Two top execs – Tim Davie & Deborah Turness – forced to quit after a bombshell dossier exposed bias and even doctored footage of Trump.
You’d think that would spark real change, right?
WRONG. 🧵🎥
2/ Instead of accountability, BBC’s highest-paid “journalists” – and even some of its famous former ones – are playing the victims.
From Jeremy Bowen to Emily Maitlis, the reactions say it all. 👇
3/ First up: @jeremybowen.
Rather than own up to the damage he’s done to the BBC’s credibility, he previously said he “doesn’t regret one thing” about his false reporting of the Al-Ahli Hospital blast in 2023.
That lie spread across the world. No regrets. No shame. 🎥
4/ And this isn’t Bowen’s first brush with misinformation.
In 2024, he falsely told viewers the ICJ had ruled there was a “plausible case of genocide” in Gaza.
Even ICJ president Judge Joan Donoghue said that’s wrong. Months later, the BBC quietly “clarified.”
5/ Then there’s former BBC star Emily Maitlis, now on @LBC.
Asked about the BBC’s Trump “splice” scandal – where footage was edited to make him look like he incited the Capitol riot – she said critics should “take a step back.”
Seriously? Accountability isn’t optional.
6/ Veteran @BBC journalist @JohnSimpsonNews?
He mocked Trump’s threat to sue the BBC over its maliciously edited footage of his Capitol speech.
Instead of introspection, more smugness.
7/ Even Tim Davie – the man who just fell on his sword – went on the defensive.
He dismissed criticism of BBC bias as “narratives given by our enemies” and called Turness “a fighter for impartiality.”
Then urged staff to “fight for our journalism.”
Fight for what, exactly?
8/ This isn’t a few bad apples – it’s rot at the core. 🍎💥
BBC journalists, past and present, still deny there’s any bias.
On Israel, on politics, on Trump – it’s everywhere.
1/10 🧵
Did you know the recent Israel-NGO framework story is being covered very differently depending on the outlet?
Most headlines focus on "restrictions" and "limits on criticism."
But what's the actual policy trying to achieve – and why do some groups comply while others don't? Let's break down the facts calmly.
2/10
In late 2025, Israel rolled out a new registration/vetting system for humanitarian orgs in Gaza & West Bank.
Goal (per official statements): Prevent wartime infiltration by militants into aid groups.
Most organizations signed on quickly. A smaller number raised concerns.
Question: What would you consider reasonable safeguards in active conflict zones?
3/10
Israel reports ~85%+ compliance rate – meaning the vast majority of NGOs met the criteria without issue.
The rules target specific red flags like:
- Documented support for armed groups
- Denial of documented atrocities (e.g., Oct 7)
- Active promotion of boycotts/lawfare against Israel
- Coordination with designated enemy orgs
Not blanket "no criticism" – but focused security checks.
1/ It’s awards season… and while Hollywood hands out trophies for acting, we’re honoring the people who pretended to do journalism. Presenting: Dishonest Reporter of the Year 2025.
Let's find out the winners 👇
2/ 🏆 Winner: The BBC
No outlet worked harder this year to prove that “publicly funded” doesn’t mean “publicly accountable.” Truly a masterclass in bias, blunders & backpedaling. honestreporting.com/exposed-leaked…
3/ Remember that Gaza documentary narrated by… a Hamas minister’s teenage son? The one whose mom got paid? Yeah — that really happened. BBC: Bold. Brave. Or just… 🤦♂️
1/ Since Oct. 7, 2023, major media outlets have repeatedly reported casualty figures from the Hamas-run Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza as if they were independently verified facts -- with little to no skepticism.
Let's break down the distorted narratives. 🧵
2/ Headlines citing MoH death tolls were widely amplified without attribution to Hamas, allowing a terrorist org’s figures to become the dominant narrative in global reporting.
3/ This has resulted in repeated blood libels in media coverage -- blaming Israel for high civilian death tolls without critically examining the reliability of the source data.
1/ 🌍Are Israeli women living in a dystopian reality where, year by year, they are being stripped of their most basic rights?
No, because the data and imagery used by @CNN to support that narrative distort reality and mislead audiences. 🧵
2/ 📸 The cover image features a “Handmaid’s Tale”-style protest from nearly three years ago against legal reforms -- not a current reflection of women’s rights in Israel. Context matters.
3/ 📊 CNN relies on the Women Peace & Security Index (WPS Index) without questioning its methodology. The index blends unrelated indicators (e.g., cellphone use, conflict exposure), not a pure gender-rights measure.