Following weeks of backlash the BBC will reportedly no longer refer to Hamas as “militants” opting instead to describe them as "a proscribed terrorist organisation" or simply "Hamas." This shift in policy by the public service broadcaster was announced by the Board of Deputies of British Jews in a press release on Friday, after the
Pretty sure they've been calling them a proscribed terrorist organisation for a while now.
Also, is the Baord of Deputies of British Jews willing to admit Israel's acts are war crimes, per the definition?
deleted by creator
They were put under pressure because Israel pressures everyone to support them, usually with some form of threat.
Wouldn’t threats from Israel also be terrorism?
Well terrorism isn't purely a threat, its actual violence with the goal of demotivating or convincing an enemy to submit to your demands. But I get your point.
You are right.
According to Israel, because of historic persecution, no jew can ever be racist, genocidal, nationalist, fascist, corrupt, a war criminal… or anything else that's considered bad… and if evidence results in you believing otherwise, you're an anti-semite!
Wow crazy to see 2014 Republican talking points recycled for whatever this is.
deleted by creator
"We're not calling them terrorists; we're just saying others call them terrorists."
BBC being the only outlet to avoid using the loaded term 'terrorist' was solid journalism, so of course that had to go.
That said, Hamas certainly is a terrorist group by any sane definition, and so's the Israel Defense Forces.
Help me see if I'm missing something, but I don't think they generally were avoiding using a loaded term.
I linked below a handful of examples of them describing, in their own words, acts as terror acts and even people and organizations as terrorists.
https://lemmy.world/comment/4719039
It seems to me like they've probably made sure to only use the term when a conviction or official designation has been made, but, as I understand from BBC's own words, Hamas is already in that boat, too.
It's really repulsive that a news organization trying to be factual and relatively neutral is badgered into changing its speech.
I agree with the sentiment, but I don't see the facts aligning with BBC's claim of abstaining from using the label.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60322508
The level was raised to severe … after two terror attacks late last year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55861305
At the High Court, listening to evidence about a notorious terrorist organisation, you don't expect to hear about Legoland.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58281243
A terror attack might have been stopped …
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57274312
Three men who assisted the perpetrators of jihadist terrorist attacks in and around Barcelona that killed 16 people in 2017 have been jailed in Spain.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/14854818
The attacks were carried out by the terrorist group al-Qaeda.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33253598
It was the worst single terrorist atrocity on British soil.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zy7nqhv/revision/9
Terrorists are people who use violent methods, or violent threats, to achieve their demands. (Followed by a list of terrorist organizations.)
The Beeb is a big operation, with genuine humans reporting and editing 24/7/365. Things will always slip by. I appreciated the policy, is all.
As long as they start calling Israel a terrorist state, that would be fair.
Hamas kidnapped US citizens, tell me again how they aren't a terrorist group?
