Sack them!
SBS TV: The Saga Continues

By Tzvi Fleischer

Two years ago, I published an article in these pages which set forth what I believed to be evidence of a tendency by SBS television to exhibit a pervasive one-sidedness, a "culture of bias" as I called it, on Middle Eastern Affairs. I had complaints to make about both the network's news and current affairs, and about programming of documentary material.

Since then, there appears to have been some improvement in SBS News and Current Affairs, though there is still clearly room for more. Documentary programming, however, has if anything, become even more hostile and aggressive towards Israel.

In January, SBS finally broadcast a documentary on the Middle East which did not criticise Israel. Israel - A Nation Is Born, narrated by former Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban is a BBC produced 5-part series, tracing the history of Israel's establishment after 1945. But SBS abandoned forever any pretence of "even-handedness" in programming by placing an introduction before this series cautioning viewers that it was "a partisan view" and that "it's unfortunate the Arab point of view is not sought" in it. No such warning has ever appeared on pro-Arab material.

Last month, SBS programmers screened, within the course of a week, not one but two documentaries which presented disturbingly unbalanced Arab perspectives of the Middle East conflict. The network also displayed another SBS trademark; arrogance and non-responsiveness in the face of public complaints.

The first of these, Jerusalem: An Occupation Set in Stone (Oct. 22, 8:30 pm) was particularly problematic. Not only did it resort to blatant emotive propaganda and half-truths, but it was also made by The Palestinian Housing Rights Movement, a group affiliated with the PLO. If any film was "a partisan view", this film, being made specifically for partisan purposes by partisans to a conflict, was it. Somehow, however, no warning or disclaimer from SBS accompanied this documentary.

The film emphasised Palestinian claims to Jerusalem as their capital, and allegations of ill-treatment Palestinians living there have suffered under Israeli rule. On the first theme, Palestinian Minister Faisal Husseini pronounced Jerusalem as the "historic...social...economic [and] religious capital of the Palestinian people," and insisted that while the Palestinians do not want to divide the city, the Israelis have already done so because the East is a "city under occupation." Another Palestinian spokes person insisted that the Arabs only want to unite the city, while the Israelis want to "destroy the pluralism and the diversity of the city". Meanwhile, the zoning regulations in the city were described as being designed for the purpose of "destroying Arab villages." It all went on and on.

One would never guess from this film that Jerusalem already had a Jewish plurality in the early 19th century, that the city has never been the capital of even an Arab province, that Palestinian residents of the city have full democratic voting rights for the city council which controls all municipal decisions, can vote in Palestinian elections and can become Israeli citizens at any time. Nor could anyone imagine from this film that the Arab population of Jerusalem has more than doubled since 1967, and tha t Arabs actually make up a slightly larger percent of the Jerusalem population today than when Israel took control of the city.

The emotive claims of the film slipped into the ridiculous when it was implied that long queues and bureaucracy to get permits at the Israeli Ministry of the Interior was some form of Israeli oppression of Palestinians. As anyone who has lived in Israel knows, everyone, Jews and Arabs alike, have to undergo long queues and bureaucracy at the Ministry of the Interior.

The film made much of the Israeli closure of access to the city for West Bank Palestinians without permits. A Jerusalem merchant claimed it was all a plan to "force me to leave Jerusalem" by denying him customers. A school principal complained that education was being disrupted because some of his school teachers could not get to work. Old women and men were shown being turned back at a checkpoint. The most extreme claim was one truck driver who insisted that "They opened this road just to kill people."

Incredibly, the documentary never even hinted at why Israel might have decided to close access from the West Bank to those without permits. That over 120 innocent Israelis had been killed and 100's more injured in 13 suicide bombings by Palestinians coming from the West Bank and Gaza, was never mentioned. The truth is, compared to the lives at risk from unrestricted Palestinian access to Jerusalem and Israel, the closure-related difficulties pale into mere inconveniences.

SBS's propensity to screen 'propaganda' documentaries from Arab governments is not new. Last year the network screened a documentary on Israeli-Lebanese affairs made by a body associated with the Lebanese Prime Minister. Both these films are from as partisan sources as could be imagined, yet it was the Eban film which got tagged with a warning.

SBS's second documentary was no less worrying, but for different reasons. A Dream of Justice and Freedom (SBS, October 28, 5:30 pm) was at least not made by the PLO. It was a British documentary consisting largely of interviews with Palestinians who had served as negotiators with Israel before the Oslo accords of 1993 brought the PLO formally into the act.

Not surprisingly, Hanan Ashrawi took centre stage, alleging that Israelis understood Palestinians "from a racist point of view like all colonial powers." But most disturbing were the continuing attacks by Ashrawi and others on the current peace process for not instantly delivering all Palestinian aspirations. Ashrawi attacked the agreements reached between Israel and the PLO and insisted that "the occupation is still ongoing" and there is "no peace." This conclusion was echoed by other negotiators, "This is not peace; maybe a truce," argued one.

What is most worrying is that the Palestinian tone was so rejectionist of the current Oslo peace agreement. There were no Palestinian voices in favour of the Oslo process. It seems odd that a documentary ostensibly devoted to Palestinian views of the peace process ignored over 70% of Palestinians which polls show support the current process.

Apparently SBS's often argued claim of balance over time in their documentary programming is to present a PLO-propaganda film attacking Israel, and then to present fringe Palestinian views attacking both Israel and the elected PLO leadership for not being extreme enough in its demands on Israel.

So, how does SBS react when you complain about their programming? Not very well, apparently, considering they're a public broadcaster, which we all pay for, whose responsibility above all is to be balanced and professional, as well as responsive to community concerns.

Last week, Executive Council of Australian Jewry President Diane Shteinman raised the probity of showing PLO propaganda films on SBS with Rod Webb, SBS's network programming chief. For her trouble she was told he "took exception" to her complaining. Webb told Shteinman that the "provenance" of a film "is of no issue whatsoever, " that the Eban series was a "front for Israeli government propaganda", and that "besides SBS had just shown an Israeli film". In this last case, he was apparently referring to An Electric Blanket Named Moshe, an obscure Israeli art film SBS showed on October 8. It was an unprecedented rebuff to the head of the Australian Jewish Community roofbody organisation. It was also a crock.

I still believe SBS is an indispensable part of the Australian media, and support it as a concept wholeheartedly. However, its performance as an impartial and professional public broadcaster devoted to non-English and multicultural broadcasting still leaves a lot to be desired. The arrogance of Mr. Webb only confirms what many have long felt about SBS; ideas of balance and community rights of complaint and oversight are still not taken seriously by portions of network management.

The problem is that SBS is meant to be a taxpayer funded community network. The federal Government are making a big mistake slashing the budget of ABC public broadcasting. ABC has mechanisms of accountability, it's responsive to community complaints and it at least makes an effort to present balance. That's three things SBS is not. It's time for Senator Alston to cast his eye further afield.