Disparity in coverage again

The Times is reporting that

"Dozens of bodies lined the dusty streets of three Christian villages in northern Nigeria yesterday. Other victims of Sunday morning’s Muslim rampage were jammed into a local morgue, the limbs of slaughtered children tangled in a grotesque mess.

One toddler appeared fixed in the protective but hopeless embrace of an older child, possibly his brother. Another had been scalped. Most had severed hands and feet.

Officials estimate that 500 people were massacred in night-time raids by Muslim gangs near Jos, the city that bestrides Nigeria’s Christian-Muslim fault line. "

Horrific news and surely something that a news organisation that routinely headlines the death of one 'child' in Hamas lead Gaza would want to lead with. Don't be silly, the news story is actually on the BBC news website and it's the lead story - on the Africa page:

"'Hundreds dead' in Nigeria attack
Several hundred people are now reported to have been killed in an ethnic clash near the Nigerian city of Jos, officials say"

"Several hundred", "ethnic clash". Take a read of the BBC report and notice the careful way it is worded with a definite attempt to try and apportion blame equally to the Christians and Muslims, even though the atrocities seem to be rather more one-sided.

Why does it seem that the BBC are always so keen to protect marauding Muslims in Africa from bad publicity and just as keen to paint as bad a picture of Israelis as possible? It can't be a coincidence, I've blogged about this inequality of coverage before, try here and here for starters.