very simple choice.
Complain about this comment
This is a very shameful decision by the BBC.
Shame on the BBC and Shame on Ken Thomson.
The shoe is definitely on you.
To compare the utter devastation inflicted on Palestine, to compare the suffering of the concentration camp that is Palestine to the suffering by the Israeli’s is a mockery of anyone’s intelligence and shows such bias in favour of Israeli that it beggars belief.
The “reasons” offered for not allowing the appeal are completely vacuous and do no more than extend the lie told by Tzipi Livni that there is no humanitarian crisis ;
In refusing the appeal the BBC has clearly demonstrated that it has totally capitulated to the demands of the Israeli lobby.
The BBC should be no more; it has lots its connection with the silent majority who have suffered its biased reporting and views for far too long;
I urge people who want real news to listen to the foreign news channels on cable and satellite; they at least provide true unbiased views.
Complain about this comment
As award-winning Guardian journalist Nick Davies explains in his book 'Flat Earth News', the mantra of 'impartiality' is all too often trotted out by journalists and news editors either too lazy to check a story or too afraid of one of the parties involved to do so.
As Davies says, if one side tells you that the grass in a field has been cut, and the other side tells you that it hasn't, then you don't just report both stories and claim impartiality. You check which one is true and report accordingly.
The BBC's craven retreat from responsible journalism in Gaza through claiming to be 'impartial' has shamed both itself and the UK. This latest, almost farcical, surrender would be laughable if it were not so tragic.
Mr Thompson, your salary is funded by licence-payers, not the Israeli government. Please be so good as to act accordingly.
Complain about this comment
Please don't lose your nerve! I have just heard Yasmin Alibhai-Brown on News24 and was shocked that she was devoid of any knowledge of the CONTEXT of this
We know that Hamas misappropriates and then sells back humanitarian aid to its own people and uses that money to buy weapons and ammunition.
In the latest incident, reported by the Petra News Agency in Jordan, a Jordanian aid convoy had been ambushed on 20th January after entering the Gaza Strip. Gunmen opened fire at drivers and forced them to relinquish the aid to the gunmen's own warehouses. Given Hamas' track record of hoarding food and claiming that its people are starving, it is doubtful that the aid will reach its rightful destination.
That being the case, you are perfectly right not to encourage people to donate when you or they have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not the money will actually be spent on the welfare of the people most affected by the conflict or whether they would, in fact, be funding the re-arming of Hamas.
You may call this lack of bias, I call it common sense. People can always donate at banks, charity shops, or online.
Please don't give in to pressure!
Complain about this comment
What an astounding and incomprehensible decision by the BBC! How on earth can the BBC's management not see that the DEC is simply trying to respond to a desperate humanitarian crisis and raise funds to prevent even more death and misery? There is nothing partial about that.
On the contrary, by not allowing the appeal, the BBC is falling into a trap of its own making and it now appears both partial and uncaring.
In my opinion, that shows the BBC's management either has a woeful lack of understanding of the values the corporation is supposed to be upholding or has lost its sense of judgement. Either way, it's clearly time for changes at the top.
Complain about this comment
I don't think anyone believes Mark Thompson is worried about impartiality, or that the great British public is as simple-minded as he is implying. But let's suppose there are a few less discerning viewers out there who might lose confidence in the BBC's impartiality as a result of the appeal: what is more important? their opinion about the BBC or saving lives? How can those responsible for this hypocritical decision sleep at night knowing more people could die as a result of their contempt for human suffering? Shame on you.
Complain about this comment
The BBC's decision to not air an appeal for the people of Gaza was a correct decision.
Unfortunately, the Middle East situation is inextricably linked to politics.
This is because images of apparent war, suffering and 'atrocity' are always used as a political tool, and a form of 'blackmail'.
