CAMERA UK

A CAMERA study of two years of BBC headlines highlights how the BBC has framed the war between Hamas and Israel. camera-uk.org/2025/11/25/ana…

BBC reporting on talks between Israel and Lebanon focuses on the topic of a ceasefire but fails to tell a more significant part of the story. camera-uk.org/2026/04/14/fra… @sam_granville

While @iaeaorg issues urgent warnings about Iran’s "non-compliance" and its acceleration toward weapons-grade uranium, media outlets are painting a very different picture. From fabricating claims that no threats exist to misrepresenting @UN reports. Why are some of the world’s biggest wire services downplaying an existential crisis? The IAEA says it’s a matter of "utmost urgency," yet headlines continue to downplay Iran's nuclear aspirations. It’s time to look more closely at the gap between the official reports and the news on your feed. "On what suicidal impulse have major news agencies, one after another, erased the existential threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran?" writes @tamarsternthal in a new analysis. camera.org/article/afp-co… more closely

Sick, prejudiced, authoritarian obsessives dedicated to denying freedom of speech to every individual, group & organisation with which they disagree. This time acclaiming the cancellation of an event of the Irish Branch of the International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem. No respect for rights of freedom of expression & religion. Just the fascist Ayatollah’s of cancel culture.

@BBC’s reporting repeats an "unknown origins" narrative concerning an attack that killed two @UN peacekeepers. This happened even after an investigation concluded that the roadside bombs that killed the two Indonesian soldiers on March 30th were likely placed by Hezbollah. "These are by no means the first cases in which the BBC has failed to report incidents involving Hezbollah and UNIFIL accurately and impartially," writes @CAMERAorgUK's Hadar Sela. "While it may come as no surprise to find the UN body that has resoundingly failed to implement UN Security Council resolutions promoting an 'unknown origins' narrative in relation to Hezbollah actions that endanger its forces, that does not justify the BBC’s failure to report the incidents in a manner that provides its audiences with the full range of available information." 👉 Share now to help fight against anti-Israel bias in the media. 🔗 Read the full report at camera-uk.org

New evidence unearthed by Jewish News includes a Green Party candidate standing for election in Camden, north London, who shared antisemitic claims that the Old Testament commands Jews to kill children, that Zionists carried out the 9/11 terror attacks, and “false flag” lies about the Golders Green Hatzola arson attack. jewishnews.co.uk/as-the-greens-… @JewishNewsUK

While BBC failed to adequately inform its audiences at the time that Hizballah’s decision to join the US/Israel war against Iran on March 2, 2026, was a violation of the November 2024 ceasefire that was in place, it's happy to promote baseless Iranian claims that Israel is violating the current ceasefire by bombing Hizballah targets in Lebanon.

This is the person media outlets like @guardian and @nytimes are trying to normalize. It gives away the game when news organizations that are usually hyper vigilant about platforming “extremists” cast those considerations completely aside if the rhetoric demonizes Israel.

Tomorrow’s Guardian has a nice soft soap intv with Francesca Albanese about her “fight.” Sadly, coming from the paper that platformed the Iranian Foreign Minister without challenge and printed an antisemitic cafe review about a Gail’s opening, this is just no shock whatsoever.

This is the official poster marking #YomHashoah 2026 The image in Yoav Kahana's poster depicts the "absence" within the "presence"; the personal and collective rupture to the Jewish people engendered by the Holocaust. This rupture accompanied the survivors as they searched for living relatives and were met with an aching void. Learn more: bit.ly/4lDfwjC

@hasanthehun @guardian @nytimes @ezraklein Read @adamlevick to get the real picture of who Hasan Piker is: camera.org/article/the-gu…

It "doesn’t matter if f*ing rapes happened on Oct. 7." -@hasanthehun The @guardian recently published a column scolding Democrats who think Hasan Piker is too extreme. Now the @nytimes and @ezraklein are normalizing the man who said “America deserved 9/11.” And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Piker’s radical and deranged rhetoric, which @cameraorguk’s @adamlevick has extensively documented. News outlets that would normally be clutching their pearls about “hateful” and “dangerous” rhetoric suddenly become “free speech” champions when that speech is noxious lies and tropes about Israel and Jews.

How to Glenn Greenwald: 1. Read a piece of news that is extremely normal (two wartime allies talking to each other) 2. Turn it into a very stupid conspiracy theory

@SkyYaldaHakim, here is the relevant section in the standards guidance set out by @Ofcom (which regulates @SkyNews) clearly stating that "significant mistakes" should be corrected ON-AIR quickly:

.@SkyNews reporter agrees with our complaint that she misrepresented Lebanon casualty figures in an interview with @dannydanon, but is unwilling to apologise on air. camera-uk.org/2026/04/13/sky…

Now that he’s a full blown antisemite, @bbc calls him an “activist”. Pathetic.

What does it mean when @kenroth, ex-@hrw head who's treated as a global expert, pounds out tweet after tweet (some 21+ in the last 24 hrs), without context, checks, or balance? Tweets about Gaza or Lebanon that for yrs haven't mentioned Hezbollah or Hamas or Iran's influence in both? That reference Israeli displacement of Lebanese without reference to the mass displacements of the population of northern Israel due to Hezbollah bombardment? That between breakfast and dinner cover everything from China, S. Sudan & Hungary to Russia & Lebanon? It means that you should question his judgement and personal standards of rigor. It means you should question the evidentiary, methodological, & critical standards that existed for the 30 yrs he headed HRW, including when I was there as senior editor for 14. As previously posted: work was not fully fact-checked and fabricated research remains in the public sphere – known to management & uncorrected. That it continues to pass without comment is evidence alone of how little accountability exists, and how reputation & donor $ trump priniciples or genuine concern for accuracy. It means you should question more broadly the standards applied within "human rights" orgs, including HRW and @amnesty , which issue statements claiming rigor & balance but have ZERO third party oversight that critically assesses whether that's true. Ask yourselves how do you know anything that they say is true - and realize, it's because they alone told you it is. It means you should raise questions about the loop of information, where "rights" experts teach at universities, that produce "professionals" who feed "rights" groups that pump out unchecked info, gaining them "credibility" that gets them visiting fellowships at universities. It means you should question how much 126,000 posts, sometimes pushed out hourly, are really worth. ---