BBC faces questions over using son of Hamas official in Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone
The culture secretary has said she will raise concerns with BBC bosses about a documentary on Gaza that was narrated by the son of a Hamas official.The broadcaster has been criticised for Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone, which centred on a 13-year-old boy who is the son of Hamas's deputy minister of agriculture.Lisa Nandy said she would discuss the matter with the BBC's director general and chairman, "particularly around the way in which they sourced the people who were featured in the programme".The BBC said it had not been informed of the family connection in advance by the film's production company, and has apologised "for the omission of that detail".
The BBC has added a message to the start of the programme on its iPlayer streaming service, making clear the family link, and saying the production team had "full editorial control".A number of prominent TV figures including actress Tracy-Ann Oberman, Strike producer Neil Blair, former BBC One controller Danny Cohen and producer Leo Pearlman have written to the BBC to call for an investigation.They said: "Given the serious nature of these concerns, the BBC should immediately postpone any broadcast repeats of the programme, remove it from iPlayer and take down any social media clips of the programme until an independent investigation is carried out and its findings published with full transparency for licence-fee payers," they wrote.
Diligence checks
They raised concerns about the "editorial standards of this programme and the BBC's compliance with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code, its own Editorial Guidelines and English law", and asked the corporation to explain what had happened."If the BBC was aware that Abdullah Al-Yazouri was the son of a terrorist leader, why was this not disclosed to audiences during the programme?" they asked."If the BBC was not aware that Abdullah Al-Yazouri is the son of a terrorist leader, what diligence checks were undertaken and why did they fail?"The BBC has kept the programme on iPlayer, and the new message at the start reads: "The narrator of this film is 13 year old Abdullah. His father has worked as a deputy agriculture minister for the Hamas-run government in Gaza."The production team had full editorial control of filming with Abdullah."
Child's eye view
In a statement, the BBC said: "Since the transmission of our documentary on Gaza, the BBC has become aware of the family connections of the film's narrator, a child called Abdullah."We've promised our audiences the highest standards of transparency, so it is only right that as a result of this new information, we add some more detail to the film before its retransmission. We apologise for the omission of that detail from the original film."It added: "We followed all of our usual compliance procedures in the making of this film, but we had not been informed of this information by the independent producers when we complied and then broadcast the finished film."The film remains a powerful child's eye view of the devastating consequences of the war in Gaza which we believe is an invaluable testament to their experiences, and we must meet our commitment to transparency."Nandy said the matter was "a conversation I'll definitely be having with the BBC".Speaking to LBC on Thursday, she said: "I watched it last night. It's something that I will be discussing with them, particularly around the way in which they sourced the people who were featured in the programme."These things are difficult, and I do want to acknowledge that for the BBC, they take more care than most broadcasters in terms of the way that they try to portray these things. They've been attacked for being too pro-Gaza, they've been attacked for being anti-Gaza. But it is absolutely essential that we get this right."The documentary, which aired on BBC Two on Monday, was made by Hoyo Films, which has not commented.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
44 minutes ago
- The National
Owen Jones: The UK media has ignored this hugely revealing scandal
