BBC refuses to support Gaza aid appeal
Disgusted of East Grinsted | 22.01.2009 21:34 | Other Press | Palestine
No support for Gaza - BBC declines to show DEC appeal under agreement dating back to 1963, leading to other outlets following suit
From the Guardian:
The BBC has refused to broadcast a national humanitarian appeal for Gaza, leaving aid agencies with a potential shortfall of millions of pounds in donations.
Full story:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/22/gaza-charity-appeal
So here's a possible complaint to the BBC that can be made on their website ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaints_stage1.shtml)
I want to complain that the BBC has refused to support the DEC appeal for the survivors of the recent conflict in Gaza. I read about this story on the Guardian website ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/22/gaza-charity-appeal), and I think the reasons given by the BBC are incredible to say the least. There are two reasons given.
Firstly that the BBC is "concerned about the difficulties of getting aid through to victims in a volatile situation," and secondly that the BBC "did not want to risk public confidence in its impartiality."
DEC appeals are almost always in volatile situations (that is what most emergencies are). In Burma (the subject of a recent DEC appeal), the BBC was satisfied that, even when the military junta was dening access to the affected region, an appeal was worthwhile. The BBC has supported DEC appeals in Sudan and DRC. Are these not volatile? Perhaps aid agencies are better judges of where aid can be effectively delivered?
In terms of impartially, I understand the BBC's concerns. But the DEC appeal is not based on the rights and wrongs of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is based purely on the humanitarian principles that a group of people, their communities and their infrastructure have been virtually (and often literally) raised to the ground. I cannot see why the BBC, with its motto "let nation speak peace unto nation," sees any problems with impartially in helping civilians who are currently survivors of conflict, and will become victims unless they receive vast amounts of aid very quickly. To not support civilians who face this fate strikes me as less impartial than supporting them. The DEC has impartially written into its constitution, and this is enforced by UK charity law. Why can you not support them?
Please reverse your decision and support the DEC appeal as soon as possible.
The BBC has refused to broadcast a national humanitarian appeal for Gaza, leaving aid agencies with a potential shortfall of millions of pounds in donations.
Full story:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/22/gaza-charity-appeal So here's a possible complaint to the BBC that can be made on their website (
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaints_stage1.shtml) I want to complain that the BBC has refused to support the DEC appeal for the survivors of the recent conflict in Gaza. I read about this story on the Guardian website (
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/22/gaza-charity-appeal), and I think the reasons given by the BBC are incredible to say the least. There are two reasons given. Firstly that the BBC is "concerned about the difficulties of getting aid through to victims in a volatile situation," and secondly that the BBC "did not want to risk public confidence in its impartiality."
DEC appeals are almost always in volatile situations (that is what most emergencies are). In Burma (the subject of a recent DEC appeal), the BBC was satisfied that, even when the military junta was dening access to the affected region, an appeal was worthwhile. The BBC has supported DEC appeals in Sudan and DRC. Are these not volatile? Perhaps aid agencies are better judges of where aid can be effectively delivered?
In terms of impartially, I understand the BBC's concerns. But the DEC appeal is not based on the rights and wrongs of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is based purely on the humanitarian principles that a group of people, their communities and their infrastructure have been virtually (and often literally) raised to the ground. I cannot see why the BBC, with its motto "let nation speak peace unto nation," sees any problems with impartially in helping civilians who are currently survivors of conflict, and will become victims unless they receive vast amounts of aid very quickly. To not support civilians who face this fate strikes me as less impartial than supporting them. The DEC has impartially written into its constitution, and this is enforced by UK charity law. Why can you not support them?
Please reverse your decision and support the DEC appeal as soon as possible.
Disgusted of East Grinsted