In the case of Gaza, sympathisers of the Palestinians/Arabs in the conflict with Israel are playing the humanitarian 'card' as a means by which to defame Israel. This is not to say that there is not a humanitarian crisis on the ground, but to explain that to air an appeal is a statement of partiality, and therefore, political.
For people to accuse the BBC of having no humanity because it chooses not to air the Gaza appeal, is another form of blackmail. It is like saying 'if you don't air this appeal you are as good as murdering Palestinians yourself'. Which is especially ridiculous, given the BBC's thorough airing of the Palestinian viewpoint.
The mania which has been whipped up about the Palestinians humanitarian needs, misses a fundamental point; All the Palestinians had to do was to quit firing rockets at Israel and none of this loss of life need to have occurred in the first place, which effectively discredits the credibility of an appeal on behalf of them.
Complain about this comment
This is an extraordinary defence of an unworthy decision.
All DEC appeals relate to items in the news, we are capable of interpreting news clips in the bulletin from those in the appeal - how is it we had that ability to discern in relation to the Tsunami and Dafur but not Gaza?
Secondly I trust the judgement of the experienced relief charities that comprise DEC than I do a clutch of broadcasting managers who have never had that responsibility.
When the ministers in a Government not renowned for moral scruples can see the issues more clearly than you can you should be seriously worried. I didn't think the time would come when I would praise Douglas Alexander over what used to be the most principled broadcasting organisation in the world - but on 25/01/09 that day arrived.
Hang your heads in shame
Complain about this comment
The BBC's decision creates a serious risk to its reputation for impartiality. A refusal to carry a major appeal for the relief of human suffering because of the controversial nature of its perpetrators indicates a willingness to bow to pressure, not to make your own impartial judgement.
Complain about this comment
im disgusted at bbc's decision not to broadcast appeal for gaza.
the crisis should not be used for political purposes
what sort of world we living if we cant recognise humantariun crisis from the politics
the bbc are just being bullied by the jewish lobbies,
Complain about this comment
We pay for your jobs and you now see part of your job is mandating that charities such as Oxfam, ActionAid, The Red Cross are unable to do theirs - shame on you bbc.
as quoted by M Thompson 'One reason was a concern about whether aid raised by the appeal could actually be delivered on the ground.'
Complain about this comment
Your arrogance led you to believe you could hide behind the multi-lateral effect your decision usually has on other broadcasters, thank heaven for Channel 4 or this story may not have seen the light of day. So to criticise the capabilities of DEC, who are signatories to the ICRC code of conduct, is not only disgusting but horrifying especially when you admit it's nothing to do with the DEC request. The reason you won't run the appeal according to both yourself and your COO Caroline Thompson during her Channel 4 News interview is that, it's more important the BBC reports the devastation post conflict. So are you saying, give the BBC some days to get the footage and news stories? Will you re-consider the Disasters and Emergencies Committee request then? Even if you do your lack of humanity is gut retching. Be an example to us all and make an apology to your viewers and licence fee payers for politicising a clearly humanitarian need and show what will be a short DEC appeal otherwise make a gesture towards the seriousness of impartiality within the BBC and Resign! Resign! Resign!
Complain about this comment
after seeking advice from senior leaders in BBC Journalism
can you name them?
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson - you are an embarrassment.
You have politicised a humanitarian issue and single-handedly reduced the public's confidence in the impartiality of the BBC. Shame on you.
Your explanation is incoherent. It is crystal clear that your news staff do not agree with your stance whatever you may claim.
Extraordinary!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I have just watched the clip where Tony Benn claims the BBC has caved in to pressure from Israel, a view echoed by some on this blog.
Caroline Thomson rightly says "I think that's a completely disgraceful thing to allege, and of course it's not true"
How perverse! The BBC wants to show it is impartial, yet does it in such a clumsy way that it ends up with Israel taking the blame.
Although I think the BBC is misguided in blocking the appeal, it is a yet another slur to blame Israel for this decision.
The BBC needs to explain to those who always criticise Israel (even for existing) that this decision was not a result of outside pressure.
