Ten journalists from CNN and the BBC have raised significant concerns about pro-Israel bias in their coverage of the Gaza conflict, alleging violations of journalistic principles.

They shared their experiences during an interview with Al Jazeera’s The Listening Post, contributing to a documentary titled Failing Gaza: Behind the Lens of Western Media.

The journalists accused their networks of manipulating reports to favour the Israeli narrative and failing to hold Israeli officials accountable for their actions.

Adam (not his real name), a CNN journalist, expressed his disillusionment after witnessing a shift in editorial policies that, in his view, often compromised accuracy.

He recalled a notable incident in November when CNN’s International Diplomatic Editor, Nic Robertson, accompanied the Israeli military to Gaza’s al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital.

During the broadcast, an Israeli spokesperson claimed the hospital was used by Hamas to conceal Israeli captives and presented a document purportedly supporting this claim.

However, Adam revealed that the document was merely a calendar listing the days of the week in Arabic.

Despite warnings from Arabic-speaking staff about the document’s authenticity prior to the broadcast, the report went ahead, leading Adam to describe it as “an embarrassing moment” for CNN.

He emphasized that this mistake could have been avoided had the network taken its staff’s concerns seriously.

Adam further criticized CNN’s editorial policy, which requires journalists to confirm airstrikes in Gaza with Israeli officials before reporting.

He described this as a clear double standard, noting that no such practice would be tolerated in any other conflict zone.

“We would not be doing this in any other place,” he stated, indicating that reporters wouldn’t ask, for instance, the Russians whether they had bombed a hospital in Kyiv.

Sara, a former BBC journalist, echoed these frustrations regarding the BBC’s approach to interview selections.

She pointed out that Palestinian speakers faced greater scrutiny in the vetting process compared to their Israeli counterparts.

Palestinian guests were often flagged for using terms like “Zionist,” while Israeli speakers faced minimal pushback, even when making unsubstantiated claims.

For example, during an interview with Israeli politician Idan Roll, BBC presenter Maryam Moshiri did not challenge Roll’s claims about Hamas fighters committing horrific acts against children, including unsubstantiated allegations that they had set babies on fire.

This selective vetting appeared to demonstrate an editorial bias against Palestinian perspectives.

BBC staff have expressed growing concerns about the network’s coverage of the ongoing crisis, repeatedly raising issues with the director general.

In February, Al Jazeera obtained an email signed by more than twenty journalists warning that the BBC’s reporting risks aiding and abetting genocide.

The staff emphasized the importance of reflecting the International Court of Justice’s ruling, which found it “plausible” that Israel is violating the Genocide Convention in Gaza and must take measures to prevent genocidal acts.

“We are worried that failure to do so constitutes a public disservice or, at worst, aiding and abetting genocide through story suppression,” the email said, referring to Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide.

Over the past year, experts and veteran reporters have raised concerns about the portrayal of Palestinians in mainstream media, accusing outlets of minimizing Palestinian suffering while amplifying Israeli perspectives.

This criticism has led to protests and resignations among some journalists at major outlets, including The New York Times and the BBC, who cite bias in reporting.

In response to these allegations, the BBC and CNN have both denied any bias in their coverage.

Public criticize western media for bias in Israel-Palestine conflict coverage

Under Al Jazeera’s social media platforms, including YouTube and X (formerly Twitter), many users expressed their gratitude for the network’s reporting on perceived biases in the media’s coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

A notable comment came from Ghida Fakhry, a former lead anchor at Al Jazeera English, who questioned when major outlets like the BBC and CNN would cease to propagate Israel’s justifications for what she termed “mass civilian murder” under the pretext of targeting military “command centres.”

She pointed out the lack of evidence produced by these media organizations, highlighting a troubling trend of portraying war crimes as acts of self-defense.

Further amplifying this sentiment, another user remarked on the crucial importance of hearing from journalists with firsthand experience in conflict zones, as this helps illuminate the alleged pro-Israel bias in the reporting of outlets like CNN and the BBC concerning Gaza.

