British Broadcasting Corporation Gaza Programme Considered a 'Significant' Infringement of Media Standards, Says Broadcasting Watchdog
The BBC committed a "major breach" of industry standards by failing to disclose that the presenter of a documentary about the Gaza conflict was the son of a Hamas official, as determined by regulatory body Ofcom.
An investigation by Ofcom into the documentary titled Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has determined that the film was "materially misleading".
The chief executive of the broadcaster had previously apologised, saying there had been "a significant failing in relation to factual correctness".
The regulator has directed the BBC to broadcast a prime-time announcement about its findings.
"As this represents a significant violation of our regulations, we are directing the broadcaster to air a message of our findings against it on the BBC's second channel at 9pm, with a schedule to be finalised," the regulator stated.
'Risk to Erode Confidence'
The watchdog's report declared: "Our probe found that the documentary's omission to reveal that the voice's male guardian held a post in the Hamas-administered government was substantially inaccurate.
"This implied that the viewers did not have critical information which may have been highly relevant to their evaluation of the narrator and the information he presented.
"Confidence is at the core of the connection between a media organization and its viewers, notably for a public service broadcaster such as the British Broadcasting Corporation.
"This failing had the potential to erode the very considerable degrees of credibility that the public would have put in a factual film from the broadcaster about the conflict in Gaza."
The documentary was removed from the online platform in the month of February after the boy's family links emerged, and in July an corporation's own inquiry found it infringed the corporation's journalistic standards on factual correctness.
A corporation official said: "The Ofcom ruling is in accordance with the conclusions of Peter Johnston's review, that there was a serious error in the programme in relation to the broadcaster's journalistic policies on factual correctness, which reflects regulation 2.2 of the regulator's media standards.
"We expressed regret for this and we agree with Ofcom's decision in complete. We will follow the penalty as soon as the timing and wording are confirmed."
