Case Study: BBC and Iraq War

The Iraq War, also referred to as the Second Gulf War, was a military engagement that
began on March 20, 2003, and officially ended on December 18, 2011. The conflict was
instigated by a coalition of nations led by the United States and was directed against the
government of Iraq. The United Kingdom, as a member of the coalition, played a significant
role in the military operations.
The primary justification for the war was predicated upon the belief that the government of
Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). However, no WMDs were
discovered following the conclusion of the hostilities. As a result of the war, the regime of
Saddam Hussein was deposed, and a period of occupation and reconstruction ensued.
The British media, particularly the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), played a
prominent role in covering the war and the events leading up to it. The coverage by the BBC
was widely consumed by the UK public and around the world. The BBC's coverage of the
Iraq War has been the subject of academic scrutiny, with some scholars alleging bias and
inaccuracies in the corporation's reporting, while others have defended the impartiality of
the BBC's coverage.

The Cardiff report, also known as the "Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural
Studies' Report on the BBC's coverage of the Iraq War," is a detailed evaluation of the BBC's
coverage of the Iraq War. The report was published in 2004 by the Cardiff School of
Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies at Cardiff University, UK. The report examines the
role of the BBC in covering the build-up to the war and the war itself, and it analyses the
way in which the BBC framed the war and presented the government's case for war. The
report's core findings include:

1. The study found that the representation of the war on television had a significant
impact on public opinion, shaping support or opposition to the war.
2. The war in Iraq was presented overwhelmingly as a war of liberation by the
television news in Britain, a framing that supported the government's position on
the war.
3. The report also found that the BBC's coverage of the war was too deferential to the
government and not sufficiently critical of the intelligence used to justify the
invasion. It also highlighted the lack of context and analysis in the coverage of the
war, which resulted in the public not being fully informed about the reasons and
consequences of the war.

There have been many academic studies conducted on the Iraq War (2003-2011).
The research, funded by Cardiff University, covers the BBC1 news at 6 pm, the ITV Evening
News at 6.30 pm, Channel 4 News at 7 pm and Sky News at 9 pm.
 1. Over the three weeks of conflict, 11% of the sources quoted by the BBC were of
coalition government or military origin, the highest proportion of all the main
television broadcasters.
2. The study found the BBC placed the least emphasis on Iraqi casualties, which
were mentioned in 22% of its stories about the Iraqi people.
3. British broadcasters were eight times more likely to make references indicating
the presence of chemical and biological weapons than to suggest their absence.
Thus, while no such weapons were actually found during the war, 89 percent of
the references assumed their probable existence, while only 11 percent cast
doubt on this idea (Lewis & Brookes, 2004)
4. Images of the toppling of the statue were shown a total of 21 times on the four
main evening news programs: five times on BBC 1, six on ITV News, seven on
Channel 4, and three times on Sky though, as a rolling news channel, Sky had
already shown the image many times before.
5. It was this event, more than any other episode during British broadcast coverage
of the war, that provoked an outpouring of hyperbole, with reporters using
words and phrases such as: 'momentous', 'breath-taking', and utterly
overwhelming' (BBCI);'extraordinary', 'astounding' (ITV News); 'tremendous',
'ecstatic' (Channel 4); 'amazing', 'fantastic' (Sky).
6. It was hard to resist, as a viewer, the impression of a city united in celebration of
being liberated:
7. Momentous scenes as the Americans take control of central Baghdad. After
three weeks of the war, U.S. forces are greeted by crowds of cheering Iraqi
civilians (BBCI, 10 p.m. News, April 9, 2003).
8. Nothing could have prepared me for that moment. It was utterly overwhelming
(Rageh Omaar, BBCI 10 p.m. News, April 9, 2003).
9. Cry freedom, the people say they've been liberated (Sky 10 p.m. News, April 9,
2003).
10. American armoured vehicles swept into the heart of Baghdad and were met by
crowds of jubilant Iraqis (BBC News 24, April 9, 2003).

