BBC to hire £200k boss to deal with Gaza documentary backlash
The corporation is seeking to guard against future reputational damage after being accused by the government of 'catastrophic failures' following the broadcast of Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone.
The documentary was pulled when it emerged that its main narrator, a boy named Abdullah, was the son of Ayman Alyazouri, the Hamas-run government's deputy minister of agriculture – a fact not disclosed to viewers.
A review of the broadcast found it broke editorial guidelines, and set out a series of measures to get a grip on coverage of the highly-sensitive Israel-Hamas conflict.
One of these measures is hiring a new director with 'editorial oversight across our portfolio of documentaries and current affairs journalism'.
The successful applicant will sit on the news board, made up of powerful figures at the BBC who typically earn more than £200,000.
Tzipi Hotovely, the Israeli ambassador to the UK, recently expressed a total lack of confidence in Ms Turness after the BBC executive spoke to staff about Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone.
Ms Turness said the Hamas official at the centre of the scandal over the documentary, Mr Alyazouri, was part of the Hamas government and not the military, and that a distinction should be made.
The UK government makes no such distinction, and both the civil and military wings are designated as part of a 'single terrorist organisation'.
It is hoped the new high-powered executive will help BBC News in 'upholding robust editorial compliance' following the Gaza documentary scandal.
The new director will be charged with restructuring how the BBC handles documentary-making, including 'rigorous social media and background checks' on those contributing to programmes.
Programmes deemed to be high-risk will also be directly overseen by a dedicated senior executive producer to 'improve lines of accountability'.
Some sources have suggested that there are perhaps 'too many cooks' when it comes to programme-making at the BBC, and it can become unclear who is responsible for what.
Other reforms being brought in following the documentary scandal will include a stipulation that translation of the word 'Yehudi' be rendered literally as 'Jews'.
Some campaigners have taken issue with the BBC translating the term as the more political 'Israelis', without the implication that 'Jews' are the target of criticism.
Tim Davie, the BBC director-general, has moved to reassure Jewish members of staff who are concerned about the broadcaster's culture and leadership following a series of incidents, including broadcasting a Glastonbury set which included chants of 'death to the IDF'.
The BBC's leadership is planning to offer expanded anti-Semitism training in the wake of these damaging scandals.
New modules addressing the issue of anti-Jewish sentiment are being devised by HR specialists, insiders have said.
And anagers may be offered further specialist training in order to help with decision-making relating to sensitive subjects.
A BBC spokesman said: 'We are deeply alert to the threat of anti-Semitism, which is why we have plans to roll out new mandatory anti-Semitism training to all staff across the BBC soon.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why I've changed my mind about a state of Palestine
The tragic images of starvation emerging from Gaza have shocked and angered the world. Yet we've become dangerously desensitized to the daily toll of death and destruction, seemingly powerless to intervene. But when even President Trump is moved to acknowledge 'real starvation' in his press briefings, it signals a potential turning point. Israel's response to the barbaric attacks 21 long months ago is increasingly testing the international community. Every state has the right to defend itself – but also the responsibility to wield force judiciously. How retribution is carried out, how military power is applied, and how operations affect civilians in the invaded territories all matter deeply. It confirms our values and distinguishes us from those we must fight. The scale of continued suffering in Gaza cannot be justified solely by Israel's right to defeat Hamas. This is not to say Hamas should not be confronted – but rather Israel's absence of a discernible strategy to convert battlefield gains into lasting peace, or to separate Hamas from the broader Palestinian population. Two-thirds of Gaza lies in ruins. Two million people are displaced. And dozens die weekly, not in combat, but for inching forward in chaotic food lines, desperate for handouts. On the ground, Hamas forces have been severely weakened. Iran, its proxy backer, has also been constrained. And yet, famine now looms as the deadliest threat. Under international pressure, Israel has permitted food airdrops into Gaza. But, as UN aid chief Tom Fletcher has said, these are 'a drop in the ocean'. Airdrops are inefficient, especially while hundreds of aid trucks wait, fully loaded, at sealed border crossings. Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has kept those crossings closed and removed food distribution from UN agencies, handing it to the Israeli Defence Forces, who lack the infrastructure or experience to manage it effectively. Let's be blunt. Beyond 'destroying Hamas', Netanyahu offers no credible endgame, no plan for post-conflict governance in Gaza, no roadmap toward the long-promised two-state solution. His actions suggest a strategy of perpetual conflict. Regional powers, including Egypt, Jordan and the UAE, along with much of the international community, are eager to help. Not only to address the humanitarian crisis but to support the establishment of a credible post-Hamas governance structure that's likely to require international supervision. But Netanyahu rejects such support, shielded by continued backing from the White House, which has so far extended understandable but seemingly unconditional support following the Hamas attacks. However, Netanyahu's tactical decisions, lacking any strategic vision, are beginning to test that support. Where is he taking this conflict – a conflict that, in a broader sense, has been ongoing since 1948. His devastating campaign in Gaza and continued illegal settlement expansion in the West Bank suggest an intent to make a two-state solution unviable. In 2014, when the UK Parliament last debated Palestinian recognition, I responded as a foreign minister, saying Britain would recognise Palestine only when it judged such a move would aid the peace process, not as a symbolic gesture. It's a card that can only be played once, so it must be used wisely. It's easy to argue that now is not the right time – that we must focus on the immediate crisis. But I would argue that now is exactly the right time, to deliver a jolt that might reverse a dangerous trajectory, one that risks closing the window on a two-state solution forever. This issue is on the agenda at the UN in New York. Recognition could help shift global focus, isolate Hamas politically, and undercut Iran's justification for arming proxies in the region. Waiting endlessly for the 'perfect moment' is not a strategy. The current status quo, or the pursuit of a one-state solution, will only entrench a perpetual insurgency, fuelled externally and leaving Israel in a state of permanent tensions with its neighbours. As Trump's support for Netanyahu grows more conditional - including calls for decisive action to prevent famine – let's leverage this to refocus attention on the broader strategic imperative: achieving a two-state solution. Without that, suffering, extremism, and endless war will continue.
Daily Mail
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
RNLI releases footage of moment crews pulled 19 migrants from the sea as charity defends Channel rescues after 'taxi service' claims
The RNLI has shared dramatic footage of a crew rescuing 19 migrants from a capsized boat in the Channel - as the charity hit back at claims it acts like a 'taxi service' for illegal entrants. Footage shows a group of screaming men thrashing around in the sea as RNLI volunteers throw mini life jackets - known as horseshoes - in their direction. The migrants - who are wearing little more than t-shirts - are then seen clambering up the side of the boat before being hauled aboard. One crew member, Dan Sinclair, said in the video: 'These people genuinely need our help. They are in distress. They have been in this situation for potentially hours on end and have become frozen - almost paralysed in position.' The RNLI released the footage - filmed at 4.50am in August 2023 - as it defended its 'compassionate' small boat rescues, adding that the 114 it carried out last year amounted to just 1.2 per cent of total launches and led to 58 lives being saved. All 19 people rescued by the RNLI in this incident survived, but six people pulled out of the sea died after being pulled from the sea by other attending vessels. Lifeboat crew members - who are overwhelmingly volunteers - said they would continue to attend any incident the Coastguard sends them to and will go to the aid of anyone in trouble at sea. Nigel Farage previously hit out at the RNLI by claiming it had become 'a taxi service for illegal immigration'. Nearly 24,000 small boat migrants have arrived in the UK so far this year - sparking widespread public fury. Crossings continued today, with migrants seen running across a beach in northern France to pile onto an overcrowded dinghy. Paula Lain, who works as a management consultant when she is not volunteering for the RNLI, told the BBC: 'When our pager goes, we're not thinking about anything political. 