In the summer of 2025 the BBC News website published a backgrounder by Paul Adams titled “What does recognising a Palestinian state mean?” which was discussed here at the time and which includes the following:
“He [David Lammy] went on to cite the 1917 Balfour Declaration – signed by his predecessor as foreign secretary Arthur Balfour – which first expressed Britain’s support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.
But that declaration, Lammy said, came with a solemn promise “that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.
Supporters of Israel have often pointed out that Lord Balfour did not refer explicitly to the Palestinians or say anything about their national rights.”
A member of the public wrote to the BBC, pointing out that:
“This is factually wrong because it is anachronistic. “Palestinians” in Mandate Palestine were both Jewish and Arab. There were no separate ethnic Palestinians at the time (1917). Adams means Palestinian Arabs, and he should spell it out as such. If not, he is materially misleading audiences on a crucial historical point. Both Jews and Arabs (and every other community in the land at the time, including Circassians, Druze, Armenians and others) were Palestinian citizens. No document or record (from the Balfour Declaration right up to the 1947 partition plan) refers to “the Palestinians” in the sense of only Arabs. In fact, the partition plan specifically refers to “the two Palestinian peoples” (Jews and Arabs).”
BBC Complaints rejected the complainant’s request for a correction, stating: [emphasis added]
“You are correct that the [Balfour] Declaration does not refer to “Palestinians” and instead uses the term “non-Jewish communities”.
However, we believe that it would be clear to readers that Paul Adams is referring to the people who are nowadays known as Palestinians – inhabitants of the territory given over to the Arab population following the partition of British mandate Palestine.
Therefore, we believe the use of the term “Palestinians” in this sentence is duly accurate and in accordance with our Editorial Guidelines, and does not need to be amended.”
The complainant submitted a Stage 1b complaint in which he noted that:
“The clear impression created by saying: “Supporters of Israel have often pointed out that Lord Balfour did not refer explicitly to the Palestinians or say anything about their national rights” is that today’s Palestinians existed as a community known as “the Palestinians” in Balfour’s time, which pre-dated 1948 by decades. National identity goes to the heart of the conflict, and the BBC has a duty to be super-careful when presenting historical information, especially when it comes to something so contentious. If anything, Paul Adams has muddied the picture for readers, especially those (arguably the majority) who are not familiar with the complex history of the area. […] Duly accurate would be to say: “Supporters of Israel have often pointed out that Lord Balfour did not refer explicitly to the Palestinian ARABS or say anything about their national rights”. Otherwise you leave readers with the impression that there was a distinct people called “the Palestinians” before 1948, whereas there simply was not. That is ahistorical and misleading on a critical point. I am asking you to simply insert a single word to correct a factual inaccuracy and a footnote to point out the correction, and I am not sure what your objection is. Please consider my complaint again.”
The BBC also rejected that Stage 1b complaint:
“Paul Adams’ report had previously referred several times to the “Palestinians”, meaning the people who inhabit the modern-day Palestinian territories. The entire article was about them and the question of Palestinian statehood.
Given this context, we would say that it would be perfectly clear to readers who Paul Adams was referring to in the sentence concerned – ie. the people who would go on to be the inhabitants of the Palestinian territories following the establishment of the state of Israel.”
The complainant then made a Stage 2 complaint to the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU), pointing out that:
“…Adams’ misnomer is not only misleading but historically harmful because it creates the impression that a single community called “the Palestinians” lived in pre-1948 Palestine alongside a local “non-Palestinian” Jewish community. […] It can be simply fixed, to nobody’s offence, by amending the reference to read “Supporters of Israel have often pointed out that Lord Balfour did not refer explicitly to the Palestinian Arabs [or Arabs living in Palestine] or say anything about their national rights”.”
And:
“No territory was given over to the Arab population of British mandate Palestine, for the simple reason that partition never occurred!”
The response received from the ECU includes the following:
Notably, the ECU declined to address the issue of the claim concerning the 1947 Partition Plan in the initial response to the complaint. That reference to “the territory given over to the Arab population following the partition of British mandate Palestine” demonstrates – not for the first time – the BBC’s failure to recognise the historical fact that Arab rejection of the 1947 Partition Plan recommendation meant that it was never implemented and no territory was in fact “given over”.
This of course is by no means the first case in which the BBC has misrepresented the Partition Plan. BBC audiences have seen such errors and inconsistencies on numerous occasions over the years:
THE BBC AND THE 1947 PARTITION PLAN
WHY DOES THE BBC TRUST’S ESC PRETEND THAT THE 1947 PARTITION PLAN IS A THING?
REVIEWING BBC PORTRAYAL OF THE 1947 PARTITION PLAN
BBC WATCH COMPLAINT ON PARTITION PLAN INACCURACY UPHELD
A BBC backgrounder dating from 2006, which is still available online, tells readers that:
“The year [1948] had begun with Jewish and Arab armies each staging attacks on territory held by the other side. Jewish forces, backed by the Irgun and Lehi militant groups made more progress, seizing areas alloted [sic] to the Jewish state but also conquering substantial territories allocated for the Palestinian one.”
HOW THE BBC INVENTED TERRITORY ‘ALLOCATED’ TO A PALESTINIAN STATE
It is however particularly disturbing to see the BBC answering a complaint about a historical inaccuracy with yet another historical inaccuracy.
Related Articles:
HISTORICAL OMISSIONS PLAGUE BBC ‘PALESTINIAN STATE’ EXPLAINER
It is interesting that at Stage 1b they said that when Paul Adams referred to Palestinians they said that it meant “the people who inhabit the modern-day Palestinian territories.”
That is what I said it meant when on a previous complaint I challenged the BBC’s use of the word Palestinians when referring to Israeli Arabs. They rejected my complaint then too.