Furthermore, the Balen Report which allegedly confirms anti-Israel bias within the BBC should now be published.
Meanwhile, the DEC appeal should be allowed to go ahead.
Complain about this comment
Mr Thompson, impartiality is vital to a fair and balanced broadcaster. However, what you fail to see, and this is truly worrying, is that there is something far more important to a public service broadcaster than impartiality and which trumps it by definition: THE TRUTH, and the truth is not impartial.
So, you choose to ignore the truth, your conception of impartiality is to side with the powerful, and your explanation is, on top of that, feeble and incoherent. Not exactly the finest journalistic or editorial principles I have come across.
People will die because of this callous decision. I hope you are aware of that
This is really the first time that I thought the BBC is not worth the license fee.
Complain about this comment
Right, I have re-read Mark Thompson's excuses, and note that he has in fact carefully NOT accused the DEC and its constituent charities of being partial to one side in the conflict.
What he says is that if the BBC shows the appeal, he thinks that people might THINK that the BBC is being partial to one side (even though, he implies, it in fact isn't).
Now, come on Mark, you've read the comments. You've heard the opinions. No, the vast majority of us WON'T think that you have lost your impartiality.
You agree, of course, that the DEC and its constituent charities are totally impartial, and have the skill to judge (better than you can, anyway) whether the aid can get through.
So what are you waiting for - show the appeal, like all the rest.
Complain about this comment
Rubbish - Mr Thompson. None of what you say makes any sense at all. You have decided to make a political judgment - and you are completely wrong. It is astonishing that you can still continue to "run" the BBC - though it is more and more apparent that you are completely out of kilter with the majority of the listeners and viewers (on this and so many other matters - you remind me of the wonderful bankers and their clever decisions).
What is more, I'll bet that by Monday evening, it will have been decided by the BBC (ie You) that "the situation on the ground has changed and the Corporation can now agree to air the advert".... In other words, you and you inept team will have realised just how incompetent you are.
Complain about this comment
The BBC says that it does not *always* run appeals in conflict zones. It cites, by example, an appeal it ran for Darfur, but did not during the recent conflict in Lebanon.
In Lebanon, Israelis were attacking (rightly or wrongly) Hezbollah Arabs.
In Gaza, Israelis were attacking Hamas Arabs.
So I think what the BBC means is that it *never* runs an appeal when those needing aid were put in that position by Israel.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of it, it is *not* running the Gaza appeal that robs the BBC of its impartiality, since it seems to suggest it is always pro-Israel.
Complain about this comment
I am appalled by the decision not to show the Gaza emergency aid appeal. We have seen the images of devastation and suffering the civilian population in Gaza is suffering and know how vital television appeals are in raising money. Every minute wasted means more unnecessary deaths. How is it possible to be impartial about this?
The BBC claims to help nation to speak unto nation. In this case we need money to do the talking on behalf of the nation and I am ashamed that the BBC should be silencing this appeal.
Complain about this comment
Well done Mr Thomspon!
Your comments and views on this issue have effectively 'outed' you .
The tell tale signs have recently been shown by the dumbed down style of questioning by the likes of Jeremy Paxman when faced with Israeli reps peddling their horrible propaganda.
This latest decison and explanation clearly shows your stance.
It must surely be a deliberate signal to the zionist supporters that you are trying to appease.
I can understand the position of the likes of Sky having to play the tune of their paymasters, however you should be aware that the strength (to date) of the BBC was the independance to provide a fair and equitable response to issues the World
over.
This type of decision is likely to be a big nail in the coffin of the BBC, not all the British TV licence payers are supporters of the Zionist project!
Complain about this comment
The responsibility for the maintenance of humanity lies with the elected government of Gaza. It was they who chose to engage military action with rockets and they who must take responsibility for the scale of reaction inflicted by the Israeli armed services. The consequences of that retaliation are not entirely clear insofar as how certain civil elements of the Gaza population became more vunerable. What we witnessed was war and just as I as a 4 year old was bombed in WW11, I suffered the consequence of that.
