Footnote to Israel-Lebanon report

In August, BBC reporter Orla Guerin filed a report from the town of Bint Jbeil in the midst of the Israel-Lebanon conflict. The report was one of the more blatant examples of BBC bias on the Middle East conflict, and blogger Drinking From Home exposed the numerous factual errors in the report.

In Australia, SBS aired the same report on 15 August.

Nearly four months on, and with one feisty librarian on the case, SBS issued an apology clarification for airing the error-riddled report:

World News Australia (15/8/2006)
On August 15, 2006, World News Australia carried a report on destruction in the town of Bint Jbeil in Southern Lebanon during the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict. The report stated that "this town has really been wiped out."

The centre of the town did suffer extensive damage and could be said to have been "wiped out" but some areas of the town suffered less damage.

A subsequent bulletin of the United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs states that "1,200 houses out of 1,500 were destroyed in Bint Jbeil"


It wouldn't even qualify as a Clayton's apology. As for a discussion of why terrorists chose to base themselves in a civilian area, leading to the tragedy at the centre of the report, the search for balance continues.

UPDATE 5/12, 10:30am: Should have linked to the clarification. Sorry 'bout that.

Comments

Anonymous said…
well done ari glad to see you are so observant s
4 December 2006 at 18:09
Anonymous said…
Good on you, Ari, for picking up what the feisty librarian reported. Where is the balance from SBS? It certainly does appear to be a "clayton's apology"!

By the way, SBS refused to deal with the complaint at all until it was sent to them by snail mail.

J.
4 December 2006 at 19:17
Anonymous said…
Hello, can we accept SBS's claytons apology? Six months down the track and is that all they can come up with?

It's pretty poor, isn't it. Is that what SBS calls balanced reporting?

Feisty librarian - keep the barstards honest.

Aunty
4 December 2006 at 19:23
Anonymous said…
Ari, you know what I'm going to post on this topic.

Gee only 1200 out of 1500 houses destroyed. Hmm. How widespread were the Hezbollah forces? I'd say that four fifths is pretty much wiping out the neighbourhood. Sounds pretty balanced to me. Did you want them to parrot the Israeli propaganda, without questioning the facts, just like another prominent Australian American media mogul?

It's a shame that 300 houses remain. That's exactly one fifth. If I lived a bit closer, I'd pop on over and put in a couple of letterbox bombs, just to add to the Israeli artwork and finish the job off for them. (that's if I wouldn't be blown to bits by the millions of unexploded cluster bomblets littering the landscape of southen lebanon, effectively making much of Southern Lebanon uninhabitable.)

This aint about the Jews, but any wonder why people hate Israel? Behave like a bully and you will be hated like one.
6 December 2006 at 14:18
Anonymous said…
The BBC report is not biased, you are. There is a concerted campaign to undermine the editorial integrity of independent public service broadcasters. If the BBC or ABC do not report the neocon view of the Middle East they are labelled as 'biased' and pressured to toe the line.
9 December 2006 at 18:52
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Can conspicuous consumption save the news business?

Image
It’s a dire time for the news industry. Readers are flooding to social media for content, advertisers are moving with them and costs are being cut at a brutal rate in a desperate bid to meet falling revenue. It is increasingly clear that business models that depend on amassing large audiences in order to provide a forum for advertising will always struggle against the “niche of one” audience that social media platforms can provide for advertisers. There’s been lots of talk lately about ways to fund public interest journalism. One idea is to tax the online aggregators – Facebook and Google, primarily – that sell advertising against the news content of others to support news organisations. Another is to make news subscriptions or donations to its producers tax deductible.  Both ideas are worth considering, but they do not abrogate the need for news organisations to seek better ways to draw revenue from consumers.  (It is alarming that discussion of efforts to build a
Read more

Thanks for all the fish

After 13 years with Blogspot, I've shifted blogging platform. So (drumroll, please), you can find my new blog here . Ari on the Web will stay online, so you can scroll through the archives for all sorts of embarrassing tidbits. To make it easier to find some of my writing on particular themes, I've grouped some pieces together under a few labels: Cancer Fatherhood Indonesia travels North Korea travels United States travels Undergraduate days   So as they say here in my new home of Japan, so long, and thanks for the all the fish.
Read more

Much in a name

Image
Naming a child is one of the greatest responsibilities a parent has. Short of some dramatic action by its bearer, a person is stuck with a name for life and all the nominative determinist consequences that flow from it. While opening it up to the whims of the democratic process was one option ( Baby McBabyface? ) and engaging the services of a baby name consultant was another, Melanie and I opted to take on the responsibility ourselves. Our criteria? We wanted a name that suited a child as well as the adult she will become. We wanted a name that conveyed both warmth and gravitas. We wanted a name that carried some broader meaning, within our family and beyond it. We wanted a name that was easy to say and easy to spell. And we wanted a name that sounded good, in its entirety and when each part stood on its own. For us, it wasn’t just the given names that needed to be chosen. With Melanie and I each keeping our family names when we got married, our daughter’s family name also
Read more