British Broadcasting Corporation Gaza Programme Considered a 'Significant' Violation of Broadcasting Rules, States Broadcasting Watchdog
The British broadcaster was found to have committed a "serious breach" of industry standards by not revealing that the presenter of a documentary about Gaza was the child of a Hamas official, as determined by regulatory body Ofcom.
An probe by the broadcasting watchdog into Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has determined that the programme was "substantially inaccurate".
The BBC's director general had already issued an apology, noting there had been "a significant failing in relation to accuracy".
Ofcom has instructed the BBC to broadcast a evening announcement about its decisions.
"Given this constitutes a significant violation of our rules, we are ordering the corporation to air a message of our findings against it on BBC Two at 9pm, with a schedule to be confirmed," the regulator stated.
'Risk to Undermine Credibility'
The watchdog's announcement declared: "Our investigation found that the documentary's failure to disclose that the narrator's father held a position in the Hamas-administered administration was substantially inaccurate.
"It meant that the audience did not have essential details which may have been very significant to their judgment of the voice and the details he provided.
"Trust is at the core of the relationship between a media organization and its audience, particularly for a national broadcasting corporation such as the public broadcaster.
"This error had the possibility to undermine the exceptionally strong levels of credibility that viewers would have invested in a BBC factual programme about the Israel-Gaza war."
The film was withdrawn from the online platform in the month of February after the boy's personal associations came to light, and in July an internal BBC review determined it violated the broadcaster's editorial guidelines on accuracy.
A corporation official commented: "The regulator's decision is in accordance with the results of the internal assessment, that there was a significant failing in the film in relation to the broadcaster's journalistic policies on truthfulness, which corresponds to regulation 2.2 of the authority's broadcasting regulations.
"We issued an apology for this and we accept the regulator's ruling in complete. We will follow the penalty as soon as the date and wording are finalised."