Ref: TELEVISION, PUBLIC OPINION AND THE WAR IN IRAQ: THE CASE OF BRITAIN by Justin
Lewis
The Hutton Inquiry, an independent investigation led by Lord Hutton in 2003, aimed to
examine the circumstances leading to the death of David Kelly, a government weapons
expert who had been a source for a BBC report that alleged that the government had
manipulated intelligence to justify the Iraq war.

• The BBC's story, which suggested that the government had "sexed up" intelligence in
order to justify the invasion of Iraq, was unfounded and that the broadcaster failed
to adequately check the accuracy of the information provided by its source.
• The BBC failed to properly investigate the complaints made against it, and its
governance structures were defective.
• The inquiry found that the story was based on a single, uncorroborated source and
that the BBC failed to check the accuracy of the information provided by the source.
• The inquiry concluded that the story was "unfair to the government" and that the
BBC failed to ensure that the story was accurate.
• The inquiry also criticized the BBC for its handling of the story and for failing to
properly investigate the complaints made against it.
• The inquiry found that the government did not "sex-up" the intelligence used to
justify the invasion of Iraq.

"Media, War and Postmodernity" is an edited volume edited by Nick Couldry and Andreas
Hepp, and was published in 2007. The book includes several chapters that examine the
representation of the Iraq War in the media. The book examines the relationship between
media, war, and postmodernity by exploring how the representation of war in the media
has changed in the post-modern era.

Some of the key findings of the book are:

1. The media representation of the Iraq War was heavily influenced by the
government's narrative and the media's need to appeal to a mass audience.
2. The media's coverage of the war was characterized by a lack of critical examination
of the government's justification for the war.
3. The media's representation of the war was shaped by the need to appeal to a mass
audience and to create a sense of unity and national purpose.
4. The media's representation of the war was characterized by a lack of diversity and a
reliance on official sources.
5. The media's representation of the war was influenced by the rise of new media
technologies, such as the internet, and the increased use of images and video in
news coverage.
 • The BBC and the Iraq War: A Study in Propaganda" by David Miller. This study,
published in the Journal of Peace Research, examines the BBC's coverage of the Iraq
War and argues that it was complicit in the government's propaganda efforts.

• "The BBC, the Iraq War, and the 'War on Terror': A Study in News Discourse" by
David Altheide. This study, published in the International Journal of Press/Politics,
examines the BBC's coverage of the Iraq War and the "War on Terror" and argues
that it reinforced the dominant narrative of the government's case for war.

1. In a report published in 2016, the BBC Trust found that the corporation's coverage of
the run-up to the war "fell short of the standards of accuracy and impartiality"
expected of the BBC.

There have been many academic studies conducted on the Iraq War (2003-2011). Some
notable studies include:

2. The media coverage of the war was heavily influenced by the government's
narrative, which was focused on the threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs)
and the link between Iraq and terrorism.
3. The media failed to provide a critical examination of the evidence presented by the
government to support its case for war.
4. The media also failed to provide an adequate counter-narrative to the government's
claims.
5. The media framed the war as a "just war" that was necessary to protect the U.S.
from the threat of terrorism and WMDs.
"The Media and the War on Iraq" by David Altheide and Christopher B. Simpson,
published in 2003.

1. "Embedded: The Media at War in Iraq" by Bill Katovsky and Timothy Carlson,
published in 2004. This study looks at the phenomenon of embedded journalism and
its impact on the media's coverage of the war.
2. "Bad News from Iraq: Journalists in the Crossfire" by Robert N. W. Keatley, published
in 2005. This study examines the dangers faced by journalists in Iraq and the
challenges of reporting on the war.
3. "The Iraq War: European Perspectives on Politics, Strategy, and Operations" edited
by John Andreas Olsen and Sten Rynning, published in 2005. This edited volume
 includes several chapters that examine various aspects of the war from a European
perspective.
4. "Media, War and Postmodernity" edited by Nick Couldry and Andreas Hepp,
published in 2007. This edited volume includes several chapters that examine the
representation of the Iraq War in the media.
5. "The Iraq War: A Strategic Assessment" by Anthony H. Cordesman, published in
2007. This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the military and political
aspects of the war.
6. "The Iraq War: Causes and Consequences" edited by Peter R. Neumann and Richard
English, published in 2009. This edited volume includes several chapters that
examine the causes and consequences of the war.