BBC Gaza Programme Considered a 'Significant' Breach of Broadcasting Standards, Declares Ofcom
The public service broadcaster was found to have committed a "significant breach" of broadcasting rules by omitting to mention that the voice of a film about the Gaza conflict was the offspring of a Hamas representative, according to British broadcasting authority Ofcom.
An investigation by the broadcasting watchdog into the documentary titled Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has determined that the film was "significantly deceptive".
The head of the BBC had earlier expressed regret, saying there had been "a significant failing in relation to truthfulness".
The authority has instructed the corporation to broadcast a peak-time announcement about its conclusions.
"Given this constitutes a serious breach of our code, we are instructing the corporation to air a message of our findings against it on BBC Two at 9pm, with a timing to be determined," the statement read.
'Potential to Damage Trust'
The watchdog's statement stated: "Our probe found that the documentary's lack of disclosure that the voice's parent served in a post in the Hamas-controlled administration was substantially inaccurate.
"This implied that the viewers did not have essential details which may have been extremely pertinent to their judgment of the presenter and the content he presented.
"Confidence is at the core of the bond between a media organization and its audience, especially for a state-funded media outlet such as the public broadcaster.
"This oversight had the potential to undermine the very considerable levels of trust that viewers would have invested in a BBC factual programme about the conflict in Gaza."
The film was removed from the online platform in the month of February after the presenter's personal associations came to light, and in July an broadcaster's internal assessment found it infringed the corporation's journalistic standards on truthfulness.
A corporation official stated: "The authority's determination is in accordance with the conclusions of Peter Johnston's review, that there was a serious error in the documentary in relation to the BBC's Editorial Guidelines on factual correctness, which corresponds to Rule 2.2 of the regulator's media standards.
"We have apologised for this and we accept the regulator's ruling in full. We will comply with the sanction as soon as the timing and wording are determined."
