"Why is this different?!" BBC slammed over failure to condemn Hamas as terrorists
Lord David Wolfson speaks about the BBC's hypocrisy over reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict
The BBC and its presenters continue to come under major criticism for its decision not to brand Hamas, who have carried out a series of attacks on Israel this past week, as a ‘terrorist’ group.
In response to its decision, a group of five lawyers have penned a letter of complaint to Ofcom, claiming the BBC has “fallen well below the standards expressed in its Editorial Values.”
One of these lawyers, Lord David Wolfson, has expressed his disgust at the BBC’s decision to insist on impartiality, while speaking with Jacob Rees-Mogg on GB News.
“Hamas is a terrorist organisation,” he said. “They are proscribed as a matter of law here. Support for them is illegal and I hope actually that the police will be stronger in in dealing with pro-Hamas rallies.”
Lord David Wolfson criticises the BBC for its reporting on Hamas.
GB News
Jacob questioned the legitimacy of the BBC’s defence to these criticisms, including a tweet by presenter John Simpson which claimed: “Calling someone a terrorist means you’re taking sides and ceasing to treat the situation with due impartiality.”
Despite the BBC’s claims that they must remain ‘editorially independent’, Jacob pointed out that the BBC guidelines do not preclude the use of the word ‘terrorism’.
Wolfson was quick to jump on this point, comparing the current reporting to the way the news organisation has treated other terrorist incidents in the past.
“The BBC has used the word in other contexts. You mentioned the IRA, also Al Qaeda. It's called the terrorist attacks in Paris, in the nightclub, a terrorist attack, which it undoubtedly was. And the question which we are left with, and which was the basis of our letter to Ofcom, is why is this different?”
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
An image of BBC Broadcasting HousePAAs well as the BBC itself, Wolfson also took aim at individuals, both within and outside the company, who he feels haven’t done enough to speak out against the horror being committed by Hamas.
“We've seen a lot of support, but we've also seen people who should be speaking out. Why? Because they spoke out in other contexts.”
“I mean Gary Lineker, for example, if I can pick on him. He drew a lot of publicity when he compared the Government's immigration policy to 1930s Germany. Well, what happened in Israel on Saturday was 1940s Germany.”
“As far as I know, the only thing Gary Lineker has so far tweeted about is to applaud the BBC's stance in not calling Hamas terrorists. I'm sure he's been extremely busy and hasn't managed to get round to condemning, unambiguously, a terrorist atrocity.”
Gary LinekerPAJacob joked: “It’s absolutely extraordinary from somebody who normally fills the airway with his view on anything and everything.”
Wolfson rounded off his thoughts with his take on how organisations can best come to a conclusion on the right way to report on a story.
“I think what we have to do is we have to decide, do we mean what we say or are we virtue signalling? And if we mean what we say, we have to continue to do it even when it's tough.”
“I like the fact that the BBC is editorially independent. But if we're going to have a state broadcaster for which we all have to pay, the least we can expect is it abides by what I would call 'moral norms'.”