Yesterday, we received this response from Steve Herrmann, editor of the
BBC News website:
Dear David
I am writing to confirm that you received the email I sent you on Friday
explaining the background to our coverage last week of the Amnesty report
on executions.
Assuming you did receive it I find it odd that you have not in any way
reflected our explanation on your website, where Friday's entry on the
subject remains the lead item.
As I made clear in my response last week, we covered the Amnesty report
in two separate stories last Thursday, and you have selectively mentioned
only one of those - a Middle East story which focused on one, regional
angle of the story.
Surely you owe it to your readers, many of whom have emailed me for an
explanation, to point out that we also published a wider story on the
report. The link I sent you last week is here:
'20,000' on death row worldwide
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/4926224.stm
This story led with the overall figures worldwide, highlighted the points
made in the report specifically about China, which was mentioned prominently,
and covered the other main countries cited in the report, including the
US. Both our stories carried the principal facts and figures from the
Amnesty report about the overall situation, along with quotes and a link
to Amnesty's website.
We highlighted the Middle East in one of the two stories we published
on the report because two of the four countries highlighted at the top
of the Amnesty report were in the Middle East, and getting well-sourced
information on the issue in this region is difficult, so we felt it worth
writing a separate story.
Our coverage did not pick out the report's figure for Iraq (three people
executed) because this was not highlighted in the Amnesty press release
but we have covered the death penalty in Iraq elsewhere (see links below)
and will continue to do so.
First post-Saddam Iraq executions
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4204910.stm
Iraq hangs 13 for insurgency role
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4790990.stm
The overview story was on our world and front page on Thursday. The Middle
East story was on our Middle East page on the same day. We have subsequently
inserted reciprocal links between the two stories to make this as clear
to readers as possible.
Your claim that the BBC was seeking to "demonise" Iran by distorting
the Amnesty report is demonstrably wrong given our overall coverage of
the report as outlined above. The further suggestion on your website that
our coverage of the Amnesty report was somehow dictated by MI5 - or MI6
- is simply absurd.
Will you put the record straight by publishing a more informed account
of our coverage on this subject based on the facts I have set out to you
of what actually happened?
Yours sincerely
Steve Herrmann
Editor, BBC News website
Dear Steve
Many thanks for your email. You write:
“I find it odd that you have not in any way reflected our explanation
on your website, where Friday's entry on the subject remains the lead
item.”
We find it odd that you are aware of the lead story on our website but
not of the fact that we posted your email within 20 minutes of receiving
it at 12:51 last Friday. You can still find it on the first page of our
message board:
“Response from BBC's Steve Herrmann
Posted by The Editors on April 21, 2006, 12:51 pm” (http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1145620294.html)
We note that you take it for granted that your response should appear
on our website more or less immediately - would the BBC ever consider
publishing one of our Media Alerts on your own site?
You write:
“We highlighted the Middle East in one of the two stories we published
on the report because two of the four countries highlighted at the top
of the Amnesty report were in the Middle East, and getting well-sourced
information on the issue in this region is difficult, so we felt it worth
writing a separate story.“
But the Amnesty International report reviewed the death penalty situation
in detail in China, Saudi Arabia, the US and then Iran, in that order.
Why, then, did you choose to alter Amnesty’s focus by devoting the
first three sentences of the introduction to your Middle East article
to Iran? And why did you emphasise this focus in the accompanying, horrific
photograph which shows two youths with nooses being placed around their
necks above the words: “Iran is the only country known to have executed
juveniles in 2005.”?
Iran was mentioned way down the Amnesty press release in paragraph 11
out of 19, and yet only Iran was singled out for such a graphic photograph.
You say that China was mentioned “prominently” in the second,
“overview” article. China is described by Amnesty as responsible
for fully 80 per cent of the world’s executions - it was also the
first country to be mentioned in detail in the press release. And yet
Iran was singled out for special analysis on the Middle East section of
your site, whereas executions in China were not even mentioned on the
Asia-Pacific section. (We notice that since our alert was published you
have added a link from the Asia-Pacific section).
You cite the difficulty of obtaining “well-sourced information”
as a further reason for focusing specifically on Iran and Saudi Arabia.
However, in its press release Amnesty specifically mentioned the difficulty
of obtaining accurate data from China, not Iran or Saudi Arabia:
“Data available to Amnesty International pointed to around 1,770
executions reported as being carried out in China during 2005. However,
the real figure is undoubtedly much higher. A Chinese legal expert was
recently quoted as stating the true figure for executions at approximately
8,000.” (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGACT500092006)
It is interesting to compare your intense focus on Iran this year - on
the grounds of a multiple Middle East connection and the difficulty of
getting well-sourced information - with earlier BBC reporting.
