BBC journalist defended amid Israel report controversy

Orla Guerin speaks onstage at the 44th Annual Gracies Awards, hosted by The Alliance for Women in Media Foundation last year in Beverly Hills, California. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 28 January 2020
Follow

BBC journalist defended amid Israel report controversy

  • Broadcaster stands by Orla Guerin in face of anti-Semitism accusations

LONDON: The BBC is facing accusations of anti-Semitism over a primetime report on the 75th anniversary of the Holocaust that referred to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

Journalist Orla Guerin — who has worked at the BBC since 1995 and is one of its most senior correspondents — made the reference at the end of her report from Yad Vashem, the World Holocaust Remembrance Center in Jerusalem.

“In Yad Vashem’s Hall of Names, images of the dead. Young soldiers troop in to share in the binding tragedy of the Jewish people,” she said.

“The state of Israel is now a regional power. For decades, it has occupied Palestinian territories. But some here will always see their nation through the prism of persecution and survival.”

Some former BBC journalists and Jewish charities have condemned the remarks as anti-Semitic.

Danny Cohen, former BBC director of television, said the broadcast was “unnecessary, insensitive and particularly ugly in the days before Holocaust Memorial Day.”

Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism (CAA), said in a statementthat the BBC had used a segment on the Holocaust “as a vehicle to desecrate” its memory “with her hatred of the Jewish state.”

But a former senior BBC correspondent, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Arab News: “It’s a tough subject to navigate, and no matter what you say about Israel, it’s going to upset somebody. People will always be upset if you try to link what’s going on in Palestine with the Holocaust. It’s somewhere you can’t go.”

The BBC “would’ve internally acknowledged that this could’ve been an issue, and they’ve chosen to run with it anyway,” he added.

“This would’ve been discussed before the film went out, because it’s a big point that she made.”

He said these pre-emptive discussions might explain the BBC’s stance in the face of criticism.

“This would’ve been looked at by lots of different people in the food chain, so she’s not on her own — this would’ve gone up to various different bosses. They would’ve signed it off,” he added.

The BBC has defended the broadcast. “The brief reference in our Holocaust report to Israel’s position today did not imply any comparison between the two, and nor would we want one to be drawn from our coverage,” said a spokeswoman.

In reaction to the accusations of anti-Semitism that Guerin has faced, the former senior BBC correspondent said: “Maybe it’s anti-Semitic, or maybe she’s making a point and you don’t like the point.”

The CAA has alleged that Guerin drew comparisons between Israel and the policies of the Nazis, but others have noted that there was no such comparison. 

Filmmaker Gary Sinyor wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “she’s not comparing the Holocaust with the Palestinians.” 

He said Guerin made a juxtaposition between the view that some Israelis see their country through the prism of “persecution and survival” while it continues to oppress the Palestinians.

She produced a report “that reiterated the truth of the Holocaust, that addressed rising anti-Semitism, that movingly depicted a survivor from Belsen (concentration camp), that showed Israeli soldiers learning about the tragedy of their fellow Jews, that took up the last four-and-a-half minutes of the BBC’s main news bulletin the day before the actual memorial service, surely we can live that,” Sinyor added.“In fact, we should be grateful.”

Arab News contacted the CAA and asked what justification it had for the view that Guerin has a “hatred of the Jewish state.”

The CAA’s press officer said Falter’s accusation was proven by “20 years of her work,” before asking Arab News to contact them via email. No further comment was received.


UAE outlines approach to AI governance amid regulation debate at World Economic Forum

Updated 22 January 2026
Follow

UAE outlines approach to AI governance amid regulation debate at World Economic Forum

  • Minister of State Maryam Al-Hammadi highlights importance of a robust regulatory framework to complement implementation of AI technology
  • Other experts in panel discussion say regulators should address problems as they arise, rather than trying to solve problems that do not yet exist

DUBAI: The UAE has made changes to 90 percent of its laws in the past four years, Maryam Al-Hammadi, minister of state and the secretary-general of the Emirati Cabinet, told the World Economic Forum in Davos on Wednesday.

Speaking during a panel discussion titled “Regulating at the Speed of Code,” she highlighted the importance of having a robust regulatory framework in place to complement the implementation of artificial intelligence technology in the public and private sectors.

The process of this updating and repealing of laws has driven the UAE’s efforts to develop an AI model that can assist in the drafting of legislation, along with collecting feedback from stakeholders on proposed laws and suggesting improvements, she said.

Although AI might be more agile at shaping regulation, “there are some principles that we put in the model that we are developing that we cannot compromise,” Al-Hammadi added. These include rules for human accountability, transparency, privacy and data protection, along with constitutional safeguards and a thorough understanding of the law.

At this stage, “we believe AI can advise but still (the) human is in command,” she said.

Authorities in the UAE are aiming to develop, within a two-year timeline, a shareable model to help other nations learn and benefit from its experiences, Al-Hammadi added.

Argentina’s minister of deregulation and state transformation, Federico Sturzenegger, warned against overregulation at the cost of innovation.

Politicians often react to a “salient event” by overreacting, he said, describing most regulators as “very imaginative of all the terrible things that will happen to people if they’re free.”

He said that “we have to take more risk,” and regulators should wait to address problems as they arise rather than trying to create solutions for problems that do not yet exist.

This sentiment was echoed by Joel Kaplan, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, who said “imaginative policymakers” often focus more on risks and potential harms than on the economic and growth benefits of innovation.

He pointed to Europe as an example of this, arguing that an excessive focus on “all the possible harms” of new technologies has, over time, reduced competitiveness and risks leaving the region behind in what he described as a “new technological revolution.”