This perspective was echoed by yet another commenter, who noted that CNN and the BBC have faced exposure regarding their biased coverage, which often employs double standards that obscure the reality of Israel’s aggressive actions against the besieged enclave.

Concerns about media bias were pervasive, with one user articulating that the coverage of the Israel-Gaza conflict raises significant alarms.

They emphasized the necessity for more balanced reporting to ensure an accurate and fair portrayal of events.

Another user criticized CNN for its perceived complicity in the genocide against Palestinians, claiming it serves as a champion for Israel alongside prominent publications like the Washington Post and the New York Times.

They shared a poignant narrative of the violence occurring on 7 October, emphasizing that many victims were targeted by Israeli forces during their operations against Hamas.

Criticism of the coverage continued, with a user denouncing CNN and BBC News for their perceived failures to report on atrocities and war crimes, including Israel’s raids on Al Jazeera offices to prevent exposure of these acts.

French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for halting arms deliveries to Israel for use in Gaza has sparked strong backlash from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Macron made the remarks during an interview with France Inter radio, aired on Saturday (5 Oct), expressing his concern over continued hostilities despite ceasefire calls. He urged the cessation of weapons deliveries, calling for a return to political solutions.

Netanyahu, in response, swiftly condemned Macron’s remarks in a video released by his office, labelling the call for an arms embargo a “disgrace.” He said that Israel would continue its efforts with or without international support, adding, “Shame on them,” referring to Macron and other Western leaders who have called for restricting arms sales to Israel.

Macron’s comments were made in the context of escalating tensions between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The French president expressed his opposition to Israel’s ground operations in Lebanon, emphasising that avoiding escalation was critical, and that Lebanon “cannot become a new Gaza.” Despite his criticism, Macron reaffirmed Israel’s right to defend itself but warned that the conflict could fuel hatred and instability in the region.

On Sunday (6 Oct), Macron and Netanyahu had a phone conversation, during which Macron reiterated France’s “unwavering commitment” to Israel’s security.

However, Macron maintained his stance against arms deliveries being used in Gaza, noting that France had not supplied any weapons to Israel. He described the ongoing conflict as a mistake that risks undermining Israel’s long-term security.

Netanyahu, for his part, argued that the fight against Hezbollah and its Iranian backers was essential for regional stability.

In his statement following the call, Netanyahu said that all “civilised countries” should stand with Israel as it battles the forces of “barbarism” led by Iran. He added that any country not standing with Israel was supporting Iran and its proxies, which he described as the “axis of evil.”

Macron’s comments have generated significant diplomatic friction between the two leaders. Macron expressed regret over Israel’s decision to launch ground operations in Lebanon, pointing to joint calls by both the US and France for a ceasefire in the region. He noted that the responsibility for military action lay with Netanyahu.

Despite the tense exchange, Macron continues to frame France as a close ally of Israel. His office released a statement describing Netanyahu’s response as “excessive and detached” from the friendship between the two nations. Macron’s government maintains its position of support for Israel’s right to self-defence while advocating for a political solution to the conflict.

The conversation between Macron and Netanyahu comes just ahead of the first anniversary of Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, which resulted in a complex tragedy.

Approximately 1,200 people were killed, including many who lost their lives as Israeli military forces carried out the controversial Hannibal Directive. This directive, designed to prevent the capture of Israeli soldiers by authorising extreme measures to thwart kidnappings, was widely reported and documented by international media.

Since that day, Israel’s military response has intensified in Gaza, and its airstrikes have caused significant casualties. Many Israel hostages are believed to have been since killed in the crossfire, as Israeli forces reportedly employed heavy shelling and airstrikes in areas where hostages were held and even shot as they fled from their captives.

The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza reports that more than 41,000 people have been killed since the conflict began, including civilians trapped in densely populated areas.

Tensions between Israel and Lebanon have also been rising, with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) engaging Hezbollah militants in the border region. Both sides have sustained casualties, and the fear of a broader conflict looms.

Macron’s concerns over a second front in Lebanon have led to his calls for restraint and political dialogue.