When is a terrorist not a terrorist?

When the BBC reports it. More of the sympathy for terrorists the leftists and their media love to use.

When is a terrorist not a terrorist? When he is on the BBC, of course. Where - according to the corporation's editorial guidelines - "the word 'terrorist' itself can be a barrier rather than aid to understanding".

Bomber, attacker, insurgent, militant - all are fine by the Beeb because they carry no "emotional or value judgments". And heaven forbid anyone get emotional about the deaths of at least 52 people in the London bombings last week.

Within hours of the explosions, a memo was sent to senior editors on the main BBC news programmes from Helen Boaden, head of news. While she was aware "we are dancing on the head of a pin", the BBC was very worried about offending its World Service audience, she said.

BBC output was not to describe the killers of more than 50 in London as "terrorists" although - nonsensically - they could refer to the bombings as "terror attacks". And while the guidelines generously concede that non-BBC should be allowed to use the "t" word, BBC online was not even content with that and excised it from its report of Tony Blair's statement to the Commons.

Link

politics

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

If anyone can't see anti-Blair political motivations in this they are blind. Sure, they are concerned with offending the "world audience" because of their bottom line, but they also know that they are going to have to keep reporting on the RESPONSE that Blair came up with. If they wanted to divert some of the angst back at Blair, they didn't need to portray the terrorists as the monsters they are.

It's sadder that, like PBS, their network uses it's governmental license and resources to actually effect political sentiment.

Successfully updated karma reason!