'We're all thinking about people. We're actively compassionate. That's what drives us beyond any moral or civic responsibility. 'When we're tasked, we don't know what we're going to be tasked to. We're there to help people in their most distressing times.' The August 2023 incident shown in the footage was described as one of the RNLI's 'most challenging' rescues yet. Many of the migrants swam directly to the lifeboat as soon as they spotted it and were pulled on board - joining 68 people who had already been rescued from another dinghy. Some needed immediate medical attention and others collapsed with sheer exhaustion when they got to safety. RNLI crew members said they have been accused of facilitating illegal immigration, but Mr Sinclair defended their work. The beach at Gravelines is a common departure point for migrants. French police have been heavily criticised for failing to stop the departures Recalling one recent rescue, he told the BBC: 'There was a little girl on that boat. 'When we took that little girl - who was probably four years old - off that boat, she looked at me straight in the eye and she said 'Thank you. I love you.' 'Now, as a father that went straight through my heart. I know I am in the right place at the right time and I am doing exactly what I should be doing.' Photos taken this morning on a beach in Gravelines in northern France showed groups of migrants wading through waves towards a smuggler's dinghy, which already appeared to be dangerously overcrowded. Officials are now planning to use AI to check migrants' ages after shocking figures showed four out of 10 who claimed to be children were lying. Home Office figures show that between mid-2022 and June 2024, 11,449 age disputes were raised by UK Border Force staff. Some 8,791 were resolved with 3,570 - amounting to 40 per cent - having lied about being under 18. A staggering 1,305 of those caught lying about their age were from Afghanistan, in a bid to get special protection in the UK. Child refugees cannot be deported and have the right to the same healthcare, education and sustenance as British children. Nigel Farage criticised the RNLI's lifeboat rescues in 2021, before he became leader of Reform. Sharing a photo of a lifeboat 'rammed full' of migrants, he said: 'Sadly the wonderful RNLI in Kent has become a taxi service for illegal immigration, to the dismay of all involved. What a state of affairs.' Simon Ling, head of lifeboats at RNLI said today: 'The core purpose of the RNLI is to save lives at sea. We strongly believe that whilst anyone can drown, nobody should. 'We do this across all of the UK and Ireland but the Channel attracts attention and we understand why. 'It polarises opinions, but to RNLI it's very simple - it's men and women getting up in the middle of the night to go and rescue fellow men and women.'
Reuters
22 minutes ago
- Reuters
Russian oil tycoon Shvidler loses Supreme Court appeal against UK sanctions
LONDON, July 29 (Reuters) - Billionaire oil tycoon Eugene Shvidler on Tuesday lost his latest attempt to overturn British sanctions imposed over Moscow's invasion of Ukraine at the UK's Supreme Court. Shvidler was sanctioned in March 2022 on the grounds of his association with former Chelsea Football Club owner Roman Abramovich, plus Shvidler's former position as a director of London-listed Russian steel producer Evraz (EVRE.L), opens new tab. He argued the decision was arbitrary, as other companies and executives involved in business which is strategically significant for Russia have not been targeted. But Britain's Foreign Office, which has overseen the sanctioning of more than 1,700 individuals or entities since Russia's invasion, argued it was right to believe sanctioning Shvidler could secure Britain's foreign policy aims. Shvidler – whose net worth is estimated by Forbes magazine at $1.6 billion – appealed to the UK's Supreme Court, with his lawyers arguing that others with greater involvement in business of importance to Russia were not sanctioned, citing BP's (BP.L), opens new tab previous joint venture with Rosneft ( opens new tab. The Supreme Court, however, rejected Shvidler's appeal by a four-to-one majority in a ruling that maintains Britain 100% record of defending Russian sanctions challenges in court. Shvidler had said British sanctions have destroyed his business and disrupted his and his family's lives. But the majority of the Supreme Court ruled that the sanctions struck a fair balance between Shvidler's rights and the aims of the sanctions regime. Shvidler's case was heard by the Supreme Court shortly before a separate appeal brought by Russian businessman Sergei Naumenko, whose superyacht was detained in London. Naumenko said he was targeted simply because he was a wealthy Russian, despite the fact that he had no involvement in Russian politics. The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Naumenko's appeal.
