British Broadcasting Corporation Gaza Programme Ruled a 'Significant' Infringement of Broadcasting Regulations, Declares Broadcasting Watchdog
The British broadcaster engaged in a "serious breach" of broadcasting rules by omitting to mention that the presenter of a programme about the Gaza situation was the son of a Hamas administrator, as ruled by British broadcasting authority Ofcom.
An investigation by the broadcasting watchdog into Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has found that the film was "substantially inaccurate".
The chief executive of the broadcaster had earlier expressed regret, noting there had been "a serious error in relation to accuracy".
The authority has directed the corporation to broadcast a peak-time statement about its decisions.
"Given this constitutes a major infringement of our regulations, we are directing the broadcaster to air a message of our conclusions against it on BBC Two at 21:00, with a schedule to be confirmed," the statement read.
'Risk to Damage Trust'
The watchdog's announcement stated: "The inquiry we conducted concluded that the programme's omission to reveal that the voice's parent held a position in the Hamas-controlled authority was materially misleading.
"It meant that the viewers did not have critical information which may have been extremely pertinent to their evaluation of the voice and the content he provided.
"Credibility is at the center of the connection between a media organization and its public, especially for a state-funded media outlet such as the British Broadcasting Corporation.
"This failing had the risk to erode the very considerable levels of confidence that viewers would have invested in a BBC factual programme about the Gaza conflict."
The film was pulled from the online platform in last February after the boy's personal associations emerged, and in the month of July an broadcaster's internal assessment determined it violated the organization's editorial guidelines on accuracy.
A corporation official commented: "The authority's determination is in accordance with the conclusions of Peter Johnston's review, that there was a significant failing in the programme in relation to the broadcaster's journalistic policies on accuracy, which aligns with regulation 2.2 of the authority's broadcasting regulations.
"We have apologised for this and we accept the regulator's ruling in its entirety. We will adhere to the sanction as soon as the timing and wording are determined."