Government officials, including the UK Prime Minister, have been urging the BBC to refer to Hamas as terrorists. However, the BBC has refused to do so, using terms like “fighters” or “militants” instead, which some view as overly sympathetic. This refusal to label Hamas as terrorists is part of the BBC’s commitment to maintain due impartiality in covering the Israel-Palestine conflict.
The BBC has extensively reported on the brutal actions of Hamas, making it clear to the world the ruthless and barbaric nature of the group’s activities, such as door-to-door killings and mutilations of defenseless individuals.
However, according to John Simpson, the BBC’s World Affairs Editor, labeling Hamas as terrorists could be seen as taking sides and not maintaining due impartiality, which is the BBC’s primary goal.
While this stance has frustrated many who wish to see Hamas labeled as terrorists, it aligns with the BBC’s long-standing policy. The Corporation has defended its position by arguing that it’s not their role to declare any group as terrorists, and they only attribute the term when others do so.
Critics point out an inconsistency in the BBC’s approach. They note that the BBC has used the term “terrorist” in various other contexts, such as the 9/11 attacks, the 7/7 bombings in London, and other terrorist incidents worldwide. In these cases, the BBC chose to describe the events using the term “terrorist” without attributing it to others.
This discrepancy in the BBC’s reporting has raised questions about the Corporation’s stance. It may not necessarily reflect an editorial bias against Israel, as some might suspect, but rather stems from a heightened sensitivity surrounding the Israel-Palestine conflict due to the intense passions it provokes on both sides.
This hesitation to label Hamas as terrorists has also led to other controversies, such as the refusal of the Football Association (FA) and Premier League to illuminate Wembley Stadium with the Israeli flag’s colors. In contrast, they previously paid respects to victims of ISIS attacks by lighting up the stadium with the French tricolor. Critics argue that this reflects a fear of backlash from Palestinian supporters.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrations around the world have shown support for Hamas’s actions, framing them as part of the pursuit of Palestinian “human rights”. Some question whether these protestors should be viewed as supporters of terrorism.
Furthermore, legal experts argue that the BBC is taking sides with Hamas by not using the term “terrorists” since, under UK law, Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organization. They suggest that the BBC’s duty is to report the facts as established by statute.
The BBC’s response to this criticism is that its audience includes millions of people around the world who may not agree with the British Government’s view on these matters. The BBC believes that using the term “terrorist” can be a barrier to understanding for its global audience, and it aims to inform them about the facts of the situation to maintain viewership.
To address the issue, the BBC could either apply the same standard to Hamas as it does to other terrorist organizations, or it could continue its current approach, albeit with potential inconsistency in its reporting. The debate around this issue continues, with no clear resolution in sight.
