BBC’s Disgusting Response to Olympic Complaints
July 24, 2012 13:51 by Simon Plosker
At HonestReporting, we recognize and credit our readership for taking action against the media when they are sufficiently motivated to do so. While it is our job to encourage activism, we know that our readers are not automatons who will write letters to editors or complain to the media at our say so.
While we can alert the public to the issues, it is ultimately an exercise in free choice and independent and informed thought as to whether or not someone will take action. Unfortunately the BBC evidently believes the opposite.
Many people who complained to the BBC about its failure to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital on its Olympic country website profile were answered with the following included in a canned response:
We have received a range of feedback about the errors on the BBC Sport Olympics page and we feel it is worth explaining that a considerable number of those have been generated by online lobby activity.
What exactly is the inference of referring to “online lobby activity?”
Does the BBC consider your individual complaints less worthy simply because the information was passed on to the complainant by way of HonestReporting or any number of other organizations?
Not to mention the particularly insidious connotation behind referring to a “lobby” when it comes to an issue associated with Jews or Israel. Is the BBC insinuating that the issue is being driven by dark forces behind the scenes and that the complaints are insincere?
This is simply a cheap and nasty way of diverting attention from the real issue.
When people take the time and effort to complain, it is irrelevant how they came to be notified or encouraged to do so. Every individual complaint deserves the full attention of the BBC without prejudice as to whether or not the complainant happens to be a reader of HonestReporting or any other organization.
For the BBC to say otherwise is disrespectful and the accusation of some form of deceitful lobbying is utterly disgusting.
jonathan Klineberg
3:28 pm
Jul 26, 2012
I live today in the far south-west of the country, a region with a tiny Jewish population. The most respected religious leader though in Cornwall is the Chief Rabbi of Great Britain; when he came to speak in Truro City Hall a few years ago, tickets sold out months beforehand and he received a fantastic reception.
Most people here have probably not ever met a Jew yet every summer hundreds of ultra religious Jews come here on holiday staying at the local University and no-one, and I mean no-one bats an eyelid.
Can you imagine that happening in say, Texas?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
14 
3
Abu Nudnik
4:17 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Yes I can. Have you ever been to Texas?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
12 
1
Mike Shapiro
4:17 am
Jul 27, 2012
Been to Texas! Korrect.
Lived in NC. In outlying parts of England, do they take off your hat, looking for the horns?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Joseph
3:42 pm
Jul 26, 2012
The solution to this is simple. The Israeli government press office should reject the credentials of any BBC correspondent and turn them back at any news event. Lets see how they like it when Israel refuses to recognize the BBC as a “Journalistic” entity (I say that with great doubt).
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
53 
1
Judith
4:02 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Your idea to treat BBC reporters by not recognizing them at any Israeli news event is perfect. Though it won’t change the BBC’s (collective, blatant) anti-Semitism which has been apparent for many years, it will show them they are insignificant. However, when the BBC refuses to print the truth, that’s adds fuel to the fire. So they are guilty on 2 counts! If they want to remain anti-Israel or anti-Semitic, you can’t change that. But to show them up as liars who refuse to print the truth is a violation of all journalistic ethics, making them no better than the al-Qaida-Hezbollah-Palestinian-type terroristic vermin they support.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
30 
0
Meir
8:01 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Well put. This would be the perfect reply. Not only that, but Israel’s Ministry of Communication could cite “evenhandedness” [whatever that means]. What was good for the Perfidy of Albion which supplied Arabs with arms in 1947/48 yet refused the same to Israel, should be good for us. Get those insidious pro-Arabs out of the press rooms.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
15 
0
Josephine Bacon
3:56 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Another example of how the BBC thinks of Israel was a report by correspondent Lise Doucet who is normally accredited to Pakistan. When asked about the huge stockpile of chemical weapons hoarded by Syria she replied “Well, they are only for Israel”. Ok, well that’s all right then!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
34 
0
Stephen
4:07 pm
Jul 26, 2012
I wrote to the BBC and in their “independent wisdom” they responded that their (revised) statement that Jerusalem is the “Seat of Government and Tel Aviv the location of most foreign Embassies” is in line with their Policy, thus one can only deduce from this egotistical anodyne reply that the BBC are the manufacturers and therefore Guardians of International Policy.
To consciously deny a legitimate State and Member of the United Nations its’ Capital is nothing but a blatant attempt to negate a universally, (apart from the bulk of Arab Nations) accepted reality.
The BBC has little or no credibility any longer as an Independent reporter of News.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
35 
0
Mrs Liliane Fredericks
4:15 pm
Jul 26, 2012
The BBC sadly is no longer competent in covering events whether news or sports.
Maybe they will cover the Olympic Games with impartiality, maybe not…. Certainly Aljazeera is far superior in their coverage of all news!
It now seems that in their arrogance, they cannot accept that they fail in their duty to inform their viewers in a balance manner.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
17 
0
Abu Nudnik
4:22 pm
Jul 26, 2012
It’s like the ye olde Engelond that borrowed money from Jews, kicked them out, invited them back, rinse, repeat, rinse.