Last year‘s coverage of Amnesty’s report on executions included
detailed analysis of China and the United States. Iran was mentioned once
in passing: “Iran came second, with at least 159, followed by Vietnam
with at least 64.” (‘Death penalty “at record levels“,’
April 4, 2005; http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4409857.stm)
The photograph did show a man being flogged above the words: “In
Iran, the death penalty sometimes comes after a flogging.”
This was a couple of months after a Financial Times editorial had noted:
"The background noise about Iran is getting ominous - and has an
eerie resemblance to the noises off that grew in volume throughout 2002
as the [Bush] administration ... prepared to invade Iraq ...“ (Leader,
‘To make headway the EU and US must stand together,’ Financial
Times, January 28, 2005)
Before the emergence of this ominous “background noise”,
the BBC showed little interest in Iran in its coverage of reports on worldwide
executions. A November 2002 report, for example, focused heavily on China.
Iran was mentioned once in paragraph 16 of a 19-paragraph piece:
“Next to China, Iran had the second-highest tally of executions
in 2001, putting to death at least 139 people, Amnesty said.” (’Execution
denounced in world protest,’ November 30, 2002; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2529793.stm)
And yet the figure of 139 deaths was 50 per cent higher than this year’s
toll of 94 - a figure subject to intense and graphic coverage by the BBC.
Another report in 2002, ‘World executions double in a year,’
also mentioned Iran in passing: “The figures for China, Iran, Saudi
Arabia and the US accounted for 90% of all known executions in 2001.”
The final paragraph of the article noted: “Amnesty recorded 139
executions in Iran last year, up from 75 in 2000.” (April 10, 2002;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1920266.stm)
The photograph with this report showed Chinese soldiers with a prisoner
above the words: “China leads the world in its use of the death
penalty.” This seems reasonable, given, as the report noted, “China's
total use of the death penalty in 2,468 cases was more than all the other
countries combined.”
In June 2001, a report, ‘Death penalty worldwide,’ focused
heavily on the United States, and observed:
“China, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Iran are the chief
countries using the death penalty. Together they account for at least
88% of all known executions.” (June 11, 2001; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1383018.stm)
China, Saudi Arabia, the US and Japan were singled out for special mention,
but not Iran. And yet this table was shown:
China: 1,000
Saudi Arabia: 123
United States: 85
Iran: 75
This is close to the latest figure for Iran, there are two Middle Eastern
countries in the list, information was equally hard to access - and yet
Iran was mentioned only in passing.
An April 2000 BBC report commented of Amnesty: “The human rights
group says the total number [of executions] fell compared with 1998, when
it was just over 2,200, but the United States, Iran and Saudi Arabia all
recorded big increases.” (‘Executions decline in 1999,’
April 18, 2000; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/717805.stm)
This chart was shown:
The death penalty in 1999
1,800 executions worldwide
China: more than 1,000
Iran: 165
Saudi Arabia: 103
US: 98
There was detailed focus on the United States, China, Saudi Arabia and
others - but, again, not on Iran. And yet Iran’s death toll was
close to double the latest figure of 94 killed.
Photographs illustrating the piece came with these self-explanatory captions:
“A public execution filmed in Saudi Arabia in 1996.”
“The electric chair as used in Florida in the US.”
“Axel Bartolome clutches a Bible as he is lead to execution in the
Philippines in January.”
Again, no special focus on Iran.
A June 1999 article reported Amnesty‘s findings:
“But executions were carried out in at least 12 countries, and
several hundred people remained under sentence of death, including in
Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.” (’Amnesty urges end to
death penalty,’ June 16, 1999; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/371100.stm)
A large number of countries were mentioned - Iran was mentioned just
this once.
The illustrating photograph showed a “Death chamber in the Philippines
- one of Amnesty's targets.” Again, no special focus on Iran.
BBC reporting on Iranian executions from 1999-2004 appears to have been
pretty much what we would expect. Iran does have a hideous record on executions,
but China’s record is far worse and the United States and Saudi
Arabia are major British allies with close business and military ties
- factors that clearly justify greater prominence in reporting.
Is it really a coincidence that just as Bush and Blair launched their
propaganda campaign against Iran - beginning late 2004 and becoming near-hysterical
in recent months - the BBC has, for the first time, put Iran’s record
of killing front and centre in its reporting of worldwide executions?
Earlier BBC reports, and earlier BBC demonising of Afghanistan and Iraq,
suggest otherwise - you are once again toeing the propaganda line.
Finally, it is remarkable that you posted an article in the Middle East
section without any links to your “overview“ report in the
World section. A spokesperson at Amnesty International searched the BBC
website last Friday and, like us and many other people, found the Middle
East article but not this “overview” report. Having found
it, he commented on your coverage:
“It seems strange – to say the least – that they emphasise
Iran and not China.” (Email forwarded to Media Lens, April 22, 2006)
Best wishes
David Edwards and David Cromwell
The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect
for others. When writing emails to journalists, we strongly urge readers
to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone.
printer friendly 
What is Media Lens?