BBC calling President Zelensky *Mr*Zelensky

A lot of people do

Yes, i agree.
BBC has apologised for a Today presenter referring to Eddie Izzard as a man, which he is, because apparently it is 'a highly controversial area'.

I'm generally very happy with the I player news, the live news feed is detailed and informative:
I don't watch a lot, but totally agree that if the conversation involves President Trump then it should be President Zelensky.

and it is this morning on the I player feed

as in

A virtual summit on the war in Ukraine is under way as UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer says Putin will have to come to the table '"sooner or later"

Around 25 leaders, including European partners, the EU commission, Nato, Ukraine and Canada, are expected to be in attendance at the 'coalition of the willing' meeting

Earlier, Starmer said Russian President Vladimir Putin "cannot be allowed to play games" with the US-proposed ceasefire deal, and accused the Russian leader of "trying to delay" an agreement
The aim of the summit is for Europe to persuade the US to "guarantee Ukraine's security in the future", write's the BBC's diplomatic correspondent

Earlier this week, Putin set out conditions for a ceasefire in Ukraine, but *Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called his response "manipulative

Also this week, US President Donald Trump said he held "good and productive" discussions with Putin during talks in Moscow

I just felt there was a bias there for President Trump against 'Mr' Zelensky. He should be given his proper title as President of Ukraine.
Of course Putin prefers him to be called just Mr as he doesn't recognise Ukraine as a separate country.

How childish.

AGAA4

I just felt there was a bias there for President Trump against 'Mr' Zelensky. He should be given his proper title as President of Ukraine.
Of course Putin prefers him to be called just Mr as he doesn't recognise Ukraine as a separate country.

Language does matter.

eazybee

Yes, i agree.
BBC has apologised for a Today presenter referring to Eddie Izzard as a man, which he is, because apparently it is 'a highly controversial area'.

It was the excellent Anita Anand on the radio 4 PM programme on Friday. I missed her calling him (!) a man but heard her apology. My initial thought was was the last I heard of Eddie Izzard was that he had ‘girly days’ when he wore pink.

Honestly 🙈

eazybee

Yes, i agree.
BBC has apologised for a Today presenter referring to Eddie Izzard as a man, which he is, because apparently it is 'a highly controversial area'.

But it is a highly charged area. the Telegraph is enjoying making much of it, of course. the irony is that as the DT said itself,
"despite the comedian not caring about pronouns and gender labels"

Yes it is a highly charged area but ……

Whitewavemark2

AGAA4

I just felt there was a bias there for President Trump against 'Mr' Zelensky. He should be given his proper title as President of Ukraine.
Of course Putin prefers him to be called just Mr as he doesn't recognise Ukraine as a separate country.

Language does matter.

It does, I player got it right so I hope that it will be lesson learnt, as AGAA4 says there is pressure I think from both US and Putin to miss out the "President".

Iam64

Yes it is a highly charged area but ……

its a storm in a teacup!

The BBC does make mistakes as in Eddie Izzard being referred to as a man but the missing out of Zelensky's title was deliberate as two different reporters failed to call him President while giving Trump his title.
I know who deserves the title of President more and it isn't Trump.

Zelenskyy’s term as president would have expired in April 2024 but Ukraine has been under martial law since 24 February 2022 in response to the Russian invasion. Ukrainian law does not allow presidential elections to be held when martial law is in effect.

Article 19 of Ukraine's "On the Legal Regime of Martial Law" bans presidential, parliamentary, and local elections under martial law while Article 10 states that the powers of the President, Parliament, and Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine cannot be terminated under martial law.

Article 108 of the Constitution of Ukraine stipulates that "The President of Ukraine exercises his or her powers until the assumption of office by the newly-elected President of Ukraine" allowing incumbent President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to legitimately remain president until the next president is sworn in, even after the expiration of the five-year term to which he was elected in 2019. (Wiki)

Trump has said that Ukraine should hold elections to potentially replace Zelenskyy.

Quite how a country at war stages an election is hard to say. 14 million Ukrainians have either fled abroad or been displaced internally. Polls have shown that 81% of Ukrainians did not want elections until the war was over and more than 200 civil society institutions, NGOs, and human rights groups have formally opposed wartime elections.

He is entitled to be called President Zelenskyy until this war is over.

Going into any negotiations you go in on equal terms, and that terminology makes President Zelenskyy appear less significant than the other two.

I thought it was a huge mistake that President Zelenskyy went into the White House meeting alone. Trump had his side kick there and Zelenskyy should have had a deputy or an aide beside him. The savage treatment might not have been so devastating had another key person representing the Ukraine been present.

Always equal numbers, and equal in seniority.

The BBC are hilarious. It's not a storm in a teacup. If you lie about that you will lie about anything.

The complaints about not using "president" are quite justifed when they occur

- but I've just been doing a walkabout round the BBC and CNN using "president" Zelensky and the tendency is to initially use "president" for them both then just the surnames. However googling "Mr Zelensky" alongside "Mr Trump" is also used in a number of newspapers so it's hard to tell.

Eddie Izzard IS a man, there is no mistake.
Dropping the title President in front of Zelensky's name is exactly the same as the long BBC refusal to call Hamas a terrorist organisation.

eazybee you are correct 👍

I cant find the programme to which OP refers. Is it part of the breakfast show? What time did it go out? If the broadcaster is referring to both men in the same sentence giving one his title and the other not then that is surely wrong.

I was interested enough to look up why the BBC takes the position is does on Hamas - here is John Simpson late 2023.

"Government ministers, newspaper columnists, ordinary people - they're all asking why the BBC doesn't say the Hamas gunmen who carried out appalling atrocities in southern Israel are terrorists.
The answer goes right back to the BBC's founding principles.
Terrorism is a loaded word, which people use about an outfit they disapprove of morally. It's simply not the BBC's job to tell people who to support and who to condemn - who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.

We regularly point out that the British and other governments have condemned Hamas as a terrorist organisation, but that's their business. We also run interviews with guests and quote contributors who describe Hamas as terrorists.

The key point is that we don't say it in our voice. Our business is to present our audiences with the facts, and let them make up their own minds.

As it happens, of course, many of the people who've attacked us for not using the word terrorist have seen our pictures, heard our audio or read our stories, and made up their minds on the basis of our reporting, so it's not as though we're hiding the truth in any way - far from it

Any reasonable person would be appalled by the kind of thing we've seen. It's perfectly reasonable to call the incidents that have occurred "atrocities", because that's exactly what they are.
No-one can possibly defend the murder of civilians, especially children and even babies - nor attacks on innocent, peace-loving people who are attending a music festival"

I do follow the coverage in I player on Gaza and the BBC never fail to cover events from both POV - for example, it never supports criticism of Israel in terms of the ICC proceedings

Silverbrooks

I cant find the programme to which OP refers. Is it part of the breakfast show? What time did it go out? If the broadcaster is referring to both men in the same sentence giving one his title and the other not then that is surely wrong.

It was part of BBC1 Breakfast Show this morning, the section is called BBC News Watch presented by Samira Ahmed.

Thank you.

I’ve found it at 1:57 - three BBC clips in which President Zelenskyy was called Mr Zelenskyy in the same sentence as President Trump, and in one, President Trump, Vice President Vance and Mr Zelenskyy. It is hugely disrespectful and legally incorrect.

The previous segment was about how the BBC gets Canadian terminology wrong too, calling its premier President instead of Prime Minister and calling provinces states.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00292d5/breakfast-15032025

I'm very glad they have been pulled up on it!

Thank goodness for the BBC.. you can very rarely fault Newsnight, Question time or PM on radio 4.. for their wonderful presenters..