It’s preposterous to say that the organization of protest by any means makes the protest null and void. That’s like saying that, although the people have spoken and chosen to vote for Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, we are going to ignore that poll and go on as before because that very opposition party organized the vote against us.
Preposterous even without the anti-Semitic connotations.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
12 
2
B'Chayil Ben Dan
5:29 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Mr. Abu Nudnik, me thinkest that thou art a very shrewd and wily devil in disguise. Remember that is was Ye Olde Engelond that helped to re-establish a homeland for the Jewish people. with the Balfour declaration: “His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” Nice try at being cute and arrogant.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
3
Barry
8:56 pm
Jul 26, 2012
True perhaps. But it was also Ye Olde Engelond that divided and conquered most of the Middle East, creating artificial borders, artificial countries, artificial capitals, and permanent chaos throughout the region. And they did it all out of the kindness of their hearts I’ll bet. It divided the British Mandate of Palestine into three parts rather than the two that it was supposed to have. It lopped off all of Transjordan and poof! A country was born, and they get to designate their own capital! And no one says otherwise. Even fantasy countries (Palestine) have their own capitals recognized by the BBC. But Jews don’t count enough to be able to designate one of their own. history be damned!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
0
Nathan Zafran
11:48 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Barry,
you by-passed the havoc the Brits created in the Saudi peninsula, but above all there was one more abominable sin. In 1945, after the collapse of Vichy France, the Brits handed over the Golan Heights to the French, thus creating the future part of Syria (the Levant). The Golan Heights, which were never Syrian, had one Arab village (Khushnyia), four Druze villages and one Circasian town – Kuneitra. The Syrians who were there for the whole of twenty two years now claim ownership.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
8 
0
Barry
12:53 am
Jul 28, 2012
Nathan, excellent point! the British rearranged the mid-east as they saw fit and today that mess is taken as a geographic fact. that the Jewish capital had existed for centuries prior to the existence of most countries on the planet means little to nothing to polite society (& certainly less to the BBC). the absolute chutzpah of not only denying the well known historical Jewish connection with Jerusalem, but at the same time giving in to Muslim revisionism & false claims to that same capital, and then actually assigning it to a non-existent state as its own, can point to nothing other than antisemitism and discrimination. the BBC diminishes itself greatly with each such absurdity.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
Phil
5:00 pm
Jul 27, 2012
England prior to the founding of the State of Israel was a mixed bag for Jews and Eretz Israel. The best book on this is “Battleground”. I can’t recall the author, but I am sure you can find it on Amazon. Bottom line: England proper was divided among pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist camps, but the military government in place during the Mandatory period in Palestine was horribly anti-Zionist and fully Arabist. This dichotomy resulted in the pogroms of Palestine before WWII. There just seemed to be no will or ability on the part of Parliament to reign in the rogue military governors in Palestine, assuming they even knew what was going on.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
B'Chayil Ben Dan
5:21 pm
Jul 26, 2012
I sent a complaint to the BBC and got a response back that said an “Online lobby activity” was behind the efforts to name Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. I am sure they meant Honest Reporting. Rather than deal with the issue, the BBC has chosen to once again place politics above the truth. If East Jerusalem had not been named as the capital of “Palestine”, it might be less odious. But, because the BBC stuck its journalistic finger into the eye of Israel as well as the Jewish people, they must be taken to task. We all know who is behind this. Regardless of that fact, we must be tenacious in our response to outright lies and falsehoods.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
18 
0
Dee Burdine
7:06 pm
Jul 26, 2012
BBC put the capitol which is given by the country. Where the country conducts its government. Jerusalem is where Israel headquarters. It is ABC’s job to report news not make policy. It is a news organization, right?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
0
Jaci
7:37 pm
Jul 26, 2012
That was the response I got from them after my complaint too :/ I didn’t understand
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
Dan Martin
10:40 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Arab organisations have been spending millions in the UK on public relations (propaganda) for years. I wonder how many commentators, correspondents and presenters they have bought up to now. But even that does not produce the pure venom of anti-semitism which appears to be endemic in the senior levels of the BBC. Many of the most vicious offenders are, regrettably, Jews who have embraced over-enthusiastically extreme Left-wing dogma and are more anti-Israel than “normal” anti-Semites.
Perhaps Honest Reporting could do us all a favour and name and shame the BBC directors and managers involved in making these shameful judgments and decisions.
Definitely expel BBC correspondents from Israel.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
9 
0
Ruth
10:50 pm
Jul 26, 2012
Got the canned response and replied: I am writing to request a Stage 2 Independent Investigation of my complaint about the BBC Sport website, which omits a reference to the capital of Israel. The BBC Complaints department may regard this matter resolved, but I do not.
Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. The BBC is not required to like this or to agree with it, but the standards of impartial journalism require it to report that the capital of a sovereign nation is where that country says it is. It is not the BBC’s role to decide where the capital of any nation is located.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
13 
0
Ruth
10:51 pm
Jul 26, 2012
The reference to online lobbying suggests that the BBC does not understand how social media work. I became aware of the situation through a friend’s Facebook post, and posted information about it on my page, where it was picked up by other friends who may or may not have taken action. This is social media in action; to refer to it as “online lobbying” gives the impression that the BBC is out of touch.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
0
Ruth
10:51 pm
Jul 26, 2012
While I appreciate that you would like this issue to disappear in order to use licence fees wisely, I also note that you have seen fit to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money to prevent the dissemination of the Balen Report, the BBC’s own investigation into editorial bias in Middle East reporting. Which begs the question: if you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding it?
In closing, please note that I will be posting our correspondence to my Facebook page.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
8 
0
B'Chayil Ben Dan
11:24 pm
Jul 26, 2012
BBC=Bombastic, Biased and Culpable! The dirty little secret has been exposed. Arab funding of the BBC has trumped journalistic fairness in reporting. The BBC has basically become a mouthpiece for Arab causes that seek the destruction of Israel. In fact, it would be a misnomer to call the BBC an agency for balanced reporting or journalism. They are now a full blown propoganda machine for terrorists. Nice. And to think that once upon a time, the BBC dramatically covered the Battle of Britain when the Nazis were in full onslaught of Britian. Edward R. Murrow would be ashamed. For that matter, the BBC seems to be anti-Britian. Might as well have minarets on their web page with a muezzin.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
Simon Shiels
6:25 pm
Jul 27, 2012
Well put. The BBC is a parasite dependent on it’s host (the license fee payer) for sustenance whilst destroying the very same.
To legitimately, watch ANY TV channel in the UK you must firstly pay a fee to this bloated, biased organisation – I for one refuse. Pity so many people in this country still believe that the BBC stands for free speech and impartiality. Unfortunately none of the other TV channels have exploited this yet.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
DLF
12:49 am
Jul 27, 2012
Why talk to the BBC about right and wrong and where whos capitol is. It’s just water off a duck’s back. Instead we should be talking to our local Public Radio Stations. The ones to which I get to listen each carry a big segment of BBC News. I assume it’s that way at Public Radio Stations all over this country. We should talk to those Public Radio Stations about carrying some other news source, a source that is less biased than the BBC. That’s a form of complaint I think the BBC will listen to.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
B'Chayil Ben Dan
12:55 am
Jul 27, 2012
PBS are lackies of the Left in this country. Always have been. Their position is no different than the BBC’s. When Republican congresspeople have tried to cut funding, the Democrats and the Left get all bent out of shape. Public radio is a favorite of Muslims here in this country. I can’t see this working any more than besieging the BBC with e-mails.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
clivel
1:09 am
Jul 27, 2012
Where I am in Canada we get PBS television that carries the BBC News but not the radio stations, so I am not sure if this would apply to radio as well. The television stations are are constantly having telethons to raise funds. Maybe they will get the message if enough people call in saying that we would be happy to donate as soon as PBS replaces the BBC with a more objective source of news.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
Jaques Zielonogora
5:21 am
Jul 27, 2012
I am very disappointed with the BBC behavior! Full of prejudice!
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Simon Shiels
6:14 pm
Jul 27, 2012
Disappointed Jaques but surely not surprised. Then to compound the matter the BBC responds by making the matter worse – still no surprise, by creating a ‘seat of government’ out of Jerusalem and an ‘intended’ one of ‘East’ Jerusalem (whatever that means). What do they know that we don’t? One thing I know about the BBC it’s about as impartial as Hezbollah when it comes to Israel!
If you live in the UK and want to legitimately watch any channel on TV you must first pay a license fee to this bloated and biased organisation. I for one refuse.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
Karen
11:04 am
Jul 27, 2012
The entire city of Jerusalem has always been the capital of Israel, without exception.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
Fern
4:44 pm
Jul 27, 2012
How CAN you skip the Capitol of an Olympic country? You NEED to correct this ommission now!
And while you’re getting back into doing the right thing, you MUST honor the ’1 minute of silence’ to remember YOUR athletes killed at the Olympic Games in Munich. Aren’t THESE games for unity & goodwill with other countries?
If not, what are these athletes playing for?
It couldn’t be for politics…?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Phil
4:49 pm
Jul 27, 2012
I read the BBC reply quite differently. That lobbying activity that resulted in Israel not having a capitol may have been referring to anti-Israel groups that lobbied against listing Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol, and in favor of listing “East Jerusalem” as capitol of “Palestine.” If true, it would have been better for the committee to refer to a world almanac than simply accept the demands of people sending emails.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Fern Kurland
9:05 pm
Jul 29, 2012
FIRST GET ALL THE EMBASSIES OUT OF TEL AVIV AND INTO JERUSALEM!!! No more pussyfooting around.
Second, where is our wonderful President Obama?? Don’t you think that he could make a statement about Jerusalem being the Capital of Israel? Those of you who still support Obama need your heads examined. He continues supporting the terrorists – because that is what he is. America is doomed if he is elected, and Israel is, too. He is NO friend of Israel.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0