On the afternoon of December 5th the BBC Jerusalem bureau’s Yolande Knell had a report published on the BBC News website under the headline “Amnesty accuses Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza”.
For many years Amnesty International has been one of the primary NGOs quoted, promoted and interviewed by the BBC, most of which come overwhelmingly from one side of the spectrum as far as their approach to Israel is concerned and some of which are active in ‘lawfare’ and propaganda campaigns against Israel.
The BBC serially fails to meet its own editorial guidelines by clarifying the “particular viewpoints”, affiliations and sources of funding of those NGOs and their representatives and Yolande Knell’s latest report is no exception.
As was the case in February 2022 when the BBC News website chose to provide worldwide amplification for an Amnesty International report accusing Israel of ‘apartheid’, information concerning AI’s record on racism, its long history of anti-Israel activity and the “particular viewpoints” of some of its staff is withheld from readers of Knell’s report.
Knell’s sole unhelpful description of Amnesty International – which, as readers may remember, called for “a comprehensive arms embargo” on Israel just two weeks after Hamas’ October 7th 2023 invasion and massacre – portrays it as “[t]he UK-based human rights group”.
Knell’s 686-word report includes 176 words of amplification of Amnesty International’s talking points concerning the much criticised report it released earlier the same day, with readers told that:
“[Amnesty International] said its conclusion was based on “dehumanising and genocidal statements” by Israeli officials, digital images and witness testimony and must serve as “a wake-up call” to the international community.”
The fact that Amnesty International distorted those statements made by Israeli officials does not get a mention in Knell’s account.
Neither has she anything to tell her readers about the fact that the executive summary of the report opens by completely erasing Hamas’ invasion of Israeli territory and perpetration of unprecedented atrocities as well as describing a territory from which Israel disengaged over 18 years earlier as “occupied”.
“On 7 October 2023, Israel embarked on a military offensive on the occupied [sic] Gaza Strip (Gaza) of unprecedented magnitude, scale and duration.”
Similarly Knell does not bother to inform her readers that, as noted by John Spencer and Arsen Ostrovsky and others, Amnesty International’s report distorts the legal definition of genocide, to which she herself referred in a televised report on the same topic and quotes in this article.
“Perhaps knowing it doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on, Amnesty has resorted to manufacturing its own definition of genocide. Amnesty claims that the universally established and the sole accepted legal definition as outlined in the Genocide Convention of 1948 which requires the existence of intent is an “overly cramped interpretation of international jurisprudence and one that would effectively preclude a finding of genocide in the context of an armed conflict.””
Knell’s report also includes 120 words describing reactions to the AI report from Israel’s ministry of foreign affairs and armed forces but, interestingly, makes no mention of the fact that (not for the first time) it was also criticised by Amnesty International’s own staff in Israel – despite the BBC being aware of that part of the story.
“Amnesty Israel, the local branch of the Amnesty International organization, rejected a report released Thursday by its parent group that accused Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, with some members accusing the report’s authors of reaching a “predetermined conclusion.” […]
In a separate statement obtained by the Haaretz newspaper, several members of Amnesty Israel and Jewish members of Amnesty International went one step further and accused the report of producing an “artificial analysis” of the situation in the Gaza Strip.
“From the outset, the report was referred to in international correspondence as the ‘genocide report,’ even when the research was still in its initial stages,” Haaretz cited the Amnesty members as saying. […]
They accused the report of having been “motivated by a desire to support a popular narrative among Amnesty International’s target audience” that stemmed from “an atmosphere within Amnesty International of minimizing the seriousness of the October 7 massacre. It is a failure – and sometimes even a refusal – to address the Israeli victims in a personal and humane manner.””
By way of background to the story, Knell tells her readers that:
“Since then [October 7th 2023], at least 44,532 people have been killed in Gaza, mostly civilians, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, whose figures are seen as reliable by the UN.”
As regular readers may recall, Knell – along with some of her colleagues from BBC Verify – promoted similar claims in the past, despite the fact that for at least a decade Hamas has employed a policy of deliberately failing to distinguish between civilian and combatant casualties for propaganda purposes and its presentation of casualty figure ratios in past rounds of conflict has been shown to be unreliable.
Notably, the majority of Knell’s report – 291 words – relates to a different topic: an incident which took place in the Gaza Strip the previous day and which was already reported on the BBC News website on the evening of December 4th. Like her colleague David Gritten, Knell did not bother to clarify to BBC audiences that the target of that strike near Khan Younis was a Hamas commander.
As noted by those Israeli members of Amnesty International staff and others, this latest report from a once respected NGO which long since lost its way is nothing but politically motivated propaganda to which, as we see in Knell’s report and additional BBC content, the corporation is perfectly happy to provide entirely uncritical amplification, regardless of its supposed commitment to accurate and impartial journalism and the obligations laid out in its own editorial guidelines.
Related Articles:
BBC’S ‘HARDTALK’ MISSES THE MARK IN AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INTERVIEW
BBC NEWS CONTINUES TO PROMOTE HAMAS CASUALTY CLAIMS
BBC’S BOWEN STILL PROMOTING ICJ DISINFORMATION AFTER CORRECTIONS
AI is a very small organisation – check out the personnel and staff from https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/-/charity-details/294230/trustees
https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/-/charity-details/1051681/trustees
and their own site https://www.amnesty.org.uk/meet-aiuk-charitable-trust-board-members
This was also reported by The Guardian, and it’s quite worrying. Both the BBC and Guardian are leading journals of record, and it’s simply not possible that either is mistaken or anything but neutral, so what/who are we supposed to believe?