Read on Twitter
BBC podcast "Mayday" tries to repair the reputation of Syria's White Helmets & their late founder. It also tries to discredit the OPCW whistleblowers. It does so with glaring falsehoods & omissions. Host @chloehadj pledged to answer my Qs, but hasn't yet: https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/
I have outlined here just some of the major falsehoods, leaps of logic, and omissions in @chloehadj's series. If the BBC stands by this reporting, then I expect that it will welcome the opportunity to answer my questions.
cc @richkradio @bbcpress https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/
cc @richkradio @bbcpress https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/
It would take several articles to document all of @chloehadj's journalistic lapses. Here are a few glaring ones:
. @chloehadj strongly, and falsely, insinuates that OPCW whistleblower "Alex" collected a $100,000 reward from Wikileaks for leaking information. She aired this innuendo without doing the minimal journalistic step: asking Wikileaks if it's true.
. @chloehadj's series has a huge conflict of interest. Her topic is the White Helmets (WH) & its late founder, James Le Mesurier (JLM). Her *researcher* is a longtime employee of UK gov't contractor ARK -- which branded the WH, marketed it, & employed JLM. She never mentions this.
. @chloehadj claims that the OPCW inspectors' concerns were addressed. Yet she omits multiple, critical facts, including: the censorship of the inspectors' initial report; the exclusion of toxicology experts; the sidelining of the inspectors who went to Syria.
Here is perhaps @chloehadj's most incredible omission: her own BBC colleague's reporting! @Dalatrm says the hospital scene -- where the White Helmets, Chloe's topic was active -- was "staged."
Yet Chloe, on a BBC podcast about the White Helmets & Douma, completely omits this:
Yet Chloe, on a BBC podcast about the White Helmets & Douma, completely omits this:
There's a lot more, detailed here: https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/.
Again, if @chloehadj manages to respond to my questions as she promised to, I will update this article with her answers.
Again, if @chloehadj manages to respond to my questions as she promised to, I will update this article with her answers.
One of the most bizarre aspects of @chloehadj's podcast is her use of "Leon", a purported OPCW source, to attempt to refute the whistleblowers. Chloe claims Leon "works for the OPCW." But it's unclear in what capacity & if Leon had any role in the Douma probe he's commenting on.
Leon uses the filler word "like" a lot, sounding like a young guy, not a veteran scientist. He refers to the Douma team as "They" -- suggesting he wasn't a member. And he recycles the same laughable claims as @Bellingcat tried in their recent hoax. ( https://thegrayzone.com/2020/10/28/draft-debacle-bellingcat-smears-opcw-whistleblower-journalists-with-false-letter-farcical-claims/)
Weirdly, @chloehadj & "Leon" try to justify the infamous, unusual meeting between the Douma team & a US delegation in July 2018. US officials tried to convince the team that a chlorine attack happened. Inspectors were disturbed. "Leon" assures Chloe there's nothing to see here.
The irony here is that @chloehadj casts herself as a foe of state disinformation (in this case Russian & Syrian). Yet via her multiple omissions, falsehoods, & defense of US interference in an OPCW investigation, her podcast is an elaborate exercise in what she claims to oppose.
I encourage people to judge for themselves. Listen to @chloehadj's episode on Douma: ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08z33bp)
And then here are my questions, which lay out what I think are some of the key flaws in her reporting: ( https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/)
I look fwd to @chloehadj's answers.
And then here are my questions, which lay out what I think are some of the key flaws in her reporting: ( https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/)
I look fwd to @chloehadj's answers.
Update: The BBC has given me its "Response" to my questions. Here it is in full (personal info redacted):
1/ "There was no conflict of interest between the wider work of a freelance cameraman and the work he did for us as a researcher on this series."
2/ "This series is the result of thorough journalism and meets the BBC’s editorial standards. A number of your points are based on inaccurate interpretations of the contents of the series and we would suggest listening again for clarification."
3/ "As appropriate, we approached individuals where allegations were raised, inviting them as well as others to respond to what is reported in the programme. We stand by the investigation and our journalism." [end]
I replied with several follow-up questions, including a request for the BBC to identify the "inaccurate interpretations" (even just one) that it claims I made. I will update should they respond.
This "response" came from a BBC spokesperson. I still have not heard anything back from Mayday host/producer @chloehadj, who had previously committed to "answering something in writing." I look forward to those answers in writing.
I have updated this story with an observation that I didn't include in my questions to @chloehadj, but that I think is notable. Chloe's purported OPCW source, "Leon" sure likes to say "like" a lot. Does this sound to you like an experienced OPCW inspector, or a young man?
Here's the audio of that quote from "Leon"' -- it's an actor speaking, but @chloehadj says it's Leon's exact words.
Does he sound, like, credible?
Does he sound, like, credible?
Update: I have been in contact w/ @chloehadj, by phone & messaging, and can confidently deduce that she will not be answering any of my questions. Not one.
You can draw your own conclusions as to what that means. (I think she can't defend her reporting). https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/
You can draw your own conclusions as to what that means. (I think she can't defend her reporting). https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/30/questions-bbc-podcast-opcw-whistleblowers/
I hope @chloehadj proves me wrong on this, and answers the questions that I have laid out (with considerable effort, and in great detail).
