BBC Gaza Programme Considered a 'Major' Violation of Media Standards, States Broadcasting Watchdog
The British broadcaster was found to have committed a "major breach" of media regulations by omitting to mention that the narrator of a documentary about Gaza was the child of a Hamas representative, according to regulatory body Ofcom.
An investigation by the broadcasting watchdog into Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has determined that the documentary was "significantly deceptive".
The chief executive of the broadcaster had earlier expressed regret, saying there had been "a major oversight in relation to truthfulness".
Ofcom has ordered the corporation to broadcast a evening declaration about its conclusions.
"As this represents a significant violation of our regulations, we are instructing the broadcaster to air a announcement of our conclusions against it on BBC Two at nine o'clock in the evening, with a date to be confirmed," it said.
'Possibility to Undermine Credibility'
The regulator's announcement declared: "The inquiry we conducted found that the programme's lack of disclosure that the voice's father occupied a post in the Hamas-controlled authority was significantly deceptive.
"It meant that the public did not have vital facts which may have been very significant to their assessment of the narrator and the content he provided.
"Confidence is at the center of the relationship between a media organization and its viewers, particularly for a public service broadcaster such as the BBC.
"This error had the possibility to erode the significantly high levels of confidence that viewers would have invested in a BBC factual programme about the Gaza conflict."
The documentary was withdrawn from the BBC's streaming service in last February after the boy's family links emerged, and in this past July an internal BBC review concluded it violated the broadcaster's editorial guidelines on truthfulness.
A representative for the broadcaster said: "The authority's determination is in agreement with the conclusions of Peter Johnston's review, that there was a major oversight in the documentary in relation to the corporation's content standards on factual correctness, which aligns with regulation 2.2 of Ofcom's Broadcasting Code.
"We issued an apology for this and we agree with the regulator's ruling in complete. We will comply with the directive as soon as the timing and language are determined."
