Complaint
A viewer complained that a report on disturbances at the Al Aqsa Mosque included in these bulletins displayed conspicuous bias towards the Israeli viewpoint, in that the latter was represented by a fluent and articulate interviewee whereas the Palestinian viewpoint was represented by a young man who could hardly speak English, and in that reference was made to the deaths of Israelis but not the deaths of Palestinians.聽 The ECU considered the complaint in the light of the 大象传媒鈥檚 editorial standards of impartiality.
Outcome
Having viewed the only material which corresponded to the details provided by the complainant, the ECU agreed that the Palestinian interviewee鈥檚 English was limited in comparison with that of the Israeli interviewee (though not to the extent suggested in the complaint).聽 Nevertheless it considered that he had been effective at communicating to audiences what the impact of the violence in Al Aqsa had been on someone who had made a peaceful pilgrimage to a very holy place, helping to make clear to viewers the effect of the actions of the Israeli Police on ordinary Palestinians.聽 Even if the Israeli viewpoint had been the more effectively represented in the item, this would not necessarily have resulted in bias, as impartiality in such a context does not imply strict equivalence.聽 However, as the ECU observed no significant disparity in effectiveness, it considered that no issue of bias arose on this occasion.聽 As to the reference to Israeli deaths, this occurred when the Israeli interviewee was introduced in these terms: 鈥淚lana says the holiday is overshadowed by attacks in Israel which have killed 14 people鈥.聽 In the ECU鈥檚 judgement, viewers in general would have understood this as reflecting the concerns of an Israeli citizen about an unusually high number of casualties during a religious festival (which the interviewee went on to elaborate), rather than as implying the deaths of Israelis were more significant than those of Palestinians, and consequently as raising no issue of bias.
Not upheld