Other news agencies also won’t do it. Canada’s CBC won’t either. They put out a public explainer why they feel the word is more politicized as a term, and they want to bring some sense of objectivity to the overall story by avoiding politicized words on all sides (terrorists for Hamas, Aparteid-like system for Israel, etc etc).
Dude who resigned should realize that this is the reality with publicly owned broadcasters. But hey, he has a choice, and he exercised it. To each their own.
But yeah, Hamas did some of the worst terrorist acts imaginable – and I don’t need a news organization to use the word for me to realize it. Was utter evil.
The BBC doesn’t use the word terrorist to describe any group, which as a journalist he should know lol.
Israel – “they killed innocent women and children so everyone better call them terrorists or you love terrorists” Also Israel “killing over 500 children in 3 days in Gaza and terrorising 2 million civilians is just war man, get over it or you love terrorists”
Response from BBC
​
Why BBC doesn’t call Hamas militants ‘terrorists’ – John Simpson
The answer goes right back to the BBC’s founding principles.
Terrorism is a loaded word, which people use about an outfit they disapprove of morally. It’s simply not the BBC’s job to tell people who to support and who to condemn – who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.
We regularly point out that the British and other governments have condemned Hamas as a terrorist organisation, but that’s their business. We also run interviews with guests and quote contributors who describe Hamas as terrorists.
The key point is that we don’t say it in our voice. Our business is to present our audiences with the facts, and let them make up their own minds.
As it happens, of course, many of the people who’ve attacked us for not using the word terrorist have seen our pictures, heard our audio or read our stories, and made up their minds on the basis of our reporting, so it’s not as though we’re hiding the truth in any way – far from it.
Any reasonable person would be appalled by the kind of thing we’ve seen. It’s perfectly reasonable to call the incidents that have occurred “atrocities”, because that’s exactly what they are.
No-one can possibly defend the murder of civilians, especially children and even babies – nor attacks on innocent, peace-loving people who are attending a music festival.
Is it really that important to use that word? It just seems like people want to use it because it evokes certain feelings in the public. Not only that, but there also seems to be a desire to vilify anyone who doesn’t use use take the exact same language, and doesn’t use the exact same signals.
But regardless of whether you call Hamas or any other group terrorists, they are still exactly the same and are still committing the same atrocities. After all, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
BBC has been downplaying this whole thing since the first day of Hamas attack and the fact it failed to call out things as it is makes me lose faith in it as a credible and trustworthy news agency.
E: all articles have editorial (ie they had the option to use another word) use of the word terrorist to describe groups/people committing violent acts.
Good on him, anyone that does those things …. Killing UN peacekeepers, woman babies etc for no reason and about 1000 dead are terrorists in my book, especially in a situation of more ore less “peace”, tense but most people were at a music festival it was the military training to invade Gaza
Do they call ISIS terrorists?
That reminds me that the BBC, among other media orgs, was regularly slammed over their policy of non-commital journalism because they would equate reasonnable political actors with far rights lunatics (“both side-ism”). That attitude was called out to favour far right and conspiracy theories.
I’m not sure their position here is truly motivated by their feelings on the word “terrorism” rather than a continuation of this policy.
I get it.
​
But Hamas is a terrorist organization. Full stop.
​
Trump is a terrorist. Full stop.
​
Say it. Say it loudly.
If Hamas is recognised as a terrorist organisation by the British government, then the BBC has a duty to call them terrorists.
My understanding of the way BBC and CBC handle this is not by avoiding using the word terrorist when involving these groups but not be the ones directly calling them terrorists. Like instead of using the phrase “Palestinian Terrorist group Hamas” they would use the phrase “ Palestinian Hamas recognized as a terrorist organization by the government of Canada/UK”. I might be wrong on that but it seems like they are trying to be neutral and just give you all the facts without giving their opinion.
19 comments
[deleted]
Other news agencies also won’t do it. Canada’s CBC won’t either. They put out a public explainer why they feel the word is more politicized as a term, and they want to bring some sense of objectivity to the overall story by avoiding politicized words on all sides (terrorists for Hamas, Aparteid-like system for Israel, etc etc).
Dude who resigned should realize that this is the reality with publicly owned broadcasters. But hey, he has a choice, and he exercised it. To each their own.