Why should the BBC promote assistance for Hamas, this is a continueing deja vu. The problem is well known, if people wish to add to Iran's contribution to building more tunnels and buying more rockets and possibly putting a roof over the heads of the civil population I am sure they know how to do it. I feel very sorry for the innocent population of Gaza, but their future unfortunately is dictated by others.
Complain about this comment
www.bbc.co.uk: BBC Archive: Witnessing the Holocaust
news.bbc.co.uk: ITV, Channel 4 and Five are to run a charity appeal for Gaza, amid growing criticism of the BBC's decision not to show it.
First things I saw.
Complain about this comment
I long for the day that the BBC goes back to reporting the news, rather than being the news.
JeremyCairns is quite right (#301) to point out that "years of stoking anti-Israel feelings has come back to bite the BBC".
All this decision has achieved is to give those who criticise everything Israel does yet more airtime/blog space to spout their hatred.
Instead of blocking this humanitarian appeal, if the BBC is genuine in its belated desire to be impartial, why not publish the Balen Report?
Complain about this comment
You say-
the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious.
This seems very sloppy thinking.
the statement:
the suffering and distress of combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are at the heart of the story and contentious.
is possibly true.
the statement:
the suffering and distress of civilians on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are at the heart of the story and contentious.
is absolute nonsense.
In international law there is nothing contentious about the suffering and distress of civilians.
The difficulty of distinguishing between civilian and combatant may be real, but that does not excuse equating one with the other.
It is the suggestion that the terms are interchangable that is highly contentious.
In fact I find the suggestion quite disgraceful.
You should resign.
Complain about this comment
There are rights and wrongs on both sides of the conflict, but a person who needs our help is someone who needs our help.
There is no doubt that innocent people are suffering in Gaza, and that is what the DEC appeal is about.
The BBC's motto was, and I thought still is, "Nation shall speak peace unto nation."
We supposedly pay Mark Thompson his over £800,000 salary because that is what we need to do to purchase excellence, but this just demonstrates that we are not getting value for money.
It is interesting the parable of the Good Samaritan can now add the TV executive who walked past the dying man because to intervene may have led to accusations of bias.
Executive pay, Jonathan Ross and now this. Mark Thompson should resign.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Sometimes you need to do the right thing rather than the correct thing. This is one of those times.
Complain about this comment
Gutless BBC - Mark Thompson and all of the BBC spokespeople who I have heard on the radio should be ashamed!! There is nothing noble or dignified in the stance of the BBC on this, and it looks - right or wrong - as though the BBC are being manipulated by Israel. What impact is this appeal likely to make? In the past these appeals have raised £10-20 million, that's a very minor fraction of the damage inflicted by Israel on Gaza. It's also a very minor amount compared to the money that Arab states have pledged already for re-construction.
So why the coy mealy-mouthed tripe spouted by the representatives of the BBC so far? I wonder how much Caroline Thompson earns - having heard her bumble incoherently on the Today show on R4 this morning - surely for her salary the BBC should find someone who A - believes the message - and B has the mental capability to deliver it. Her "performance" was lamentable and totally lacking in any sort of belief in the delivered message. The BBC should dismiss her immediately and send her salary to the DEC!!
