Opinion | Dissecting a classic BBC propaganda piece
By Tom Fowdy
Several days ago, the BBC ran an article titled: "Fukushima: China's anger at Japan is fuelled by disinformation." In the piece, the broadcaster falsely asserted that scientists had given Tokyo the green light to dump nuclear-contaminated waste into the Pacific Ocean and that China's objections to it amounted to nothing more than a misinformation campaign by the state driving up "fear and suspicion", in which it then sought to project the anger of Chinese cities against Japan as an aggressive tirade, as if the country could do no wrong in its actions and nobody could have legitimate concerns about it.
I have, on many, many occasions, critiqued the overt bias of the BBC on foreign policy matters, noting repeatedly that the BBC World Service is an independent company that due to operating outside of the UK, operates independent of OFCOM rules and follows the agenda of the British Foreign Office accordingly. In doing so, it drives forward the British foreign policy line and has no commitment to impartiality whatsoever. Here in this article, I dissect all the strategies used in what amounts to a typical, one-sided, "China Bad story."
First of all, the article deliberately and perhaps deceptively, downplays scientific objections to the dumping. As slapped near the top of the article, "Scientists largely agree that the impact will be negligible, but China has strongly protested the release." A quick googling of scientific opinion on the matter will show that this is far from the case. One such article, in the South China Morning Post, draws a completely different conclusion from the BBC, with a headline stating: "Why do many scientists oppose Fukushima radioactive waste discharge?"
As the article goes on to state: "The US-based National Association of Marine Laboratories (NAML), which represents more than 100 labs, released a position paper in December 2022 that firmly opposed Japan's plan over "a lack of adequate and accurate scientific data" about its safety." Of course, the BBC conveniently omits this from its narrative, instead claiming that China's objections to the whole saga are in fact "politically motivated" as it says. Finally, at the bottom of the article, it states in a footnote that "opinions are also split in the scientific community. Some said the level of radiation is too low to pose any danger, but others have said more studies need to be done." So why are these people not platformed? And why does it say at the top that scientists backed it?
If in that case, some scientists have objected to it, how exactly are China's concerns about it "misinformation?" The term "misinformation" has become an abusive word by the mainstream media at large which is used to dismiss the opinions of a contrary point of view, against the agenda being pushed, by branding them as deliberately false or illegitimate. This is frequently used in regard to anything said by Russia or China, irrespective of what the facts are. In doing so, the BBC fails to actually mention "what" the misinformation is. Because if there is debate in the scientific community, as it states, how exactly are China's concerns invalid? Just because it is pushing a particular point of view does not mean such is false.
Secondly, the article presents a linear narrative that the Chinese state has directly encouraged aggressive behavior towards Japan, wherein it then presents Japanese people as victims, depicting the whole saga as a coordinated campaign. By making it exclusively about China, the article downplays concerns and protests about it in other countries, such as South Korea. Although eventually further down the article that is acknowledged, the focus of the piece is ultimately designed to distract from that. In fact, the bottom of the article even acknowledges that some Japanese themselves are concerned about the dumping, but these opinions are neither given emphasis nor weight.
It has been said many times before, but do you think the narrative surrounding this Fukushima nuclear dumping would be the same if it were China doing it, and not Japan? Do you think their "experts" and scientific opinion would be trusted, and the plan lauded as transparent and problem-free? I don't need to answer that one. Yet this article again is another example of a clear-cut politically motivated article by the BBC World Service, reminding us again that a clear agenda is being pushed under the guise of impartiality. This story was conducted in clear-cut bad faith, with the omission of information, a misleading narrative and the use of buzzwords, which is all a bit ironic given China is the one being accused of whipping up fear and suspicion. After all, was the BBC so honest to point out when Beijing was being demonized left, right and center for COVID-19, and all the paranoia and hatred stemming from it? Of course not.
The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | How concerns over Fukushima became an anti-China campaign
Opinion | The long game of China-India relations
Comment