BBC News executive says it ‘failed' to ask right questions on Gaza documentary
The review, published on Monday, was conducted by Peter Johnston, the director of editorial complaints and reviews which is independent of BBC News, and found that the programme was in breach of accuracy for 'failing to disclose information about the child narrator's father's position within the Hamas-run government'.
It did not, however, find any other breaches of editorial guidelines, including breaches of impartiality, and also found no evidence that 'outside interests' 'inappropriately impacted on the programme'.
Speaking on BBC's Radio 4 World At One programme, Deborah Turness, chief executive of BBC News said: 'Our current affairs teams, day in, day out, week in, week out, are creating and pushing out incredibly controversial, difficult, complex documentaries.
'We have really good, best in class systems in place, but in this we failed, and we must put in place new processes which will enable us to continue with our courageous journalism with confidence.'
She also added: 'It's about accountability. And I think what you can see today is that the BBC has taken this incredibly seriously. We have led a full and thorough investigation, which we are publishing full and transparently.
'Everything is out there, and we share the action plan that we're now putting into place to prevent this kind of mistake happening again.
'We are responsible for everything that we publish and everything we broadcast. We take it incredibly seriously, and we didn't run those questions to ground.'
Ms Turness also addressed a second Gaza documentary, Gaza: Doctors Under Attack, which was originally commissioned by the broadcaster from an independent production company called Basement Films.
However, the corporation delayed airing it until the review into Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone was released.
The documentary, which includes witness accounts from frontline Palestinian health workers in Gaza and documents attacks on hospitals and clinics, was later pulled entirely and aired on Channel 4 earlier this month.
Ms Turness said: 'We want to tell the stories of Gaza. We are telling the stories of Gaza.
'We've got long form projects in the pipeline. We are covering Gaza, and we're covering it with courage and without fear or favour.
'During that production, the BBC raised concerns around the social media activity of one of the journalists. Obviously, we are incredibly protective and conscious of our impartiality and our very high standards of impartiality, and we were concerned about the activity of the journalist concerned.
'We decided, in the light of those concerns, that we would pause broadcast of that documentary while waiting to see what the Peter Johnston report would bring us.
'The film company weren't happy with that pause, and they wanted the journalism to air sooner. So we were trying to find a way around that, trying to find a way without airing the documentary, to put the journalism and the voice of the doctors on our platforms.
'And then came a moment where the lead journalist went on the Today programme to talk about Israel's attacks on Iran and used language around Israel that was really not compatible with the BBC standards of impartiality and made it impossible for us to continue with the project.
'It was very difficult to imagine that it could meet the BBC standards of impartiality, and that it would have created at least a perception of partiality, had we aired it.
'And the right thing to do at that time was to walk away, because no BBC journalist could have said what that journalist said on air, and therefore we have to apply some of the same standards to those who work with us from the outside.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Israel's dangerous expansionism is now the clear and present danger
That much was evident again during a speech in February when Israeli defence minister Israel Katz told how he had asked the country's military commanders what the main lesson was from the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023. 'They said we will no longer allow radical organisations to exist near [[Israel]]'s borders, whether in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, or near the settlements. And that is now our policy,' Katz's speech went on to recount the military chiefs as saying. But the truth of the matter is that this has always been Israel's policy, and at the heart of such a military doctrine lies the belief that territorial depth offers lasting security. Or, to put this another way, security through expansionism has forever been a core tenet of the Israeli military playbook. That said, rarely has the country and its government been as determinedly expansionist as it is today. Writing recently in the Financial Times (FT), the Saudi author and commentator Ali Shihabi described Israel's current pursuit of more territory as one 'cloaked in the language of security and