But yeah, Hamas did some of the worst terrorist acts imaginable – and I don’t need a news organization to use the word for me to realize it. Was utter evil.
The BBC doesn’t use the word terrorist to describe any group, which as a journalist he should know lol.
Israel – “they killed innocent women and children so everyone better call them terrorists or you love terrorists” Also Israel “killing over 500 children in 3 days in Gaza and terrorising 2 million civilians is just war man, get over it or you love terrorists”
Response from BBC
​
Why BBC doesn’t call Hamas militants ‘terrorists’ – John Simpson
[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67083432](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67083432)
The answer goes right back to the BBC’s founding principles.
Terrorism is a loaded word, which people use about an outfit they disapprove of morally. It’s simply not the BBC’s job to tell people who to support and who to condemn – who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.
We regularly point out that the British and other governments have condemned Hamas as a terrorist organisation, but that’s their business. We also run interviews with guests and quote contributors who describe Hamas as terrorists.
The key point is that we don’t say it in our voice. Our business is to present our audiences with the facts, and let them make up their own minds.
As it happens, of course, many of the people who’ve attacked us for not using the word terrorist have seen our pictures, heard our audio or read our stories, and made up their minds on the basis of our reporting, so it’s not as though we’re hiding the truth in any way – far from it.
Any reasonable person would be appalled by the kind of thing we’ve seen. It’s perfectly reasonable to call the incidents that have occurred “atrocities”, because that’s exactly what they are.
No-one can possibly defend the murder of civilians, especially children and even babies – nor attacks on innocent, peace-loving people who are attending a music festival.
fuckin cowards wont even call a spade a spade
Just let me remind you that [CBC told it’s journalists to not call Hamas terrorists and not say the occupation of Gaza has ended in 2005 in leaked email.](https://www.nationalreview.com/news/leaked-emails-show-canadian-media-exec-demanding-journalists-avoid-using-term-terrorist-in-hamas-coverage/) When this went viral, CBC went on damage control campaign.
See you champ.
The BBC has called Al Quaeda a terrorist group in the past.
[https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-58551970](https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-58551970)
But Hamas is different because….?
what a pathetic country the UK has become
Is it really that important to use that word? It just seems like people want to use it because it evokes certain feelings in the public. Not only that, but there also seems to be a desire to vilify anyone who doesn’t use use take the exact same language, and doesn’t use the exact same signals.
But regardless of whether you call Hamas or any other group terrorists, they are still exactly the same and are still committing the same atrocities. After all, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
BBC has been downplaying this whole thing since the first day of Hamas attack and the fact it failed to call out things as it is makes me lose faith in it as a credible and trustworthy news agency.
What’s this then?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-64177264
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-66620071
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0f5vtly
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001byhd
~~https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-58173190~~ person was convicted of terrorist acts, doesn’t count.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-61994377
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0929gdv
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-54920396
E: all articles have editorial (ie they had the option to use another word) use of the word terrorist to describe groups/people committing violent acts.
Good on him, anyone that does those things …. Killing UN peacekeepers, woman babies etc for no reason and about 1000 dead are terrorists in my book, especially in a situation of more ore less “peace”, tense but most people were at a music festival it was the military training to invade Gaza
Do they call ISIS terrorists?
That reminds me that the BBC, among other media orgs, was regularly slammed over their policy of non-commital journalism because they would equate reasonnable political actors with far rights lunatics (“both side-ism”). That attitude was called out to favour far right and conspiracy theories.
I’m not sure their position here is truly motivated by their feelings on the word “terrorism” rather than a continuation of this policy.
I get it.
​
But Hamas is a terrorist organization. Full stop.
​
Trump is a terrorist. Full stop.
​
Say it. Say it loudly.
If Hamas is recognised as a terrorist organisation by the British government, then the BBC has a duty to call them terrorists.
My understanding of the way BBC and CBC handle this is not by avoiding using the word terrorist when involving these groups but not be the ones directly calling them terrorists. Like instead of using the phrase “Palestinian Terrorist group Hamas” they would use the phrase “ Palestinian Hamas recognized as a terrorist organization by the government of Canada/UK”. I might be wrong on that but it seems like they are trying to be neutral and just give you all the facts without giving their opinion.