Right-wing media biased against Muslims, finds report

They are more likely to use unreliable sources, misleading headlines and biased articles.

A report has found that right-wing and religious media outlets are more likely to spread negative misinformation about Muslims.

The Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) report analysed over 10,000 articles which mentioned Muslims and rated them on five metrics for accuracy.

They found that right-wing and religious outlets are more likely to use unreliable source, misleading headlines and publish articles CfMM regards as “very biased”.

One of the worst offenders, according to CfMM, is the Spectator magazine. The researchers found that 29% of its articles which mentioned muslims were “very biased”.

One example is Qanta Ahmed’s Spectator article which claimed there is no basis for the niqab in Islam. CfMM say this is a misrepresentation which ignores and negates the belief of some women whose decision to wear the niqab is rooted in particular interpretation of the religion.

Another example is Dominic Green’s claim in the Spectator that Muslims target him for his Jewish blood. CfMM say this is just one example of a common generalisation used in the media – that Muslims are anti-semitic.

Another way in which the media is often biased against Muslims is when it associates Muslims or Islam with negative behaviour.

For example, they say, about an article by Trevor Phillips in the Daily Mail: “While arguing for more power for prison governors against gang members, Phillips singles out the nationality and religion of “Pakistani Muslims”, while using broader terms for “Black” and “White” people.”

The Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday and Christian Today are most often guilty of this while the New Statesman, Guardian and Observer do it less often, the study found.

Another metric of anti-Muslim bias the study uses is when the media highlights the Muslim identity of a negative person but not a sympathetic person.

For example, a comment piece in the Jewish Chronicle mentions both Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini’s and the poet Rumi. Only Khomeini’s muslim identity is highlighted.

The report’s author Faisal Hanif concludes: “The critical mass of this output, particularly among the right leaning media, (although by no means exclusively), has the effect of dehumanising Muslims.”

The report recommends better fact-checking and more responsible editorial decisions.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

14 Responses to “Right-wing media biased against Muslims, finds report”

  1. Dave Roberts

    I’ll say one thing for this blog, it’s quick off the gun as the Center for Media Monitoring is only being launched this today. It’s sponsored by The Muslim Association of Britain and is run from the East London Mosque and Muslim Centre which was exposed by John Ware in an award winning Panorama programme as being controlled and run by extremists. John has another programme on tomorrow exposing anti semitism in the Labour Party so he is pretty even handed.

  2. Patrick Newman

    For those who do not want to wallow in the Roberts bullshit here is the link to the Centre for Media Monitoring so you can judge for yourself. The Ware programme was transmitted in 2005.

  3. Dave Roberts

    Patrick Neuman! You’re alive. You keep disappearing and we miss your idiotic comments so much. Now, you really must pay attention, and sit up!
    The documentary I refer to by Ware was in, I think, 2010 or thereabouts. It was certainly after the documentary by Andrew Gilligan about Lutfur Rahman and the massive corruption in Tower Hamlets. Both of those programmes contributed to the court case which destroyed the crook, Rahman, who is still being defended by idiots like you.
    Do you have anything sensible to say or are you the same as ever, a dimwitted dupe of Islamist reaction? I’ll have to watch myself, I’m starting to sound like a Marxist, and that would never do.

  4. Dave Roberts

    The John Ware programme went out in April 2014 and is still well worth watching as is the Gilligan programme. All of the Lutfur defenders at the time got their comeuppance. Livingstone, Ian Burrell in The Independent, the SWP, and Uncle Tom Cobble and all. All liars and now prove so. I understand from Muslim friends, and it was Muslims who gave evidence against him in the main, tell me that Rahman has property in Dubai, Bahrain and Bangladesh bought with money stolen from the people of Tower Hamlets, with your full knowledge and approval Mr Neuman.

  5. Tom Sacold

    Writing as an atheist, all religion has to be challenged, but some religions have more to be challenged on than others !!!

  6. Dave Roberts

    That a phobia! Cos you got to have a phobia, innit?

  7. Chester Draws

    One example is Qanta Ahmed’s Spectator article which claimed there is no basis for the niqab in Islam.

    So how do the millions of Islamic people who don’t wear the niqab get on then? Someone should tell them. Including, amusingly, two of the authors of the report in question.

    I look forward to their analysis of media reports published in Moslem countries involving Christians. Like that’s going to happen. There’s only barrow this lot are going to push.

  8. Dave Roberts

    While I like this site for the fact that it allows a discussion and doesn’t, at least apparently so, censor comments it leaves itself wide open to criticism because it takes things at face value instead of checking them. It is blindingly obvious that the vast majority of Muslim women in this country and in their won don’t wear the niqab. The only conclusion therefore must be is that they are bad Muslims and will be punished by the state. I watched a programme last night about The Lebanon and religious violence there and there wasn’t a niqab in site. Could we have an explanation of this please?

  9. Tom Sacold

    Yep. The niqab is simply a tool of cultural and political oppression.

  10. wg

    I grew up in a time of revolution – the 1960s were about throwing off the shackles of authoritarian religion.
    It couldn’t happen today – Dave Allen and the Monty Python team would be arrested under this weird, new zeitgeist of ‘hate crime’.
    Is the UK a better place for throwing off that religious authoritarianism – I believe that we are.

    Far more worrying to me is the inconsistencies of law that exist in the UK at present – halal slaughter, polygamy, sharia; we are either one nation under the law or we are not.
    It seems strange to me that, if I were to send my white English child to school dressed from head to toe in a black sack, my child would be sent home and given instructions to come back suitably attired.
    It seems that the state can meddle in my affairs to the nth degree – because I am a white Englishman – but will leave well alone any favoured religious denomination.

    As far as I’m concerned TV and the media can ridicule or speak negatively as much as they like – it’s what the UK is about: it will be up to the public to make up their own minds – or does Left Foot Forward think that we are all too thick to think without draconian state intervention?

  11. Patrick Newman

    Oh dear, what have we got! It is worse than I thought. The Tommy Robinson adulation society has taken over the comments section of LFF. What bothers them is not so much the religion of Islam but the colour of the skin of most Muslims. It good old Enoch Powell style colour prejudice – racism.

  12. wg

    Not really, Patrick Newman – I am white, English working class: that is my identity and culture – and I do so have a dislike of authoritarian religions; no matter the colour of the practitioners.

    It is your blind inability to believe that my identity and culture are relevant: would you apply the same arguments to others identities and cultures?

    I grew up in a free thinking and free speaking country – people change, and their perceptions of what is funny or unfair change; and what I thought of as funny when I was a youth now seem boorish and ill-mannered.

    But…I will not support a return to religious domination and blasphemy laws in the UK: nor do I wish to see children unable to feel the sun on their faces and the wind in their hair – or their right to befriend and love who they choose, and be able to sit with them as an equal (how many of our virtuous Labour colleagues are quite prepared to address segregated audiences?)

    If that means ridiculing and questioning religious sects, then I am all for it.

  13. Tom Sacold

    Islamic protests are back at Parkfield School Birmingham after school re-institutes LGBT lessons

    There is online video of a protestor saying “In Islam it is not OK to be gay”

    Integration into Britian’s mostly secular liberal culture is proving difficult for some.

  14. Dave Roberts

    Patrick Neuman. Still thick as two short planks.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.