And yet Benjamin Netanyahu – the Israeli prime minister subject to an International Criminal Court arrest warrant – has been accused of forging this alliance by the Israeli political class. And yet – once again – the Westminster media has overwhelmingly failed to cover this latest profoundly revealing scandal. Avigdor Lieberman is a far-right opposition leader who once served as Netanyahu's deputy prime minister, foreign minister and defence minister. This week, he publicly announced: 'The Israeli government is giving weapons to a group of criminals and felons, identified with Islamic State, at the direction of the prime minister.' Did Netanyahu come out swinging, accusing his opponent of antisemitism, as he did when another opposition leader, former Israeli general Yair Golan, declared that Israel was killing babies as a hobby? READ MORE: Patrick Harvie: Increased UK defence spending only makes war more likely He did not. Instead, Netanyahu bragged that 'Israel is working to defeat Hamas in various ways, on the recommendation of all heads of the security establishment'. In a video message, he clarified that Israel had 'activated clans in Gaza that oppose Hamas', shamelessly calling it 'a good thing' which was saving the lives of Israeli soldiers. 'What's wrong with that?' We're talking here about a militia headed by a man named Yasser Abu Shabab. He styles his faction as the 'Anti Terror Service', but it is a criminal gang operating in an area of Rafah firmly under Israeli military control. His own family has not only disowned him, but backed his execution. According to Palestinian analyst Muhammad Shehada, his militia is composed of 300 'drug dealers and criminals.' And here's the important detail. To justify imposing a total siege on Gaza, Israel claimed that Hamas was stealing humanitarian food. Among those pointing out this wasn't true was Cindy McCain, widow of the late hawkish Republican senator John McCain, and now director of the World Food Programme. But we do know that Shabab's Israel-backed gang has been stealing aid. As ever with the Israeli authorities: every accusation is a confession. This is just another plank of Israel's starvation policy. But again, the Western media has overwhelmingly failed to clearly spell out what Israel is actually doing. Having imposed a total siege on Gaza since March 2, Israel set up a US-backed shadow entity named the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to explicitly supplant the UN. It hasn't just been rejected by every aid agency – even the US marine who heads it resigned on the basis it contradicted the basic principles of humanitarianism. The Foundation set three aid checkpoints in the south in an effort to concentrate Gaza's entire population into a confined area – a concentration camp. Too little aid was delivered, much of it unusable given the siege on cooking materials. But in any case, the Israeli military repeatedly fired on starving Palestinians. In the words of Tory MP Kit Malthouse, the UN system had been replaced with a 'shooting range, an abattoir'. But when the Israeli military massacred dozens of starving Palestinians, they deployed their usual strategy: deceive, deflect, deny, distort. Even though the shootings happened in an Israeli military zone, and despite the overwhelming evidence of Israeli lies, the Western media indulged Israeli claims that Hamas was responsible as if they were credible. CNN belatedly published a clear rebuttal of Israeli lies, but attention had already moved on. As ever, the Western media overall fail to allow Israeli responsibility for atrocities to stick. And yet now, even as Yair Lapid – the main opposition leader – states Netanyahu is 'giving weapons to organisations close to ISIS in Gaza', this latest plank of Israel's starvation strategy barely gets any coverage. This is despite Israel's 'Hamas is ISIS' campaign long being used to justify the genocide. This all fits a classic pattern, of course. Israel encouraged the rise of Hamas in the 1980s in order to undermine its public enemy number one at the time, Yasser Arafat's Fatah. More recently, Netanyahu worked with Qatar to transfer money to prop up Hamas – with the hope of dividing the Palestinian nation and movement so an independent state was impossible. Remember too how the West armed and backed the Mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, playing a crucial role in creating the global Islamist fundamentalist movement. You would think the Western media might take an interest given the precedents. It is true that there is a shift taking place. Israeli spokespeople are suddenly being taken apart on mainstream television. Sky News is demanding the Prime Minister answer if genocide is taking place. But the media narrative still has not clearly shifted to reality – that is, a crime of historic proportions is being facilitated by Western governments, which means questions should be focused on 'how can this crime be stopped, and perpetrators held to justice' rather than 'is Israel doing something very bad here?' The latter is an improvement on where the narrative was stuck for so long – which was essentially 'Israel is waging a war of self-defence', with a side debate about whether the 'response' was 'proportionate'. What is clear is that an understanding is creeping into the political and media elites that a reckoning is coming, where those who facilitated this abomination will be forced to answer for what they did and what they didn't do. Time is running out.