Complain about this comment
The DEC is an umbrella organization of charities to expedite urgent major humanitarian relief efforts. It is non-partisan, with a wealth of practical expertise in the delivery of aid. Given this track record, it is absolutely not the business of the BBC to presume to decide on the logistics of the delivery of relief and to place this conditionality on the DEC as a consideration in any broadcast appeal. But what most definitely is the business of the BBC is to provide a public platform through which the DEC's appeal can be made. It is specious to refuse this on the ground that the BBC's impartiality would be compromised. Just as in forms of government information broadcasts, party political broadcasts, so too would any appeal by the DEC be understood in its own terms - and that neither the impartiality, objectivity nor the editorial judgement of the BBC would be implicated in it. This is so manifestly clear that I doubt that Mark Thomson can seriously question it. I suspect that what he really fears being compromised is the BBC's ability to manage what he calls the "ongoing" news story of Gaza, dependent as it is on Israeli government co-operation. If so, this would be a serious matter and deserve a more open consideration than being hidden behind a screen of impartiality, the fear of, as he says, "giving the public the impression that the BBC was taking sides..." And so a wrong-headed, craven and cowardly decision reaches its final grubby justification in Thomson's last sentence: we are to remember that despite the BBC's decision we can still contribute to the DEC's appeal. No, Mark Thomson, you are not so easily absolved - you know well enough the correlation between money and air-time. But suppose we do, as I hope, come up with the cash for the appeal? Do you really meant to trumpet this, find this a source of pride, that the public should raise its relief effort in spite of - and not because of - the BBC?
Complain about this comment
Well we know the left wing/socialist and Islamic alliance wouldn't be lobbying the BBC to broadcast an appeal for Israel.
We know Benn and Galloway wouldn't be hammering at the doors of the BBC wanting them to air an appeal on behalf of Israel.
--------
297. At 10:18pm on 24 Jan 2009, johnzina wrote:
What would the BBC have decided if Iran had nuked Tel Aviv?
Complain about this comment
238. - patricamconnell
"Didn?t the BBC broadcast the appeal for Lebanon when Israel destroyed half of the country?"
someone correct me if i am wrong but wasn't it the Lebanon appeal that also didn't get broadcast by the BBC? It's hard to be sure as (surprising) Mark Thompson doesn't offer clear examples of when they have refused to broadcast appeals in the past to give some weight to his weak argument. If I'm right, strange again that the Israel was involved then too.
silverlining to all this though is that my disgust and horror at the BBC's decision on this has compelled me to donate even more than i would have previously to the cause though. I feel much less generous about my tv licence fee though.
For the record - i do agree the point about the government not interfering with what the BBC puts out is very, very important, but the BBC Trust and management are having a deeply shameful lack of common sense on this one. really misguided.
Complain about this comment
Well done the BBC, by not showing the DEC appeal you have scored an own goal, which resulted in the appeal getting more air time and as a result will raise more money than they would have otherwise. I have always been a strong supporter of the BBC but now with this stance and your biased news covering of GAZA you have shown your true colour, which is that you are partial and won’t speak out against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, and destruction and humiliation of its people. Recently instead of reporting news you have been making news – that speaks volume about your institution. And during the Israeli killing of the Palestinians and destructions of its properties you kept saying you needed to ensure balanced reporting and therefore weren’t showing footage out of Gaza without background stories and/or because your reporter weren’t there to authenticate the stories. Don’t you know ‘a picture speaks a thousand words’ – that’s all you had to do show the truth but you chose not to. Both of your actions above are proof that you are biased and scared of the Israeli/Jewish lobby. Just remember what your reaction would be if some bully/thug camein to your house and forced you to leave in your bathroom with restrictions whilst they claimed rest of your house as their own and are endeavouring to takeover your bathroom too!!?? You should never announce or promote yourself as independent or impartial - you are not! You should be ashamed of yourself!!
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson you are a spineless man and should resign immediately.
Shame on you and shame on the BBC.
And shame on you for re-hireing that foul-mouthed, over-paid, uncouth slob Jonathan Ross.
Thompsons' salary (yes both of them) - outragous.
The Guardian - Thompson's salary
How do you justify that?
#76 septemus.
Excellent post - what a heart-breaking list of shattered families. I too have a five-year-old daughter...
#83 Mark.
You are right - this spinless caving-in to the pro-Isreali lobby IS political.