religious entitlement'. By 'entitlement' Shihabi is, of course, referring to the biblical idea of a 'Greater Israel' that many of the religious zealots and right-wingers that comprise prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu's coalition government envisage in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and beyond. Whether Netanyahu himself is fully aligned with his cabinet over ambitions for a 'Greater Israel' remains open to conjecture, but what's in no doubt is that Israel is now pushing back its borders like never before. In Gaza this past week, reports of an intensification in the demolition of buildings underscores what many observers see as Israel's long-term plan to move the Palestinian population out and fully control Gaza's post-war space. In the occupied West Bank, meanwhile, Israel's illegal settlement expansion and annexing of territory goes on apace. Further afield, the past week also saw Israel doubling down militarily on both Syria and Lebanon. In Syria, Israel continues to take territorial advantage of the country's political fragility in the wake of the overthrow of Bashar al- Assad's regime. (Image: The Washington Post via Getty Images) FAR BEYOND THE LINE FOR months, the Israeli military have been assimilating the Druze residents of the Golan Heights, venturing territorially far beyond the line where their predecessors stopped during the conquest of this mountainous plateau Israel has occupied since 1967. Since the ousting of Assad last December, Israel has struck Syria hundreds of times, and invaded and occupied about 155 square miles of its territory. Last Wednesday, Israel launched air strikes on Syria's capital, Damascus. It also hit Syrian government forces in the south in an operation it says was aimed at protecting the Druze minority group caught up in clashes with Bedouin tribes in Syria's southern province of Sweida close to the Israeli border. But Netanyahu's claim that Israel is simply giving the Druze – one million of whom are are spread across the region including in Israel – a helping hand simply doesn't wash with many Middle East analysts.'It's pure opportunism,' Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. 'Of course, it's nice to pretend that we're helping our friends the Druze in the same way as we never helped our other friends, the Kurds,' he said, referring to another regional ethnic group. Pinkas is not alone in his assessment that Israel doesn't want to see a unified Syria with a strong central government controlled by Ahmed al-Sharaa's fledgling presidency. Like other observers, Pinkas maintains that Netanyahu would far rather see 'a weak central government dealing with areas controlled by the Kurds (in the north) and the Druze and Bedouin in the south.' 'Basically, if Syria remains un-unified, Israel can do what it wants in its south,' he added, underlining yet again the perceived importance of territorial depth offering lasting security. Few doubt the sectarian violence that has gripped Syria's Sweida province these past days has underscored the country's fragility and presented al-Shaara with his most significant crisis yet. For his part, Netanyahu reiterated that Israel will continue to use military means to enforce its two red lines in Syria – the demilitarisation of the area south of Damascus, near Israel's border, and the protection of the country's Druze minority there. The most extremist members of Netanyahu's government, meanwhile, continue to make clear that Israel's intention is to go much further. Only a few months ago, Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that Israel would not stop fighting until Syria was partitioned and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had been expelled from Gaza into third countries. 'With God's help and the valour of your comrades-in-arms who continue to fight even now, we will end this campaign when Syria is dismantled, Hezbollah is severely beaten, Iran is stripped of its nuclear threat, Gaza is cleansed of Hamas and hundreds of thousands of Gazans are on their way out of it to other countries,' Smotrich declared during a pre-Memorial Day speech in the West the country? DIVIDE THE COUNTRY ACCORDING to the Times of [[Israel]], Smotrich's comment about dividing Syria came just days after a US Republican congressman Marlin Stutzman told the newspaper that al-Sharaa had expressed 'openness' to normalising relations with Jerusalem and cautioned against efforts to divide the country. 