Alex Hern reports on the BBC Trust’s assessment of the validity of BBC 1Xtra’s censorship of the phrase “Free Palestine”.
The BBC Trust has announced that it is satisfied with the decision to censor the word Palestine from a freestyle performance by the rapper Mic Righteous.
In the show, which aired 11 February last year, Righteous rapped:
“I still have the same beliefs
“I can scream Free Palestine,
“Die for my pride still pray for peace,
“Still burn a fed for the brutality
“They spread over the world.”
The production team made the decision to put a sound effect, of glass smashing, over the word Palestine. You can listen to the whole performance here, or the offending section here.
In response to the original complaints, the BBC executive argued (pdf)
that BBC Radio 1Xtra and the BBC as a whole had a duty to be impartial. In this instance, the production team felt that Mic Righteous was expressing a political viewpoint which, if it had been aired in isolation, would have compromised impartiality.
The BBC’s guidelines on impartiality state:
The audience expects artists, writers and entertainers to have scope for individual expression in drama, entertainment and culture. The BBC is committed to offering it.
Where this covers matters of public policy, political or industrial controversy, or other “controversial subjects”, services should normally aim to reflect a broad range of the available perspectives over time.
Interestingly, the BBC apparently considers “scream Free Palestine” to be more of a controversial statement than “burn a fed”. The Trust has now released its adjudication of the matter, but in so doing has dodged the question.
They write:
The Committee agreed that it is for the Executive to decide what to include and what not to include in a broadcast, provided the result does not lead to a breach of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines.
The Committee agreed that its duty was to assess whether the material as broadcast was likely to have been in breach of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines, in this case those relating to impartiality.
In other words, in response to complaints that the BBC was unfairly censoring an artist, the Trust has instead examined whether the finished program breached impartiality guidelines. Given the potential breach was never aired, the result of assessment was a foregone conclusion.
Amena Saleem, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, argued:
“The BBC Trust has moved the goalposts and decided to look at the censored content that was broadcast in February and April 2011.
“And the Trustees have decided that the content from which the word ‘Palestine’ had been edited was not biased against Palestine. This level of manipulation and duplicity would not be out of place in Catch 22.“
The BBC needs to answer the real question; not whether the finished show was impartial, but whether it is acceptable policy to censor the word Palestine.
See also:
• Israel-Palestine in 2012 – Seph Brown, January 5th 2012
• Mitchell tells Israelis and Palestinians: “Get in the room, sit down and negotiate” – Shamik Das, October 18th 2011
• Palestine UN bid: Without courage, the cause of moderates will be lost – Sara Ibrahim, September 21st 2011
• Inside the “We believe in Israel” conference – Seph Brown, May 16th 2011
• Palestine Papers revelations shed new light on peace process – Seph Brown, January 24th 2011
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
20 Responses to ““Free Pale*****”: BBC tries to settle censorship row”
Paul Gurney
#bbc censors the word #Palestine http://t.co/rRlsqqs6 #Israel #Gaza #WestBank #occupation
Sarah AB
I don’t think it’s right to censor the phrase ‘free Palestine’.
http://hurryupharry.org/2011/05/15/liberty-if-it-means-anything-means-the-right-to-%E2%80%93-say-%E2%80%98free-palestine%E2%80%99-i-think-doesn%E2%80%99t-it/
Not sure, after reading the comments, about some of the company I’m keeping though.
Arthur Askey
What is significant is that Thompson appears to be the first BBC director-general to have gone in an official role to speak with the Israeli government. More to the point, Thompson did so despite the fact that the head of government at the time was none other than Ariel Sharon, widely known in the Arab world as the ‘Butcher of Beirut’.
…
As this last point makes clear, Crocwatch doesn’t accept that Thompson’s motivation is the one that he is claiming to have, i.e. that the BBC must remain ‘impartial’. This argument is absurd in the context of a humanitarian appeal by entities such as the Red Cross.
…
Whichever way you look at it, Thompson’s argument is so flimsy that there must be an ulterior motive for Thompson’s ‘self–censorship’—or is it just plain old censorship—of the BBC. The question now is whether Thompson is actually a closet Zionist himself, or whether he has simply been ‘spineless’ (as one response to his blog put it) and has rolled over when faced with pressure from the Israeli Lobby.
http://crocwatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/mark-thompson-the-bbc-and-the-israeli-lobby/
AllFools
Anyone remember that song “Free Nelson Mandela”? The BBC happily played that even when the UK governments position was that Mendela was a convicted terrorist (thanks Maggie).
Mark Thompson was given the job by Tony Blair, enough said.
Blessed Love Studios
Shameful decision by 1xtra, must read this : RT @leftfootfwd: “Free Pale*****”: BBC tries to settle censorship row http://t.co/LseMQMFT