BBC Chair admits ‘serious failings’ led to Gaza documentary scandal

During a parliamentary hearing on the work of the BBC before the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, Shah said the link had not been disclosed due to “serious failings” on the part of both the BBC and the independent production company, Hoyo Films, that made the documentary.

Shah called the scandal a “really bad moment” and a “dagger to the heart of the BBC’s reputation as impartial and trustworthy”.
However, he suggested that it was the result of “people not doing their jobs” in terms of the BBC’s compliance rules, rather than a failure of those systems as a whole.

Shah explained: “Questions started on day one following transmission...a report came to the board last Thursday and, to my shock, we found that there were serious failings on both sides.

"What we’ve done now is to ask for a further investigation. I have a worry that it wasn’t so much the processes that were at fault as that people weren’t doing their jobs.

"The idea that we see the conflict in Gaza through the eyes of children is a good documentary idea, what we’re talking about is the execution of that idea.”

Since the film’s release (and subsequent withdrawal from iPlayer), questions have also been raised over payments made from the BBC to those involved in the film, and over whether any money may have been diverted to Hamas.

But the corporation’s Director General, Tim Davie CBE, who was quizzed by MPs alongside Shah, insisted that the only payment made from the BBC was “for a licence fee to the programme maker to make the film”.

Davie did, though, admit that a “small payment” was made to Al-Yazouri’s sister by Hoyo for his narration and said that the internal inquiry, led by Peter Johnston, the former head of BBC Northern Ireland, would examine whether any money reached Hamas.

And he accused Hoyo of failing to answer the BBC’s questions about potential Hamas links in advance of broadcast, saying: “There were unanswered questions from the BBC that should have been followed up and answered.

"This should have been declared, transparency was lacking.”

Asked if the BBC had been intentionally deceived by Hoyo, Davie refused to be drawn but did say the possibility would be examined by Johnston and agreed that it was “still a question”.

Elsewhere in the hearing, Shah suggested that the row could prompt a larger review of the BBC’s coverage of the Middle East in general as that will not be within the scope of Johnston’s report.

He told the committee that it “warrants a proper, independent review of our coverage as a whole”, to which Davie added: “I am proud of how we’re covering some of these polarised, fiendishly difficult events.

“Our journalists are under enormous pressure, ferocious lobbying...it’s been extremely difficult.

“Nothing is more important than that we’re trusted...there’s a lot of frustration and disappointment [regarding the film].”

However, while he admitted that the scandal was “damaging”, he said: “Overall trust in BBC News remains very high.

"We’re the most trusted brand in the world...I think we’re doing a great job with our coverage.”