'The first (concern) – which I felt was most important to him – was that Israel may have a plan to divide up the nation of Syria into… multiple parts. That was something that he was very opposed to,' Stutzman recalled. The plan again, according to the Times of Israel, appeared to be a reference to the lobbying Israel has reportedly been doing in Washington for the US to buck al-Sharaa's fledgling government in favour of establishing a decentralised series of autonomous ethnic regions, with the southern one bordering Israel being by last week's flare-up between Israel and Syria, that issue of partitioning Syria and creating a demilitarised southern area appears to be still on the cards as far as Netanyahu is concerned. This weekend, relations took a slightly more positive turn, however, after hostilities between the two sides were quelled on Friday by the announcement of a ceasefire. Israeli officials confirmed that 'due to the ongoing instability' they had agreed to allow Syrian forces limited access to the Sweida area over the next few days. But even with this ceasefire in place the situation remains incredibly volatile, and al-Sharaa could now in effect be forced to either cede ambitions to reassert state control over southern Syria, undermining his attempts to unify the country, or risk an even greater confrontation with Israel. Israel's laying down of territorial markers in Syria is just the latest example of what some analysts says is a policy of pushing a dangerous expansionism in the region. With the Israeli air force bombing Beirut and the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, as well as the Syrian capital Damascus from which its infantry troops are now stationed a mere 40 minutes away, never has Israel engaged in such prolonged conflict on so many battlefronts. All this, too, before taking into consideration its recent onslaught on targets across Iran. With every day that passes Netanyahu, it seems, raises the stakes even further while increasingly disregarding the occasional overtures from Washington to rein in Israel's military actions as was the case in Syria last week. Read more Tears and trauma: David Pratt in Ukraine DAVID PRATT ON THE WORLD: Whatever happens in Brazil's resentful and rancorous election, the result will have major repercussions for us all David Pratt in Ukraine: It's hard to comprehend this level of destruction David Pratt: Kremlin's protestations have a hollow ring as atrocities mount up EXPANSION STRATEGY TO get a fuller picture of the scale and intensity of Israel's expansionist strategy at the moment it's worth considering recent mapping compiled by the independent non-profit think tank the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED). According to a recent analysis of its data, it shows that between October 7, 2023 – the date of the Hamas attack on Israel – and just before Israel attacked Iran on June 13, Israel has carried out nearly 35,000 recorded attacks across five countries: the occupied Palestinian territory, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and attacks include air and drone strikes, shelling and missile attacks, remote explosives, and property destruction. The majority of attacks have been on Palestinian territory with at least 18,235 recorded incidents, followed by Lebanon (15,520), Syria (616), Iran (58) and Yemen (39). Detailing ACLED's research, the broadcaster Al Jazeera noted that while the bulk of Israel's attacks have concentrated on nearby Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon, its military operations have also reached far beyond its immediate the past six months, Israeli forces have launched more than 200 air, drone or artillery attacks across Syria, averaging an assault roughly every three to four days, according to ACLED. In Gaza, meanwhile, reports last week confirmed that Israel has stepped up the demolition of buildings across Gaza with entire towns and suburbs levelled in the past few weeks. Heavy machinery has played a central role in this destruction operated both by soldiers and civilians, reports operating heavy machinery in Gaza can earn as much as $9,000 per month, according to reports in the TheMarker, a Hebrew-language daily business newspaper. According to newspaper, a trained heavy equipment operator can earn approximately 1,200 shekels (£270) per day, drawn from the 5,000 shekels (£1,118) the Israeli ministry of defence pays daily to the equipment's owner.'At first I did it for the money. Then for revenge. The work there is very hard and unpleasant,' one heavy equipment operator told TheMarker. 'The army doesn't operate smartly, it just wants to destroy as much as possible and doesn't care about anything.' Gaza's demolitions, many of them buildings that have already been destroyed or damaged by Israel's military onslaught, is seen by observers as part of a longer post-war plan to control, contain, or disperse what remains of Gaza's civilian Palestinian population and prepare the way for the territory's use for settlement expansion and commercial use. In the occupied West Bank, meanwhile, Israel is applying many of the tactics used in its war on Gaza to seize and control territory there. According to an analysis by the British research group Forensic Architecture, Israel has used building demolitions, armoured bulldozers, and air strikes to establish a permanent military presence in areas such as Jenin, Nur Shams and Tulkarem refugee camps. Satellite imagery shows widespread