In the aftermath of the death of George Floyd, we saw protests and violent riots break out across America. Marchers carried signs that read “silence is violence” and “Black Lives Matter.”

“Black Lives Matter,” as we all know, is more than just a slogan. It’s a radical left-wing organization with an anti-capitalism, anti-police, anti-America, and anti-Israel agenda. Over the last several weeks, the group and their message have risen to what Fox News’s Tucker Carlson described last month as an “unprecedented” level of power “for an American political movement.”

“Black Lives Matter now enjoys almost complete immunity from criticism,” Carlson correctly pointed out at the time. He would know, considering that he has become a target of boycott efforts on behalf of BLM simply for daring to criticize the group’s agenda and how they really operate.

A big reason why Black Lives Matter is treated as though they are above criticism and scrutiny is because the mainstream media treats them that way. In fact, supposedly objective media reporters have actually gone on record defending the group, as we saw earlier this week when ABC News reporter Jon Karl and PBS reporter Yamiche Alcindor rushed to their defense during a press briefing after President Trump called a planned NYC “Black Lives Matter” road painting a “symbol of hate” in a tweet.

“Why is the president calling Black Lives Matter a symbol of hate?” an agitated Karl asked White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany Wednesday.

“On Monday, the president went after stripping racist themes on buildings. On Tuesday he went after a rule to combat segregation. And then today, he said that he describes the words Black Lives Matter as a symbol of hate. Why is he digging in on race in this way?” an indignant Alcindor asked during the same press conference.

In both instances, McEnany noted multiple times after both reporters asked the question different ways that Trump was talking about the organization, not individual black lives.

“All black lives do matter, he agrees with that sentiment,” McEnany responded to Karl. “But what he doesn’t agree with is an organization that chants ‘pigs in a blanket fry ’em like bacon’ about our police officers, our valiant heroes, who are out on the street protecting us each and every day.”

There is, of course, a big difference in saying you believe black lives matter versus saying you agree with the Black Lives Matter movement. It’s a very important, key distinction to make in this debate. Unfortunately, “woke” reporters here in the U.S. often deliberately blur the lines by conflating the two as if they mean the same thing, so they can play the exact type of word games they did with McEnany over Trump’s tweets.

Across the pond in the UK, however, there’s been an unexpected development on this front. Unlike the mainstream media here that routinely fails to make the distinction between saying “black lives matter” (blm) versus saying you support Black Lives Matter (BLM), a growing number of media outlets there have started distancing themselves from the political group because of their calls to defund the police and after a series of anti-Israel, anti-Semitical tweets posted by BLM-UK were recently posted. Here are just a few of them:

The BBC in particular has significantly pulled back in their shows of support for the group, claiming they don’t want to appear to be endorsing a political cause:

The BBC has decided its presenters and guests should not wear Black Lives Matter badges as the campaign was accused of “hijacking” George Floyd’s death for political reasons.

Bosses at the corporation have ruled that “visual symbols of support” for Black Lives Matter should not be worn on screen, senior sources told The Telegraph.

It comes as a number of high-profile organisations were forced to backtrack on their support for the Black Lives Matter movement as its UK arm publicly criticised Israel and called on the British government to “defund the police”.


Sources at the BBC, however, revealed the corporation had always deemed Black Lives Matter a political campaign, and had therefore deemed that the wearing symbols of support would fall foul of impartiality guidelines.

Some Sky Sports presenters have taken steps, too, to distinguish between expressing support for the black community versus endorsement of BLM:

But after the BLM UK campaign issued a barrage of politically-charged tweets earlier this week, Sky Sports presenters including the former England player Matt Le Tissier said they were uneasy about wearing badges after becoming concerned at the campaign’s far-left activism.

A spokesman for the Premier League, meanwhile, distanced themselves from BLM, saying it recognised “the importance of the message that black lives matter” but did not “endorse any political organisation or movement, nor support any group that calls for violence or condones illegal activity”.

A number of public officials there including some on the left have also gone on record in recent weeks criticizing the group while being careful to note that they support calls for racial justice and equality.

Several Twitter users pointed out that the BBC acting like BLM had been “hijacked” by radicals was laughable:

Whatever the case may be, it’s a refreshing change to see that in at least one country on this planet, media outlets are hitting the brakes on the notion that BLM is sacrosanct and above reproach.

The only question left is whether or not the U.S. media will eventually follow suit or continue pretending to “stay woke”?

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.