If you watched yesterday’s Andrew Marr programme on BBC1, you would have seen a British TV landmark. To judge from its contents, the programme was the first to have been edited by the leader of Hezbollah, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.
Most of it was, rightly, given over to the events in the Middle East. But of the four guests interviewed, not one had anything but bile to pour over Israel. Up first was Glenys Kinnock MEP, remarking how “heartening” it is that the Middle East minister, Kim Howells, has begun “a shifting of ground away from defence of Israel”. Alongside her was Matthew Parris, who repeated the hostile views he has already made clear to Times readers. A Lebanese minister followed. Then Sir Menzies Campbell, a man whose entire career has been spent attacking Israeli policy, whatever it happens to be.
All were treated with deference by Andrew Marr, as he invited them to honour us with their sagacity.
Not that we should be surprised. The BBC’s coverage has been overwhelmingly one-sided, with presenters and reporters editorialising against what they universally refer to as “Israeli attacks on Lebanon”.
Right at the beginning it was clear how the BBC would cover the operation, when a film on Newsnight concluded with the reporter, Peter Marshall, remarking across a picture of a blown-up bridge: “All this destruction. And still more threatened” — as if the Israelis are on some kind of wilful destruction spree, dropping bombs for the sheer hell of it, rather than taking action to destroy Hezbollah’s capacity to murder any more Israelis.
On Saturday the BBC’s website helpfully carried full details of the assembly points for that day’s anti-Israel march. Nowhere did it give the same detail for yesterday’s rally in support of Israel.
See also this response from a BBC secret Zionist.