BBC Gaza Film Deemed a 'Major' Violation of Broadcasting Rules, Declares Broadcasting Watchdog
The public service broadcaster committed a "significant breach" of broadcasting rules by omitting to mention that the narrator of a programme about the Gaza conflict was the offspring of a Hamas representative, according to British broadcasting authority Ofcom.
An investigation by the broadcasting watchdog into Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has concluded that the programme was "significantly deceptive".
The chief executive of the broadcaster had previously apologised, noting there had been "a serious error in relation to truthfulness".
The authority has instructed the broadcaster to broadcast a peak-time statement about its conclusions.
"As this represents a significant violation of our regulations, we are ordering the BBC to transmit a statement of our determinations against it on the BBC's second channel at 9pm, with a date to be determined," it said.
'Potential to Undermine Credibility'
The authority's announcement declared: "The inquiry we conducted found that the programme's omission to reveal that the narrator's parent occupied a role in the Hamas-controlled government was significantly deceptive.
"It meant that the audience did not have essential details which may have been very significant to their judgment of the narrator and the information he presented.
"Trust is at the core of the connection between a television network and its audience, notably for a public service broadcaster such as the British Broadcasting Corporation.
"This oversight had the potential to undermine the exceptionally strong degrees of trust that the public would have put in a documentary produced by the BBC about the Gaza conflict."
The film was withdrawn from the BBC's streaming service in the month of February after the boy's family links were revealed, and in the month of July an broadcaster's internal assessment concluded it breached the organization's journalistic standards on factual correctness.
A corporation official commented: "The regulator's decision is in accordance with the results of Peter Johnston's review, that there was a significant failing in the film in relation to the corporation's content standards on truthfulness, which aligns with Rule 2.2 of the regulator's media standards.
"We issued an apology for this and we comply with the authority's determination in its entirety. We will comply with the penalty as soon as the date and wording are finalised."