All news reporting DECISIONS are political. Whether to cover a story or not to cover a story with a political dimension is, in itself, a political editorial decision. One which the BBC makes hundreds of times every day.
Broadcasting an appeal for humitarian aid is not.
Not broadcasting the appeal is most definitely a political decision as Thompson tacitly admits in his statement.
Shame on the BBC for refusing to broadcast the appeal.
#83 Mark.
You are wrong "If only giving money to the BBC was also voluntary."
IT IS voluntary - don't watch TV. I don't have a TV and I don't pay for a licence.
Jonathan Ross; the endless drivel spouted on TV make-over programmes - particularly the property-based ones; the pernicious ethos of greed enshrined by "The Dragon's Den" and "The Apprentice"; Peston's increasingly pro-government kow-towing to an inept and
useless government on the economic crisis, are all clear indicators of a steady and obvious dumbing-down of BBC output for at least the last 10 years.
Won't be long before these blogs are moderated to meaningless pulp.
Thank God there are other media outlets on the net.
#94 jollyBoyers.
Well said.
#97 One_Marble_Left.
Well said - but I doubt writing to your MP will do much. Back-benchers are even more spineless than front-benchers. There's hardly a single MP who has the guts to say anything independently.
#98 antonia865
Well said.
#101. JeremyCairns
What a naive and paranoid comment.
"There are campaigns by left wing and Islamic groups to flood this blog and flood the BBC with complaints"
How on earth could such a "campaign" be organised in one-and-half hours? (Thompson's blog at 6:38 pm - and your post 8.15 pm).
#106. JMSheff
Well put.
#109. oldboneman
"...Mark Thompson's regurgitation of the spurious reasons and arguments we have been reading all day. He adds nothing to the debate, but demonstrates a level of disrespect for the intelligence of the reader.
Manifestly, it is this stance that is reducing public confidence in the BBC..."
Very well put.
#111. adamant1980
Excellent post - particularly your last paragraph:
"...This is not impartiality, this is censorship to maintain consistency of biased coverage. "
I'll stop reading the other posts for now - there are 390 of 'em (100 awaiting moderation).
The BBC are taking increasly large steps towards completely losing touch with the public.
Thompson and his cronies should resign. The BBC should broadcast the appeal.
For someone who is paid almost a million pounds a year we all should expect something better than the appologetic drivel which Thompson has offered here.
He obviously thinks all viewers of BBC output have the IQ of a boiled hens-egg. How insulting.
Old Groucho
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#70
My dad says he may consider how he pays his staff from now on. He is wondering if he should not pay them in cash, but instead provide them with the necessities of life. After all, if they get mugged or a pickpocket helps themselves to the contents of their bags and pockets, does that mean he will be helping thieves.
He is wondering how he can ensure they have noting worth stealing in their homes - he'd be aiding and abetting burglars if items were stolen from his employees homes.....
Sounds rational, does it? He hasn't stopped laughing at how pathetic this has been all day.
The British public really do not appreciate the patronising explanation. The BBC management are not paid to patronize the public. We understand the difference between wars and helping the victims, the general population who are caught up in it.
British management and decision-making at its best, yet again. Not.
The whole argument is disgusting. The victims of bombings need help to have shelter, food and healthcare. What is there to debate?
If the British public feel the appeal is partisan, then they will not make donations.
The Red Cross and the others neutral aid agencies. Or does the BBC have evidence to suggest otherwise?
Should we refrain from providing aid to any other part of the world for fear of theft?
To ensure the BBC is seen is neutral, then they should act.
Lets have a week long series of documentaries explaining the precise issues around Israel and Palestine. With proper academic studies of the issues, not rent-a-quotes of dubious intent. Some good, analyses grounded on facts.
Lets have a week long series of documentaries desribing how this war, and it is a war, has been depicted by the press and media. With proper academic studies of the issues, not rent-a-quotes of dubious intent. Some good, analyses grounded on facts.
