Write Your Letter against British Boycott, Bias and Cynicism

Clear Evidence that British Journalism is Biased!

Write also in other countries, this boycott call's importance is global.

The British National Union of Journalists called the British government and others to boycott Israel.  This is the largest organization of British journalists representing about 40,000 members.  Journalists, whose ethics and oath should be for impartial reporting of the facts, take side.

We have to do our best against it. Because this is not a one-time event. This is only the climax of the long-time on-going incitement against Israel by parts of the British journalism, constantly worsening the conflict in the Middle East. 

Many British papers have condemned this NUJ boycott call.  We, Take A Pen, do not do this - at least not fully. Why?

Because, although we do despise the boycott call's content and the NUJ for doing this, however we appreciate the clarity this NUJ boycott call generated.  For a long time this is the first totally open, sincere, non-hypocritical, direct British declaration of a sensitive and ugly fact; a fact we knew for years but couldn't easily prove.  With this formal decision the representatives of the British journalists actually issued a formal ‘Certificate' that:

"A very large part of the British media and of British journalists is institutionally biased against Israel, ignorant about Israel and in its misinformed blind hatred ready to leave behind all decency and  journalistic ethics, looking only for actively harming Israel and its people."

Until this ‘certificate' is formally withdrawn and the inciters of this active hatred are ousted from their rows, the British journalist community as a whole will have been declared by itself to be incompatible and disqualified for any impartial and honest coverage of  what happens in and around Israel. Active perpetrators of hatred against one side in a dispute obviously can not pose themselves as honest reporters or commentators in that same dispute.

As said many British writers and many British papers have condemned the NUJ boycott against Israel, from the Evening Standard and The Times to The Guardian, from the Daily Telegraph to The Independent.  Others, like The BBC have been conspicuous in their word-twisting, only to avoid issuing a clear condemnation.  But all in all one can appreciate the lot of disapproving writings in Britain about the NUJ boycott call. What is the problem then?

The problem is that the boycott call is only the tip of the iceberg of hatred-driven British journalism when it comes to Israel.  The tip of the iceberg of a years-long crucial issue about the British journalism; having produced a huge amount of hatred-driven journalism about Israel.

Our, Take-A-Pen's politically independent volunteers around the world follow world media in up to 18 languages.  So we are in the position to realistically compare international media phenomena and tendencies.  We found it sadly and have been saying it for years, that a large part of the British mainstream media covers the Arab-Israeli conflict and the life in Israel with a strong anti-Israel bias; uncritically accepting and disseminating deceitful Arab propaganda, frequently on the border of hate-speech. It is very sad to say that by international comparison the British media has been found as probably the worst in this respect in the world of free press.  And please, don't try to console me, anyone, that this is half of the British media only, or less than a half. The sad fact is that a not negligible part of this once admired red apple is, how to put it nicely, infected... er... simply rotten.     

Bias: For years Take-A-Pen's criticism sent to the British media about their bias, even in thoroughly documented cases, were rarely considered and honestly corrected (like in one case by the Guardian), but were typically shrugged off (like by The Independent). The worst case is again the BBC, which, after our critical studies targeted us with several legal threats, aiming at intimidating us. This is the actual practice about free speech of The BBC; self-declared champion of free speech. (Seven threatening BBC mails are in our files). 

It would be tempting to elaborate now on what many analysts say and demonstrate with hundreds of examples, that the BBC News has been strongly biased for years, but no more need. Recently both Arab sources and the BBC itself declared, as if for the defence of the kidnapped Alan Johnston, that the BBC's activity in Gaza had been fully devoted to Palestinian interests. (Johnston had been the only Western reporter allowed to work there, guess why. But even the BBC's and his willing collaboration did not save him from unlawful treatment.

Cynicism: It would be tempting to discuss the cynical BBC's championing freedom of information and spending 200,000 pound for a legal procedure to obstruct the publication of the internal Balen report which obviously reveals the BBC's heavy bias in the Middle East.

But let's withstand these temptations for distraction, today there is no more need for further detailed proofs.

The debate 'Is the British journalism biased?' is over. It has been concluded 'Guilty of Bias', based on evidence issued by the most authentic forum possible; by the British journalists themselves. The National Union of Journalists' decision to boycott Israel, and Israel alone of all the countries and nations on earth, is full-proof evidence that the representative body of British journalism discriminates Israel and is actively hostile to Israel, biased and also much worse than biased, this is totally incompatible with the least of journalistic ethics. Not reporting the facts but distorting them, not objectively reporting but trying to manipulate them by active participation.

Not much consolation is that parts of the British journalism hate the US probably even more than Israel only do not dare to attack it so openly. Neither is a real consolation that the vote in NUJ was a narrow 64 to 56.

Had not fifty three (as voted) but only five percent of British journalists believed in mediaeval blood libels like that Israel is an apartheid state as ex-South Africa, it would be enough for alarm and shame.

Apartheid?  In fact Israel is probably the first and only country and nation in human history, which, while involved in a long and bloody war with a dreadful enemy, did never do any harm to the ethnic minority akin with that enemy, living within the country; Israel's Arab population.  1.2 million Arabs are living in Israel in relative wealth and with human rights far above those of their brothers' in any of the 23 Arab countries.

We see the for example the UK doing great efforts to progress further towards racial equality there, but I believe Israel does not less for this, and although lives in a much more sensitive situation, has achieved probably more in respect of racial equality.

This NUJ boycott call disqualifies the British press to claim to be a world leader, what until now - it turns out, wrongly - many believed.

The honest silent majority of the British journalism has to work very hard and with exceptional perseverance in order to cure this severe professional and ethical illness within, revealed by the detestable boycott call, and to do this both for pure justice and in order to regain its good name.

Think about it.  And even more important: write your letter about it.

 Write your short reader's letter to your paper!

 Write also in other countries, this boycott call's importance is global.