Tuesday, 18 April, 2000, 19:44 GMT 20:44 UK
Jewish leaders are angry Mr Irving was given air time
BBC under fire for Irving interviews
Jewish leaders have criticised the BBC for continuing to give a voice to shamed historian David Irving after he was branded a "racist and anti-Semitic" by a High Court judge.
They are outraged that the historian has appeared on BBC2's Newsnight and Radio 4's Today programme to defend himself.
"The BBC sets the standard for journalistic integrity in this country, and we are concerned to know what standards it will be setting in the aftermath of the Irving case."
Mr Irving sued Prof Lipstadt over her 1994 book, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory.
He said it had generated waves of hatred against him.
Lipstadt: Her views of
He maintained he was not a Holocaust denier, although he did question the scale of the Nazi destruction of the Jewish population and their use of gas chambers.
But Irving lost the case after the judge accepted Prof Lipstadt and Penguin's plea of justification.
Mr Irving was in defiant mood when he was interviewed on the Today programme following his defeat.
He vowed to "carry on ploughing my straight furrow across the country".
But the corporation says rather than giving Mr Irving a platform, it had challenged him on his opinions and asked questions many viewers and listeners wanted to see put to him.
A BBC spokesman said it had tried to examine the significance of the case.
He said the corporation had never offered Mr Irving a platform for his views.
"Instead we sought to hold those views up to rigorous scrutiny in order to reveal them for what they are," he said.
"We recognise the sensitivity of the case, and throughout our reporting, sought to reflect the judge's comments about David Irving's views."
Tuesday, 18 April, 2000
Website fact: The stamina of the defence team was aided by a six million dollar fund provided by Stephen Spielberg, Edgar J Bronfman, and the American Jewish Committee, which enabled them to pay 21 lawyers and "experts"; the experts like Evans, Longerich were paid up to £109,000 each to testify as they did (while the defence's star legal team was paid considerably more). Nobody was paying for Mr Irving, who has been fighting this battle for three whole years. Nor did he pay his defence witnesses one cent or sous: they testified from conviction, not for reward. [Help!]