It's all about advertising and distributing .both the bbc and cnn need carriage in Muslim countries. Cnn international adbusiness is far more profitable then domestic us. The same goes for the New York Times. Follow the dollars

What the BBC has done to us, is merely what they started in the 1920s. Their hatred is long ingrained against Jews. They are racists period.

Whereas BBC is quality writing, they have been biased against Israel for nearly a century. They simply see the large Arab world as having more (financial) interest to them then we small puny state of Jews. They bent over backwards to help the Arabs destroy us before and during the war of Independence and are just continuing that policy.

How in the name of sanity does the author arrive at this conclusion? Does it ever happen the other way around, when reporting on Israel?! Low standards may occur, but it has nothing to do with this issue!

and maybe 12 million Jews on Planet earth. If reporting the news is also about raising revenue. The headlines will always be targeted at the largest potential readership and the largest potential revenue stream. The village idiot gets that before the nobel laureate. Blame the free market not the BBC

It was not time pressure or inexperience that resulted in anti Israel biased headline. It would have taken longer to work out how to spin this to portray the terrorist as the victim than to simply report the facts. This was given serious consideration by experienced copy writers to get the bias right. Not a one off but a clear trend when reporting on the conflict. Almost every BBC report on the topic has this spin which is in part why British public opinion is so anti Israel. I think BBC is the cause rather than pandering to an existing bias.

graded as well??! What is this dribble?! Apologetic spin on a very easy to demonstrate fact?

If it were only a matter of ignorance, the mistakes would equally affect all countries and all peoples around the world. But Israel and the Jews are the main target of the biased reporting, by far! It's just plain old antisemitism.

"Palestinian killed after stabbing soldier, snatching his rifle" This is the title from a YNET article on October 7th, 2015. What is the difference??

The standard and reliability of journalism is dropping rapidly mainly because people don't want news- they want their own personal view pampered to. The BBC is still by far the most professional and neutral news outlet in the world, but it too is suffering the cutbacks. Israeli media has a strong pro-Israel slant catering only to local consumption, Arab media outlets are even more so. As to the headline, it was the third headline put out, the first was : Israelis stabbed in Jerusalem attack" and the second was Israeli killed and others wounded in Jerusalem attack"....so much for the anti-semitism.

A few random cases of shoddy journalism - maybe this would hold - but - with ALL data samples showing a distinct bias against Israel, we clearly have a trend - which would indicate that POLICY management. Nice try - but no cigar.

Google: How can a ‘New York Times’ reader possibly know what is truly happening in Israel/Palestine? ,... This rag have it right ;) ,...

don't forget the BBC leader for ME: Behrouz Afagh, Head of Journalism (Near East, West and Central Asia). For sure he pinpoints what to report...

infront of the photoes and vedioes it is humanity to decide who are the armed soldies who are the stone throwers . it is not jews or moslemes

This analysis is absolute b/s The journalists are not ignorant It is a deliberate media onslaught against Israel with antisemitism as a major component

In the case of BBC they are not chasing money as they are funded by (my reluctant) tax-payers license fee. They are not doing this for ratings but to manipulate public opinion in line with their own bias. The public here are brought up on a diet of anti-Israel propaganda dished out by the BBC which is their primary source of news. The general public do not bother to educate themselves to the history of the conflict and probably do not bother to even read beyond the headlines (which is why the BBC know importance of manipulating the headline even if the rest of the article is more "balanced".) and simply register that once again Israel is being aggressive and disproportionate. This makes it easy to get them to go along with things like BDS or to participate in anti Israel demonstrations. BBC spent hundreds of thousands of Pounds of tax-payers money to suppress an internal review into their own anti-Zionist bias. One can speculate as to just how damming that report was.

that's why the big news agency cater to them. a few million jews boycotting BBC is small potatoes, while a billion of arabs boycotting is an actual big deal. that's all there is to it. News Agencies are a business, just like any other.

The last report I heard was that the 2 sides of the conflict are equally too blame for the escalation of violence. If I throw a stone and hit your head you are as much to blame as I am. This the BBC way of staying neutral.

