The recent resignations of BBC staff over union instructions to wear Palestinian colours are not just a troubling moment for the institution but a damning indictment of its deeply entrenched and long-standing anti-Zionist culture. For years, many have raised concerns about the BBC’s skewed reporting on Israel, yet this latest episode confirms something more insidious: an abandonment of impartiality in favour of blatant political posturing.
The directive from the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) to dress in Palestinian colours goes beyond inappropriate—it is a brazen endorsement of one side in one of the world’s most divisive conflicts. It is not the job of journalists to engage in activism, let alone to visibly signal allegiance to any political cause. Yet the fact that this directive was even issued—and that some within the BBC appear to have complied—speaks volumes about the toxic atmosphere surrounding Israel within the institution.
For years, critics have noted a pattern of biased coverage from the BBC. Stories about Israel are framed in ways that vilify the state while erasing the context of its security concerns. Terror attacks against Israeli civilians are downplayed or outright ignored, while Palestinian actions are presented as heroic struggles. The term “anti-Zionist” is wielded as a shield against accusations of antisemitism, yet the overlap is clear to anyone paying attention. The BBC, it seems, has long been complicit in this narrative, giving anti-Zionist views an unchallenged platform under the guise of balance.
What makes this latest incident particularly egregious is the coercive nature of the NUJ’s instructions. By mandating that journalists wear Palestinian colours, the union not only abandoned its own impartiality but pressured its members to conform to a political stance. For those tasked with reporting on this issue, such a directive is nothing short of professional sabotage. The BBC journalists who resigned deserve commendation for their integrity, but their departure highlights a troubling reality: those who stand for fairness are increasingly isolated in an institution that seems uninterested in upholding it.
The BBC’s anti-Zionist bias is not accidental. It is the product of a culture that has allowed political agendas to fester unchecked. From editorial decisions to the language used in reporting, the institution has consistently framed Israel as the aggressor and its detractors as victims. This is not journalism; it is advocacy. And it is advocacy that fuels hostility toward the Jewish state while emboldening those who seek its destruction.
The BBC has positioned itself as a bastion of impartiality, yet time and again it falls short of this standard when it comes to Israel. The resignations of these journalists are a rare moment of accountability, a spotlight on a culture that prioritises ideology over facts. This is not just a failure of individual judgment—it is institutional rot.
For viewers, the consequences are profound. The BBC’s reporting shapes public perceptions, and when those perceptions are built on bias and misinformation, the damage extends far beyond the newsroom. It perpetuates harmful stereotypes, normalises hostility toward Israel, and distorts the very nature of the conflict.
The NUJ’s directive and the BBC’s broader failings are not just problems of journalistic ethics; they are emblematic of a wider societal issue. Anti-Zionism has become an acceptable prejudice in certain circles, cloaked in the language of human rights and justice. Yet its selective outrage and disproportionate focus on Israel reveal its true nature.
At WBII, we have long fought against this bias, calling for fair and accurate reporting on Israel and its people. The BBC’s latest scandal confirms what we have always known: that the battle for impartiality in journalism is far from over. The resignations of a few principled individuals are a start, but real change will require a complete reckoning within the institution.
The BBC must be held to account. Its credibility, already tarnished, depends on it. And if it cannot reform itself, then it should no longer claim the mantle of impartiality. For now, its reporting on Israel remains a stain on its reputation and a disservice to its audience. It is time for the BBC to choose: impartiality or irrelevance. It cannot have both.