The National
44 minutes ago
- The National
Why your friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man gives you the ‘ick' factor
That shimmering street grid, and those sandstone bases of unbuilt skyscrapers, will host the most everyday superhero of the current Marvel Universe. Everyday, in every way. It's not just Peter Parker's tentative romance with Mary Jane Watson (and her variants), or his wracked grief on the deaths of his adoptive parents, or his humdrum job as a freelance photographer. But it's also his powers; they too partake of the everyday. In his earliest incarnation, Parker is bitten by a radioactive spider, escaped from an experiment. Spider-Man first appears in the nuclear-haunted, cold-warring mid-60s, where the lingering effects of radiation on babies and animals were well known. Not to mention the beginning of plausible genetic engineering. Watching the precursor to the forthcoming Glasgow-based movie, 2021's Spider-Man: No Way Home, it's notable that all the villains assembled – Doctor Octopus, Green Goblin, Sandman, Lizard, Electro – have gained their malevolent powers through exposure to radiation, or biological/cyborg experiment. Just like Spider-Man. READ MORE: 'Ludicrous': BBC bias claims reignite as majority of panellists back Labour Doth this 'good' mutant protest too much against the 'bad' ones? The citizens are consigned to the role of spectators (or squished collateral damage) as these super-humans fight for supremacy. No amount of Peter Parker homeliness – he is your 'friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man', after all, happiest when arresting street thugs – can hide his posthuman weirdery. No Way Home might be the eighth-biggest-grossing movie of all time, but it's lame in the way it resolves this tension – where body modification turns towards good or ill. Parker and friends test-tube up some remedies for the villains, transforming them back into their humdrum, benign human selves. But then Doctor Strange – played by a somnolent Benedict Cumberbatch – has to then 'magic' them back into the parallel universes they've come from. The current Spidey-verse – with a guileless Tom Holland in the title role – is, at this late stage in the Marvel franchise, a bewildering mix of superpowers. Under the techno-influence of Tony Stark, the old struggles with the Spidey costume – stitching it together, hauling it on, repairing rips – are now an automated swoosh from suit to suit. There's also a very funny sequence where previous Spider-Men from parallel universes (Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield) explore their web-making powers. Garfield and Holland have to keep refilling their cartridges, while Maguire produces it subcutaneously from his wrist (which was creator Stan Lee's original mutation). 'Does it come out anywhere else?' asks Holland guilelessly. This is a nod to the obvious metaphor: the yearning young adult Parker suddenly suffers a condition where white sticky fluid unpredictably erupts everywhere … The actors are given enough room to riff on it. So we're laughing, these days. But I don't think any amount of irony and eyebrow-raised referencing can reduce the essential strangeness of Spider-Man – and for that matter, X-Men, Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, Captain America, Black Widow, Ant-Man, I could go on. All of them are the victims of science and technology either gone wrong, or consciously applied to the body, resulting in imposed or desired superpowers. As the box office shows, the appetite is there for stories, however fantastic, of human biomodification. You could render them as giant compensation fantasies. We're coping with our everyday sense of bodily vulnerability to the outcomes of sci-tech, through entertainments that show us gaining power from it – not being polluted and made more fragile and dependent by it. Yet it strikes me that we are much more resistant to the transformations of bioscience than we are to the transformations of AI and automation. We consume all manner of creative narratives, both desirable and cautionary, about computers becoming conscious or purposeful – and it all seems more like a lubricant to the spread of AI in our lives than an inhibitor. When it comes to us and our bags of skin, however, we're just not as embracing of the radical bio-changes that the superheroes undergo, willingly or unwillingly. The safest vector is through disability or health. The pills and therapies that suppress appetite, attack viruses, enable pregnancies, and (who knows) slow down cell decay to prolong life. Even that avatar of techno-weirdness, Elon Musk, who wants to neurologically link brains and computers, does so first in service of the paralysed, giving them some much-needed agency and purchase in the material world. Yet we appear to have an unarticulated, deeply-set norm that kicks back against too much of this. The 'ick' factor is certainly present. Take the Enhanced Games that took place in Singapore the other week. Sportspersons competed in athletics which ignored the fuzzy line between legal performance-enhancing substances and illegal ones. But the games languished under waves of aversive, sometimes even revulsed press coverage. So we revel in the superheroic cavortings of cyborgs and mutants on our screens, while objecting to already finely-calibrated athletic bodies taking a few seconds off a track record, by expanding the pharmacopoeia of their drugs. I'm not complaining! Indeed, I'm desperately grateful that there seems to be some kind of natural, intuitive limit to the kinds of transformations we moderns of the 2020s are willing to undergo. Even the blockbuster entertainments are telling us something obvious, as the Earth is (yet again) threatened with total annihilation in their narratives. Which is that it ultimately, terminally matters how we humans consciously deploy our transforming powers in the world. I will admit to enjoying these bionic characters as modern mythological gods, cartoonishly laying out important dilemmas for us. However, I sometimes crave sci-fi tales in a much subtler register. Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go is interesting to set alongside these bombastic tales. In its way, it's hardly less monstrous. The whole society in this novel is stable, settled, orderly and utterly cruel: the institutionalised children in it are clones, being grown to adulthood so that they their organs can be harvested for clients. The supportive relationships that comprise much of the novel are to support the weakening young adults, as they are weakened by the surgeries they undergo. This is body modification, but all about submission to the process, accommodating its demands. It's far from radiation, gene therapy or prosthetics enabling you to leap tall buildings with a single bound. Bio-heroes in the blockbusters conduct their sparring in the public sphere, as if they're conducting an oblique argument about the society they're in. For No Way Home, they literally battle across the surface of a scaffolded Statue of Liberty. They're also constantly pursued by an Alex-Jones-like vlogger, casting Spidey as a public enemy. In Never Let Me Go, the bio-subjects are held in a pastoral enclosure, erased from the world that depends on their sacrifice. The crowds gawp at the superheroes: faced with Ishiguro's bureaucratic horror, the crowds avert their eyes. The superheroes at least ask: What happens when your body has power and potential, when what you can do with it amplifies your agency? Ishiguro asks: what happens when the body simply becomes somebody's property? The Spider-Man producer Amy Pascal says the new film will be about 'Peter Parker going to focus on being Spider-Man, because being Peter Parker was too hard'. Cute: his pursuit of Zendaya, as his girlfriend with a now wiped memory of him, will no doubt humanise the story. But Spider-Man – and we haven't even touched on arachnophobia (or is that arachnophilia?) – is properly odd, if you scrutinise him closely enough, and line him up with all his bionic pals. There are important tensions about humanity, technology and the future, hidden behind that bug-eyed mask.
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
TV teen who needed French polisher in Yellow Pages ad unrecognisable 34 years on
One of the best-remembered ads for the Yellow Pages phone directory featured a floppy-haired teenager waking up to the aftermath of party he'd thrown while his parents were away Before the rise of the internet, we had the Yellow Pages, a comprehensive directory of local businesses – from advice centres to zoos – all vying for your custom, packaged in a hefty, distinctively coloured phone book. In the 1990s, the Reading-based company became famous for its unforgettable TV adverts, each new release bringing a buzz of anticipation akin to the unveiling of a new John Lewis Christmas advert today. These TV commercials even turned their stars into temporary celebrities, long before the era of reality TV, and gave birth to several catchphrases. Anyone around at the time will easily remember the Yellow Pages ad featuring elderly man searching for a book titled Fly Fishing by J R Hartley, with the surprising twist that it was Mr Hartley himself seeking his old publication. There was also the cheeky young lad standing on a stack of Yellow Pages to sneak a kiss under the Christmas mistletoe. And in 2003, Cold Feet actor James Nesbitt was enlisted to rejuvenate the brand, with the actor channelling his character Adam's hapless persona from the show, using the Yellow Pages to navigate tricky situations. But one of the most memorable adverts, first aired in 1991, featured a shaggy-haired teenager waking up on his living room floor after hosting a house party while his parents were away. Venturing into a bedroom, he stumbles upon a stranger on the bed, exclaiming: "Wake up! My parents fly back today," as a small group hastily tidies up the house. Then after his abject horror at noticing a scratch on a wooden table, he turns to the reliable Yellow Pages to find a solution. "Hello, French polishers?" he enquires over the phone, adding: "It's just possible you could save my life." The scratch is skilfully polished away in the nick of time and everything seems fine, until the final moment when the unfortunate lad realises that someone has doodled a beard and glasses onto a woman on one of the family's treasured paintings. The teenager in the advert was portrayed by Nottingham actor Simon Schatzberger, who later played Adrian Mole in a stage production in London's West End, and has since appeared as a Woody Allen-esque character in a stand-up comedy show. Now aged 57, he's also had a stint as David Klarfeld on the BBC soap Doctors and made appearances in EastEnders as a Rabbi, both in December 2018 and again in January 2019. His other television roles include Band Of Brothers, Daniel Deronda and Father Brown. In 2019, Yellow Pages announced it would cease printing its iconic directories, after more than half a century. The final editions of the once-indispensable guide were delivered in Brighton, the city where the directory's original copies were distributed. It boasted 104 editions, each customised to specific areas of the UK, with nearly 23 million copies circulated each year. And in 2023, a perfume was launched that even smelled like Yellow Pages, proving the brand lives on... sort of.
