Some time ago, I wrote about why I thought BBC tends towards some type of information. At that time, I was talking about the last Gaza conflict.
Now, BBC has been accused of refusing to broadcast a charity appeal for Gaza aid.
I must say that I’m fully disappointed with this. To me, BBC was one of the most reliable information sources in the world and all this came down when I listened to the news talking about this frustrating refusal (apart from my experience a month earlier).
Yesterday, BBC Radio has aired an interview with British politicians who are appealing to BBC to broadcast this ad and even thought its director – Mark Thompson - stands adamantly opposed to it.
As he writes in a blog post on the corporation's Web site:
"We concluded that we could not broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully constructed, without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story”
"Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programs but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations. The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story," Thompson said.
"Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues -- the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it -- are both at the heart of the story and contentious," he added.
If you have read the text I posted earlier, you’ll se an interesting experience I’ve had with CNN and BBC. I tested both broadcasting corporations to know if they really were impartial - or not.
CNN showed itself totally impartial even when involving delicate issues such as Iraq war and so forth, very contrary to BBC which is prone to one side only.
It’s disappointing because for long years apart I had BBC as the #1 Broadcasting TV in the world. Now, it’s just confirmed what I had suspected before: such as lots of broadcasting corporations in the world – including Brazilian media – BBC is nothing but a company which is compromised with someone’s interests and not with reality.
I know that there’s always interests behind the scenes, still more when concerning about companies that have the power of using words around the world. Nevertheless, they should never present themselves as prejudiced even if they disagree with some reports.
The truth and reality must be priority, ever. International (and also national) broadcasting TVs, radios and even newspapers, should never be influenced by this kind or paradigm. If they do so, they will undermine its credibility along with its watchers/viewers/readers. They also might realise that to get its confidence back will not be an easy task.
Then, do I consider BBC partial? No, I don’t. But I still believe that this corporation is credible in spite of casting doubts over its preferences. However, I’m sure she only broadcasts what is of its own interest and the altogether compromise with the audience is set aside, unfortunately.
I hope one day the BBC might rethink it and be the same as it was used to be in the past.
Now, in my point of view, CNN International is the most reliable news source in the planet.