Early on the morning of November 23rd, the BBC News website published a report credited to Jaroslav Lukiv and titled “Beirut hit by massive Israeli strikes – local media” which opened as follows:
“Israel has carried out massive air strikes on central Beirut, Lebanese media say, and there are reports of several deaths.
An eight-storey residential building was completely destroyed with five missiles in the capital’s Basta district, according to Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA).
Hezbollah’s al-Manar media outlet quoted the Lebanese health ministry as saying four people were killed and 23 injured. Videos have now emerged purportedly showing the wreckage of a building.
The Israeli military made no immediate comments on the reported strikes early on Saturday.”
Over the next fifteen hours, that report was amended sixteen times and in the twelfth to sixteenth versions its headline read “’Are we not humans?’: Anger in Beirut as massive Israeli strike kills 15”.
The version currently appearing online is headlined “‘Are we not humans?’: Anger in Beirut as massive Israeli strike kills 20” and is credited to the BBC Beirut bureau’s Hugo Bachega, with “[a]dditional reporting by Dearbail Jordan and Jaroslav Lukiv in London”. It includes a filmed report by Bachega which also appeared separately on the BBC News website.
In the body of the report, readers discover that the paraphrased quote in that headline is attributed to one person.
““It was a very horrible explosion. All the windows and glasses were over me, my wife and my children. My home now is a battlefield,” said 55-year-old Ali Nassar, who lived in a nearby building.
“Even if one person is hiding here…Should you destroy buildings where people are sleeping inside? Is it necessary to kill all the people for one person? Or we’re not humans? That’s what I’m asking.””
With nothing to tell BBC audiences in his own words about the practice employed by Hizballah and other terrorist organisations of using civilians as human shields by operating in civilian areas, Bachega continues:
“According to the Israeli public broadcaster Kan, the attack was an attempt to kill Mohammed Haydar, a top Hezbollah official. Hezbollah MP Amin Sherri said none of the group’s leaders were in the building hit, and Haydar’s fate remained unclear.”
Notably, Bachega fails to expand on that minimalist description of Haydar and so BBC audiences are not aware that, as reported by the Alma Center and others, he is also:
“…a member of Hezbollah’s Jihad Council, who currently serves de facto as responsible for Hezbollah’s military operations following the assassinations of Fuad Shakar, Ibrahim Aqeel, and Ali Karaki. […] Haidar was a close advisor to Nasrallah and among other roles, was responsible for coordinating Hezbollah’s military activities in Yemen and Iraq and maintaining connections with the Houthis and Shia militias. Additional reports link him to the Captagon industry, which is central to Hezbollah’s economy. Before his appointment to the Jihad Council, he was a Hezbollah parliament member. During his years with Hezbollah, he performed numerous roles before being elected to parliament, including deputy head of the Executive Council and even managing Al-Manar.”
Neither did Bachega bother to clarify that:
“The United States Federal Register lists Haydar as a specially designated global terrorist wanted by the United States. Al-Hadath reported that he has a $7 million bounty on his head. US State Department records show that he was designated on September 10, 2019.”
That missing background information clearly impairs the ability of BBC audiences to put the quote from a local resident, which Bachega chose to highlight both in the body of his report and in its provocative headline, into its correct context.
Later in his report, Bachega tells readers that:
“The escalation comes as renewed negotiations to end more than one year of conflict showed initial signs of progress. This week, Amos Hochstein, who has led the Biden administration’s diplomatic efforts, held talks in Lebanon and Israel to try to advance a US-drafted deal.
Since the conflict intensified in late September, Lebanese authorities have said any deal should be limited to the terms of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel.
The resolution includes the withdrawal of Hezbollah’s fighters and weapons in areas between the Blue Line – the unofficial frontier between Lebanon and Israel – and the Litani river, about 30km (20 miles) from the boundary with Israel.
Israel says that was never fully respected, while Lebanon says Israeli violations included military flights over Lebanese territory.” [emphasis added]
Regular consumers of BBC content are of course all too familiar with both its journalists’ overuse of the “Israel says” formula as a means of usually unnecessary qualification as well as the chronic failure to explain UN SC resolution 1701 and why it has not been properly implemented in all the years since it was passed.
Nevertheless, Bachega’s portrayal wrongly suggests that Israel is the only party claiming that 1701 has not been put into effect and he himself clearly has no interest in informing BBC audiences in his own words that the fact that the Hizballah terrorist organisation’s “fighters and weapons” have remained under the noses of the UN forces in southern Lebanon for over 18 years is part of the background to the current conflict.
However, if readers of this report perhaps thought that Bachega’s framing was merely the result of unfortunate phrasing, two later reports indicate otherwise.
“Israel and Hezbollah close to Lebanon ceasefire deal”, by Robert Greenall and Frank Gardner, November 25th 2024:
“Lebanese authorities have said any ceasefire deal should be limited to the terms of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel.
The resolution includes the withdrawal of Hezbollah’s fighters and weapons in areas between the Blue Line – the unofficial frontier between Lebanon and Israel – and the Litani river, about 30km (20 miles) from the boundary with Israel.
Israel says that was never fully respected, while Lebanon says Israeli violations included military flights over Lebanese territory.”
“Israel cabinet to meet to discuss Lebanon ceasefire deal”, by Ido Vock, November 26th 2024: (later retitled and reattributed) 
“Lebanese authorities have said any ceasefire deal should be limited to the terms of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel.
The resolution includes the withdrawal of Hezbollah’s fighters and weapons in areas between the Blue Line – the unofficial frontier between Lebanon and Israel – and the Litani river, about 30km (18 miles) from the boundary with Israel.
Israel says that was never fully respected, while Lebanon says Israeli violations included military flights over Lebanese territory.”
“What we know about Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire deal”, November 26th 2024:
“Under resolution 1701, areas south of the Litani should be free of any armed personnel or weapons other than those of the Lebanese state and the UN peacekeeping force (Unifil).
But both sides claimed violations of the resolution.
Israel says Hezbollah was allowed to build extensive infrastructure in the area, while Lebanon says Israel’s violations included military flights over its territory.”
In other words, the BBC has decided to frame over 18 years of amply documented failure on the part of the Lebanese government, the international community and the United Nations to implement the UNSC resolution which ended the Second Lebanon War (and by that, to create the conditions leading to the third) as something that merely “Israel says” is the case.