The distortion of the news about Israel has been a problem for many, many years The source material is created by arabs in the newsrooms in Israel - created by arab journalists, arab photographers, arab translators & arab sub-editors etc. The journalists around the world believe what arrives via the NewsWires - they are lazy and just copy & paste The arabs influence the journalists in so many ways - they control access, pressure, and even threats and intimidation The arabs now control the minds and hearts of the media and the "movers and shakers" - the arab money probably now far outweighs the "jewish lobby" - look at the UN ! - NGO monitor needs to expose more The Israeli government does not address the problem - within Israel the Government Press office needs to be more pro-active, even to the point of withdrawing press credentials - within each country the Israeli embassy needs to spend more time and money - they need to educate the Editors so that they recognise and "spike" the Pallywood stories - example: Daily Mail published the fictitious story about Israel opening (non-existent) dams to flood Gaza Example of the problem: - the Press Association in London has 250 photojournalists editing video news for the world - alongside them are 50 arab journalists producing news for Al Jazeera - think about their discussions over lunch and at the water cooler - does anyone do anything to counter this ? Read a book about all this published in 1986 ! - "The Media's War Against Israel" by Karetzky & Goldman - the PLO threatened to kill journalists who did not deliver their message I hope that sending Mark Regev to be the Ambassador for Israel in London may be the start of a new phase But I wonder ! .

The excuse that journalist covering stories relating to Israel and the PA are ignorant is all but rubbish , can some one please show me 1 single story that was not anti Israel but rather anti Palestinian? anti antisemitism is deeply rooted in the European DNA along with my belief that reporters stationed in Israel are contacted by anti Israel groups , BDS etc etc. who are probably promised some sort of compensation for reporting the story in a way that paints Israel in a bad light

It may be intellectually satisfying to try and identify exactly what the cause of misstatements is. Occam's Razor is a philosophical construct to apply the simplest explanation for something. Rampant anti-Semitism is as simple an explanation as one can find. It can be masked by claims such as "the settlements made me do it" or "there were never any Jews here in Israel" or "why don't they go back where they came from [which applies to anywhere]." They used to be an ad in the United States whose tagline was "You do not have to be Jewish to enjoy Levy's bread." To me, the current version is "you do not have to be an overt anti-Semite to show hate and disdain for Israel."

It's not just about the larger audience. It's always been more about the oil. That's why the U.K. always leaned towards the Arabs and why they left all of the arms to the Arabs during Israel's war of independence. They expected the Jews to lose and why get on the Arabs' bad side, when the Israelis didn't have a chance in Hell, anyway... WRONG! Well, we see how well Arab armies fight. All the money that the U.S. has poured into Iraq, just to have them run away screaming, the minute ISIS points a weapon at them.

The idea that anti-israeli bias of mass-media stems from ignorance is itself a bias. Pure ignorance is random and as such cannot be biased.

While raising important and true points, I would suggest your article is too generous. One of the issues is that bean-counters (read: accountants) have taken over. They know nothing about the craft and its role, and it shows. Another issue is the growing number of politically biased people who enter the field. Their motto is that they should afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. When told that their job is to inform, and to inform as precisely and quickly as possible, and that this, in and of itself, is a pretty difficult job, they look askance. This is based more on inadequate education, that is biased beyond belief and leads them to positions we should call left-wing. In any case, thanks for touching upon a very important subject.

The vile, anti - Isreal mob at the BBC know exactly what they are doing. They use the same tactics against any political movement, party or country which they consider to be enemies. Their reports are peppered with discriminatory and one-sided focusing, especially when it comes to Israel. Palestinians are always pictured as the 'oppressed' and the Jews are always shown as religious zealots of uniformed thugs. It won't change until the corporation is financed by voluntary donations and taken out of the taxpayer funded trough. When the conniving journalists have to fight for their proper place in unbiased reporting, they may learn to apply the rules required of them in their ignored code of conduct.

are some of the worst anti semites of all. Too bad they've forgotten that Jesus was a Jew as is his father... ( Pretty much the same for all of Europe.) No one said they were smart.....

Bwahahahahaha!

This op-ed is an exercise in futility.

Not because the whole world is baying for the blood of "the Joos" but because..
...It's an exercise steeply-indulged in information-warfare that it doesn't even shy from using the ludicrous "T-word".