|
Monday, 22 June 2009 17:20 |
| | The Telegraph and the Daily Mail today both carry stories on alleged bias towards Islam in BBC programming. The Daily Telegraph reports on a document to be presented to the Church of England's General Synod next month which criticises the marginalisation of Christian programming on the BBC and alleges that the BBC’s new Head of Religious Programming, Aaqil Ahmed (pictured), displayed anti Christian bias in his former post at Channel 4. |
The Mail carries a story, ‘The BBC supports Islam and attacks Christianity’, citing the former BBC Radio 2 presenter Don Maclean's views on the corporation’s attitude towards programmes dealing with Islam and Christianity.
Don Maclean claims:
'They're keen on Islam, they're keen on programmes that attack the Christian church.
'I know there are things that need to be brought forward, but you don't see any programmes on Anglicanism that don't talk about homosexual clergy and you don't see anything on Roman Catholicism that don't talk about paedophiles.
'They seem to take the negative angle every time. They don't do that if they're doing programmes on Islam. Programmes on Islam are always supportive.
'I'm not against anybody's right to practise their religion and I think we need to talk sensibly to people who practise the Islamic religion.'
The allegations of anti Christian bias and of the suitability of a Muslim to head religious programming for the public service broadcaster will raise again the question of whether religious programming can only be shown due respect and competency by an adherent of that religion.
Among Don Maclean’s comments in the DM article is this rather bizarre remark:
'They're [Muslims] all in private telling you how dreadful they think Islamic terrorism is, but they're not forming together in a group and standing up against it.’
Which is shocking given that the BBC is to apologise and pay libel damages to the Muslim Council of Britain for broadcasting comments by Charles Moore on a Question Time programme in March, in which he slandered the organisation for not taking a clear stance on violence against British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The paper that broke the story? Yes, the Daily Mail! 
|