Politicians including Grant Shapps and Sir Keir Starmer condemn the broadcasting corporation’s choice of terminology amidst recent attacks on Israel.
The BBC is embroiled in a burgeoning controversy for its steadfastness in not designating Hamas as ‘terrorists’, a decision that has evoked rebuke from parliamentarians across the political spectrum.
This morning, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer implored the corporation to elucidate its reluctance in employing the term amidst the horrifying assaults on Israel. Concurrently, Defence Secretary Grant Shapps excoriated the stance as “verging on disgraceful”.
Sir Keir, during his discourse with LBC, articulated, “I think the BBC needs to explain why it isn’t. I said ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist’, and to me that’s obviously what we are witnessing.”
Mr. Shapps echoed this sentiment, urging the BBC to realign its “moral compass”. He vehemently stated, “It’s verging on disgraceful, this idea that there’s some sort of equivalence… Hamas, as a proscribed terrorist organisation, has gone out and slaughtered innocent people, babies, festival goers, pensioners. They are not freedom fighters, they are not militants, they are pure and simple terrorists.”
This debate intensifies as the latest in a series of political voices expressing disdain over the BBC’s hesitance to refer to Hamas as terrorists.
The BBC’s editorial guidelines encompass a distinct segment concerning Israel and Palestine, underscoring the requisite caution in language utilisation surrounding terrorism due to its politically charged and emotive nature.
Staff are advised to circumvent the term “terrorist” sans attribution, opting instead for descriptors like “bomber”, “attacker”, “gunman”, “kidnapper”, “insurgent”, and “militant”.
The discourse surrounding language and its power continues to unfurl, spotlighting the BBC’s editorial choices amidst an ongoing violent conflict. Story Source