destruction, with entire neighbourhoods flattened and roads reconfigured to facilitate troop movements and surveillance. The United Nations estimates that these operations have displaced at least 40,000 Palestinians. As Israel's expansionist strategy intensifies, many regional observers say it is simply fuelling chaos and stoking up a future widening regional conflict. Martin Gak is an Argentinian Jewish journalist based in Germany who is of the view that Israel's territorial ambitions are 'much bigger than the theological design of greater Israel'. In a recent interview, Gak drew parallels with the way Israel is now operating in the Middle East using tactics similar to those of Russia. He said: 'If you look at Gaza, if you look at what happened in southern Lebanon, the images should be very reminiscent of Grozny in the second Chechen war… so I think that what we're seeing is a Russian playbook of complete destruction,' Gak told Turkish media. ISRAEL'S GAIN? OTHER regional observers like the Saudi commentator Shihabi recently posed the question in the FT as to what does Israel truly gain from this relentless push to expand its borders? 'The cost is staggering: deepening international isolation, increasing threats to the global Jewish community, psychological trauma within a constantly targeted Israeli society, and the further destabilisation of an already volatile region,' Shihabi concluded. Like other Middle East watchers, Shihabi is firmly of the view that more territory is not the answer to Israel's security problems and that 'the future is being held hostage by zealots who value conquest over co-existence'. While it might have been initially framed as an 'incursion' to eradicate Hamas and rescue the nearly 250 hostages seized on October 7, Israel's Gaza 'operation' has since moved into an entirely new and much wider military realm. It's one, too, for which it has been given virtual carte blanche by the US and Western countries to prosecute. Until that stops, Israel's dangerous expansionist ambitions will almost certainly continue to fuel an escalation in conflict across the Middle East. The days of framing such a military strategy as being driven by 'existential need' have gone. Israel, as many rightfully argue, is the real regional threat now.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Anti-Semitism rife in UK schools
Anti-Semitism is rife in the UK's schools, with more than half of Jewish teachers reporting abuse. Jewish teachers have reported increasing instances of swastika graffiti and chants of 'free Palestine' and 'f--- the Jews'. One Jewish teacher said: 'On multiple occasions, students have shouted 'free Palestine' at me. On another occasion, someone shouted 'f--- the Jews' outside a meeting of Jewish students.' The findings were revaled in a survey of Jewish teachers by the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT), which has more than 300,000 members. It comes after a Government-backed report found that anti-Semitism has been normalised in middle-class Britain. The survey found that 51 percent of Jewish teachers had experienced anti-Semitism in their schools since May 2023. A total of 44 per cent reported swastika graffiti appearing at their school since May 2023, and 39 per cent have witnessed or been subject to Nazi-related comments. Jewish teaching staff reported being told 'it's not racist to say Jews are rich – it's just a fact', while others have faced assumptions that they are Israeli and not British citizens. The rise in the abuse is being fuelled by 'dangerous' rhetoric from the far-Right and misinformation on social media, according to Matt Wrack, the acting NASUWT general secretary. But the union's response has been criticised for failing to address anti-Semitism from far-Left or Islamist groups in the aftermath of the Oct 7 Hamas terror attack on Israel.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
'Vulnerability' left in UK constitution after UKIMA review
The Internal Market Act (UKIMA) faced fierce criticism from devolved administrations when it was introduced in 2020 to regulate trade within the UK following EU withdrawal. They argued it enabled Westminster to override devolved decision-making in areas such as public health and food standards in pursuit of a unified UK market. After winning power in 2024, the Labour Government announced it would be reviewing the legislation. The findings of the UKIMA review were published last Tuesday. The review introduced procedural changes – including a mechanism to fast-track exclusions from the act where the economic impact is less than £10 million per year – and pledged to prioritise the use of common frameworks, post-Brexit agreements intended to manage formerly EU-governed policy areas collaboratively. READ MORE: Lesley Riddoch: I was steered by BBC bosses on how to report. I ignored it However, the review's changes are not legally binding and could easily be reversed, Professor Thomas Horsley, a constitutional law expert at the University of Liverpool, said. 