How did the BBC cover a letter from 36 British Jews?

In an opinion piece published at the Jewish Chronicle and titled “Stop misrepresenting British Jews”, the former president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews writes:

“In recent days, significant attention has been given to a letter published in the Financial Times, signed by 36 Deputies of the Board of Deputies of British Jews. The letter sharply criticised Israel’s conduct in Gaza, and it has since been widely reported — by the BBC, Channel 4 and other national media — as though it reflects the position of the Board itself and, by extension, the British Jewish community.

Let me be clear: it does not.”

The BBC News website’s first report on that letter – credited to Alys Davies – was published on  its ‘Middle East’ page on the evening of April 16^th under the headline “Members of Board of Deputies of British Jews condemn Israel’s Gaza offensive”, with the original version telling BBC audiences that: [emphasis added]

‘The Board of Deputies letter said: “Led by the families of the hostages, hundreds of thousands of Israelis are demonstrating on the streets against the return to war by an Israeli government that has not prioritised the return of the hostages. We stand with them. We stand against the war… It is our duty, as Jews, to speak out.”’

Only on the afternoon of the following day – some twenty hours later – was that misleading description of the letter amended:

‘The letter from members of the Board of Deputies said: “Led by the families of the hostages, hundreds of thousands of Israelis are demonstrating on the streets against the return to war by an Israeli government that has not prioritised the return of the hostages. We stand with them. We stand against the war… It is our duty, as Jews, to speak out.”’

The headline of that report was later changed to read “Members of British Jewish body condemn Israel’s Gaza offensive”.

All versions of the report refer to a BBC Radio 4 interview (from 30:18 here) with one of the signatories. A report at the Jewish News notes that during that interview:

“World At One presenter Sarah Montague noted that the letter, published in the FT on Wednesday, is “the first public show of opposition to what Israel is doing from the Board”, although she added there were over 300 Deputies in total.”

On the afternoon of April 17^th the BBC News website published another report by Alys Davies, this time on its ‘UK’ page, under the headline “Head of British Jewish body criticises members’ open letter attack on Israel”. That report relates to an opinion piece published on the same day by the Jewish News in which Phil Rosenberg noted that:

“Whether intentionally or otherwise, the impression that has now been put forward by certain national and international news outlets is that yesterday’s letter published in the Financial Times, signed by approximately ten percent of Deputies, is the position of the Board of Deputies as an organisation, and therefore the position of the UK Jewish community as a whole. This is emphatically not the case, and as president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, I speak for the organisation as a whole.”

He later went on to write:

“Thinking about it objectively, for a letter signed by three dozen people to make headlines in an assortment of national newspapers, while TV and Radio producers fight among themselves to get signatories to appear on their shows, makes very little sense.

The reason for it is simple; it feeds into an underlying and dangerous narrative about ‘good Jews’ and ‘bad Jews’. This was aptly summed up yesterday in a Twitter post by Jeremy Corbyn’s former shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, where he stated: “There’ll be some who will criticise this letter from some members of the Board of Deputies, saying why only 1 in 8 have signed it & why so late. Yet every signatory should be welcomed into that courageous band of Jewish people who have stood up for peace & an end to the killing.”

I don’t think a single one of our 300-plus Deputies opposes “peace and an end to the killing”. But that does not stop the implied slur.”

That part of Mr Rosenberg’s article was not reported by the BBC and neither does the corporation appear to have found later developments including objections to the letter from other representatives and an investigation to be newsworthy.

Indeed, it would appear that as soon as the story no longer served its purpose, BBC journalists lost interest.