Comment

BBC Newsnight's reaction to the Israeli assault on Lebanon

David Berry

Newsnight is the BBC's news flagship programme screened weekly from Monday to Friday between 10.30 and 11.20 pm on BBC 2. One of Newsnight's presenters is Jeremy Paxman, a journalist renowned for his abrasive and confrontational style of interviewing; well-suited one would have thought for prising out information from his interviewees to attain the truth. Well perhaps, but what good is the final product if there is a perceived failure to balance out news items by viewers?

This perception of failing to be 'objective', 'fair', 'balanced' and 'detached' from events is not particularly new. For example, the Glasgow Media Group's Bad News published in 1976 or Peter Schlesinger's book Putting 'Reality' Together published in 1978 offered sharp critiques of the BBC's 'objectivity' arguing that news was in fact the product of ideological intentions and bias. Perhaps the main difference today is that ordinary members of the public, as opposed to academics leading the way, now voice their criticisms over the BBC's sense of 'objectivity'. This is not particularly new either it's just that the Internet has allowed a greater public space in which voices can now be heard. Take one look at the BBC/Newsnight's website and you'll see the many emails sent by concerned viewers.

The criticism by viewers has become particularly acute since 2003 over the BBC's coverage of the American and British led war in Iraq, mainly for not allowing sufficient anti-war voices to be broadcast in news reports and interviews. Added to this, on July 18th 2006 there was a protest held in London, organised by A Call For Light, which included media activists, over the lack of objective reporting and subsequently bias at the BBC. Today the criticisms continue over Newsnight's coverage of the Israeli assault on Lebanon. Are they justified?

It's probably fair to say that there's no bigger test to the credibility of journalistic practice than war reporting, particularly when a journalist is of the same nationality of the country at war. However, that shouldn't be an excuse for searching for the truth, which should always outweigh sentimental attachment to country. This also extends to having sympathies with one country over another; the search for and exposure of truth should take precedent over subjective beliefs, regardless of consequences, unless there is an ethical, as opposed to personal-moral, justification not to publish.

So how should Newsnight report the indiscriminate taking of life or to put it bluntly the deliberate targeting of innocent people (non-combatants)? What should journalisms' response be towards such acts? Ethically, we speak of journalistic responsibilities (some would say duties or obligations) towards bringing the truth to public attention. We speak of standards and of the quality of performance that doesn't shy away from investigating thoroughly and asking difficult questions. We also speak of confronting the powerful in order to root out the truth of events irrespective of one's own 'value-judgements'. The powerful here are represented by the US-UK-Israeli axis and weapons of civilian destruction, flown from the US to bolster the Israeli Armed Forces' assault in Lebanon that land en-route via the UK.

The criticism over Newsnight's coverage of the Israeli attacks resulted recently in a studio debate on Monday July 24th 2006 when Jeremy Paxman chaired a discussion on the 'middle-east crisis' between Rabbi Barry Marcus of the Central London Synagogue, and Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of Al Quds. Both presented their opposing views to the 'crisis' and this is how Paxman introduced the discussion:

'The middle-east crisis and the way the British and American governments respond to it, to say nothing if how we and other media outlets report it, fires more anger and generates more complaints than any other international story. The arguments go either that governments turn a blind eye to Israel's use of disproportionate force against civilians or that Israel is judged by higher standards than everyone else especially its enemies'.

To justify the BBC's coverage of the 'crisis' and to make clear that the BBC can't please all the people all of the time, Paxman read out a number of emails that had been sent to Newsnight and stated that they indicated that Newsnight were accused of being both pro and anti Israeli. Paxman also claimed that Newsnight had been accused for being 'too harsh' on Israel. So just how should Newsnight approach an event that sees Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah that leads to an all-out assault on innocent people who aren't directly connected to the kidnapping or responsible for the kidnappers actions? Paxman continued: 'The debate comes down to a single issue; how do you judge Israel?' and stating later in the programme: 'So, how should Israel be judged?' Well how are we to judge the comments of Israel's Justice Minister, Haim Ramon who stated that 'Everyone in southern Lebanon is a terrorist'? (Peter Beaumont, The Observer, Sunday July 30th, 2006).

On Monday July 31st, Paxman then interviewed the Israeli Foreign Ministry Spokesman, Mark Regev and perhaps sensitive to the criticism the BBC has endured on this occasion his approach was far more direct and to the point. During the interview Paxman asked: 'Mr. Regev, at the current rate of progress how many more women, children or old people do you expect to kill?' Then he asked in relation to the assault on innocents: 'Are we supposed to take seriously the comments of your Prime Minister when he said I am sorry from the bottom of my heart. Are we supposed to take that seriously?' Then later in the programme he said: 'The sight night after night of children, mothers and old people being killed and maimed by Israeli weapons has had a pretty traumatic effect on Jews and indeed Gentiles who previously had wished Israel well'. This was an introduction to a debate between three prominent British Jewish figures, Alain de Botton (writer), Julia Pascal (dramatist) and Bella Freud (fashion designer) to highlight differences of opinion within the Jewish community. Freud was the dissenting voice calling on Israel to halt its assault and rightly in my view argued that this isn't about Jewish-Muslim issues but rather about the 'disproportionate' attack on Lebanon.

Whilst the debates between different positions are welcome, Newsnight would also do well to set this current 'crisis' in its proper historical context. For why did Hezbollah kidnap the Israeli soldiers?