Saturday, January 24, 2009

The BBC and their idea of impartiality

The BBC has a very confused conception of what "impartiality" means. It is recent news that it refused to broadcast the DEC's fundraising appeal for Gaza. The BBC's reason is "to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC’s impartiality in the context of an ongoing news story."

In today's mainstream media the accent is always in the component of the "fear" and in the maddening quest of a "public enemy" we have to be afraid of. The "fear" is today one of the most powerful instrument in governments' hands, as we inevitably seek their help to protect us from an unidentified enemy and we delegate all responsibilities, accepting to give up on our most basic civil liberties.

If we weren't afraid, we wouldn't trust people and institutions that are doing all but working for everybody's interest. The fear is becoming the main energy that is driving our system.

Mainstream media are governed by the financial and political class and used as a propaganda tool, and citizens who don't widen their sources of knowledge will have their fear of this public enemy increased every time they watch or read national news.

In the mainstream media, criminals and terrorists are always poor people. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the popular mass movement that desperately seek to react against the illegal occupation of the rich and powerful State of Israel, is seen as a terrorist movement, while the continuous mass murders carried out by the Israeli authorities are seen as self-defence.

In a system where fear is used as a powerful tool to control citizens making them believe they live in a free and democratic world but that, in reality, are afraid only because they feel powerless, the positive aspects of humanity, such as solidarity and help to the weak are sometimes neglected and distorted.

This is the case of the latest BBC's choice in regard to the fundraising appeal for Gaza. Impartiality has nothing to do with humanitarian aid and BBC's directors know it very well. They also know that every man, just for the fact of being born and raised in a society and surrounded by other people is never completely "impartial."

But one thing is being "partial" because of our personal opinions that come from studying and interacting with the different elements of a society, another thing is being "impartial" because we need to protect the interests of who is financing us and telling us what decisions we can or cannot take.

In this specific case, the BBC's decision can be defined "inhuman" instead of "impartial."

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

George Galloway says the truth about Israeli-Palestinian conflict



This is an example of today's journalism: if journalists take the side of Israel and the United States, then they are objective and do well their job, if journalists denounce the crimes of Israel and of the United States around the world, then they are biased.

In this video a journalist in Sky shows that she knows nothing about the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict and yet she has an opinion on something she doesn't know anything about.

This is the information most people see everyday, with the sole goal to uniform and brainwash the public mind. Those cannot be defined "journalists."
Related Posts Widget for Blogs by LinkWithin