BBC impartiality can be publicly demonstrated. Or are the viewers too dumb to follow the analyses?
Palestine. Peace Not Apartheid by US President Jimmy Carter is a thought provoking read. Just one of many thoughtful books read by the BBC audience.
Mr Thompson, perhaps you might want to buy that on your way home and have a read.
Complain about this comment
Craven, craven, craven. Mark Thompson should be ashamed of himself. Caving to certain reactionary newspapers in their demands for 'justice' in the Ross/Brand saga is one thing; this is cowardice on an altogether different scale, since it's a matter of life and death.
Thompson's logic in this post is riddled with holes. I'd expect the charities themselves to make a decision on whether aid can get through -- unless Mr. Thompson has some expertise in these areas that overrides the considerable experience of our leading charities, I suggest that he abandons this patronising argument before he embarrasses himself further.
As for the editorial independence line: shame, shame, shame on you for suggesting that the public can't tell the difference between a humanitarian crisis and a political conflict. It may be that the Israeli military did a very poor job of distinguishing between innocents and combatants in the recent operation, but the rest of us aren't so indiscriminate. The implication that airing a humanitarian appeal is tantamount to taking sides merely repeats the collective punishment that Gazans have already endured.
Incidentally: would Mr. Thompson be prepared to state on the record that the BBC has received no representations from the Israeli government on this issue, either directly or via the Israeli ambassador?
Complain about this comment
I can't really make my mind up on whether the appeal should be broadcast or not on humanitarian/impartiality rules
I do however think that the bbc should stick to their decision right or wrong though. The last thing I want is the government being able to influence what must, and must not be broadcast.
Although, if people were really thinking on their feet, they'd shove the appeal through on the grounds of a party political broadcast.
Complain about this comment
With respect to to Mr Thompson and those helping to make the decision not to transmit the DEC apeal, I think your conclusion is wrong because:
1. The BBC has a public service duty to inform the public the best they can as to what is happening in the world. This includes not only information gathered by themselves but verifiable information gathered by others. In this case the DEC charities concerned.
2. This is not just a news item, whatever the politics of the indivdual or orgatisation we should have a humanitarian concern.
3. The suffering of innocents and the relief of that suffering in a non judgemental way, I believe is something that the British public wishes to allieviate whenever it can.
4. In the eyes of those waiting for help a decisiion like this can only make them dispire further.
I do hope you will change your minds and allow this humanitarian appeal be transmitted to the British public, enabling them to react in the way they feel best.
Complain about this comment
Not broadcasting DEC appeal just makes BBC loosing its credibitily. In a no way back to recover it in this generation. People's heart will not forget this shameful decision.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson's statement seems borne solely out of fear of being accused of side-taking. The recent emergence of this commitment to impartiality has, under Mark Thompson, led to a situation in the news service where nobody is allowed to say anything without equal airtime being given to someone with an opposing view.
This striving for balance is at odds with an honest and reputable delivery of news, and this current debate is a shining example. The end result: protecting his reputation becomes more important than does trying to help save the lives of people in imminent danger of death. He should be ashamed.
Furthermore, by not agreeing to help in this plea for help for people in critical difficulty, he IS taking the sides. He is on the side of those who will happily sit in their warm comfortable homes and let the children of Gaza die in misery. Don't forget that c.50% of these people are under 18 years old.
Following his cowardly justification and logic in the above statement, I have a suggestion for him. Why not broadcast two appeals - one for the people who are suffering in Gaza and one for those who are suffering in Israel?
This gets him 'off the hook' and may actually help the people who need help now. How could he argue against that I wonder?
Complain about this comment
I feel sorry for Mark & his colleagues on the editorial team. There are plenty of blog posting complaining of the BBC's "pro-Palestinian" stance. Now they are being "pro-Israeli".
Damned if they do, damned if they don't and damned by others the rest of the time.
Mark - do what you believe and stick to your guns.