'All they've done is said, 'these legal powers that exist, we commit politically to exercise them in accordance with what we agree in the common frameworks',' Horsley said. 'But that is a political commitment, and we all know that intergovernmental commitments can be – even the strongest ones – can be disregarded by a particular recalcitrant government in London. 'So the constitutional vulnerability, if you want to put it like that, remains.' He also said the £10m threshold below which UKIMA exclusions would be fast-tracked was a 'low bar', noting that it could be met by the turnover of a single company. Following the publication of Labour's review, both the SNP Government in Edinburgh and the Welsh Government in Cardiff welcomed changes to the exclusions process – but called for UKIMA to be fully repealed. Welsh Deputy First Minister Huw Irranca-Davies (Image: Welsh Government) Huw Irranca-Davies, the Deputy First Minister of Wales, said: 'We particularly welcome the commitment to implement any exclusions agreed via common frameworks, which should improve the functioning of the UK internal market. The common frameworks operate on a clear set of principles which fully respect devolution and include dispute resolution mechanisms. 'However, it is our long-standing and consistent view that the act should be repealed and replaced with a system, underpinned by legislation, designed around the common frameworks.' Scottish Constitution Secretary Angus Robertson hit out in stronger terms, saying UKIMA 'introduces radical new uncertainty as to the effect of laws passed by the Scottish Parliament and effectively provides a veto to UK ministers'. 'Nothing set out in the UK Government's response to the review changes this position, which is completely unacceptable,' he went on. READ MORE: Kate Forbes calls for Internal Market Act to be scrapped 'The conclusion of the review falls well short of our stated position of repeal and replace UKIMA, and indeed short of the legislative change required to mitigate the most damaging aspects of the operation of UKIMA.' Horsley said he could understand the argument being made by the devolved governments, that the 'common frameworks can do it all' and UKIMA is unnecessary. 'It is precarious because if things don't get agreed through the common frameworks – or a future UK Government decides, well, these political commitments we made, we're changing our mind – the legal powers are still there,' he said. 'This review doesn't change the legal framework, it just says, wait a minute, we're going to park it in the background and we're going to try and work using more intergovernmental political mechanisms, the common frameworks.' However, Horsley said that although the Labour Government's review has resulted only in political pledges, it was 'definitely a move in the right direction and a move that speaks to the ambition of the UK Government to reset relations'. He went on: 'There are other parts of UKIMA which are just not discussed. [The devolved governments] would like to reopen discussions around the direct payments that can be made from London in devolved areas. So there are things that are not so narrowly related to intratrade that are still rubbing up wounds. 'But in terms of just narrowly looking at UKIMA and the market access principles, there are some positive things there and some clear commitments from the UK Government towards more consensual policy making … which is very different to obviously the more abrasive approach which preceded under previous governments.' READ MORE: John Swinney sets out 3-point plan for fresh independence push In late 2024, Horsley was one of four constitutional legal experts to co-author a report on UKIMA which concluded that reform of the legislation was 'essential to restore intergovernmental trust'. Asked if Labour's review had provided that essential reform, he said: 'What this review shows is that there is more work to be done, but it's around those common frameworks. 'It's now shifting the attention to making the common frameworks work. These are not off-the-shelf things that are super functioning and solve all the problems. 'So the work between the governments now is going to have to be making those common frameworks work.' Douglas Alexander is UK Trade Policy Minister (Image: UK Parliament) After the review was published, UK Trade Policy Minister Douglas Alexander acknowledged there were 'real concerns' about how the laws have operated, and pledged "improvements'. Alexander stressed the importance of having a 'well-functioning UK internal market' as part of the Government's 'ambition to improve economic growth for the benefit of businesses and people in all parts of our country'. He added: 'Latest figures show that trade between the four nations of the UK is valued at £129 billion and that it is particularly important to the economies of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.'
