Summary of complaint
The Asserson report complained that the 91ȱ had “materially breached its obligations for due impartiality and accuracy under the 91ȱ Editorial Guidelines 2019 in its coverage of the Israel-Hamas war.”
Our response
We have read the Asserson report in its entirety and have responded to its authors in detail. Having carefully examined the report, we do not think that its methodology leads to reliable conclusions. We do not accept that impartiality can be assessed using ‘sympathy’; nor by quantifying daily coverage of events or counting words. We believe the use of AI to measure impartiality in this way is unreliable and unproven. The methods used in the report fail to take account of basic journalistic principles and practice, and often rely on selective interpretations and incomplete evidence.
In conclusion, we do not see any new evidence to suggest we have breached our obligations for due impartiality and accuracy during our coverage of this highly complex, challenging and polarising conflict.