Complain about this comment
well we are all getting a little hot under the collar tonight aren't we!!! claims of racism and of terrorism can get flung about in both directions, so lets not bother with that and instead consider the matter at hand.
I know it is unusual (but not unknown) to have Mark T blogging here but why was it not until 6.38pm when I would guess there have been complaints arriving at the beeb all day?
I hear both sides, both have valid things to say, the BBC must be impartial, but aid is needed. I could equate it to the dilemma of a doctor with the prescription of antibiotics to someone with a cold... in a small percentage of cases it will work but for the majority of population there shall be reduced effectiveness... but it means a lot to those who are aided. Is the damage to the BBC comparable to the loss of life? Can the position of the BBC be compared to those in suffering?
I dont think it can be compared, reputations can be regained, lives cannot.
You are playing the part of the priest in the story of the good samaritan, you didnt beat the poor soul up but are content to walk by on the other side rather than do anything that would come to the persons aid.
I wonder whether the BBC took a risk assessment of what would happen by refusing this DEC appeal when other broadcasters were considering going ahead? IMHO An appeal for aid could have been made without damage to the corporation integrity. The BBC must tread a narrow line in the war coverage, but this is the after effect, innocents injured and needing aid.
We viewers understand that party political broadcasts are not the view of the BBC so why would we not understand about a DEC appeal? (also Perhaps if the BBC thinks no one would vote for a party then it shouldnt show a PPB?)
I also feel delaying DEC apppeal 'till aid is seen to be moving freely is not a BBC matter and should be removed from the equation in future relief efforts. When DEC launches an appeal the need is urgent and should be broadcast as soon as possible, delays cause death.
Finally by covering the campaign against the broadcast, sending a rep to Ch4 to be on the news, and writing this blog you have drawn so much attention you may as well have broadcast the appeal in the first place. Only now again you have put the viewer last, making the BBC the news story rather than the reporter. As a licence fee payer I am a share holder in the Beeb, give me my monies worth and be the decent public service broadcaster you could be!
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompson did not politicize this. You all have. Please stop wasting the time of the poor comment moderator and put your money where your mouth is: www.dec.org.uk
Incidentally, I found the link in one of the BBC's stories on the issue.
Complain about this comment
**Call for Mark Thompson To Be Sacked**
As already commented on by 416 other posters, the actions taken by the BBC and the explanation provided by its Head is indefensible, patronising and morally repugnant.
The BBC has, under this directorship lost its ability to report news for the greater good. It is fashioned by schedulers and controllers who appear to be influenced by external sources and has descended into the one thing it prided itself as being; an independent and world-respected news agency.
This would surely not have happened in the time of Greg Dyke.
In the wake of the above blog and its utterly illogical reasoning for not promoting charity work for a Humanitarian Catastrophe, I call for the sacking of Mr Thompson who has brought the entire BBC into disrepute and call for an investigation into the matter.
**Call for Mark Thompson To Be Sacked**
Complain about this comment
You see two men fighting. One man gives the other a bloody nose before the second man takes out a knife and stabs the first repeatedly, leaving him seriously injured. The man with the bloody nose runs off, leaving the first man lying on the pavement bleeding to death. What do you do? If you are a decent human being, you come to the aid of the dying man. If you are the BBC, you cross the road and pass by on the other side. That's the difference between the DEC and the BBC.
Complain about this comment
Mark Thompsons attempt to justify the BBCs decision not to screen the Gaza appeal is a poor one. I am so disappointed in the BBC and although I can't speak for anyone else I expect many people will feel the same. We have a large family and we all think the excuses are poor. It makes you think who is running the BBC, why dig your heels in when people are obviously bothering to let you know that they dont find it acceptable? Come on get with the programme... If I could erase the BBC from my TV right now I would, what a let down after many years of faith in their ability to calmly and professionally deliver a professional service. Sad BBC, very sad state of affairs.