Did BBC Pay Hamas Members To Be In Documentary?

[Social Media]

 

The BBC is facing more intense scrutiny following allegations that taxpayer money may have been paid to Hamas during the production of a controversial documentary about Gaza. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, has called for an independent inquiry into what she described as “potential collusion” with the terrorist group. The demand comes after it was revealed that *Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone* was presented by the son of a Hamas minister.  

 

 

Initially, the BBC defended keeping the documentary available with a disclaimer, describing it as an “invaluable testament” to Palestinian experiences during the war. However, the broadcaster has since removed it from iPlayer, citing the need for “further due diligence” regarding its collaboration with Hoyo Films, the production company responsible for the film.  

 

 

Badenoch has urged the BBC to launch a full-scale independent investigation into both the documentary’s production and wider accusations of “systemic BBC bias against Israel.” She warned that if the corporation fails to demonstrate “true impartiality,” the Conservative Party may withdraw its support for the licence fee.  

 

“It’s funded by us. We are paying for the BBC to promote a Radical Islamic Terrorist organization.”

Wow, GB News breaks down how the BBC is funding and promoting Hamas propaganda, at the British taxpayer expense.

“It’s funded by us. We are paying for the BBC to promote a Radical Islamic Terrorist organization.”
pic.twitter.com/uCi0zbUUqr

— Eyal Yakoby (@EYakoby) February 24, 2025

 

The controversy escalated after *The Telegraph* reported that BBC executives are set to be questioned by MPs in the Commons culture, media, and sport committee. Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy is also expected to hold urgent discussions with the BBC regarding the documentary’s sourcing. She criticized the BBC’s “defensive reaction” to the controversy, saying that the broadcaster had claimed it was unaware of the presenter’s connection to Hamas before the documentary aired.  

 

“After the revelation that the presenter of this programme was the son of a Hamas official, the BBC initially argued that the ‘documentary’ remained an ‘invaluable testament’ to the war and kept the programme on iPlayer,” Badenoch said. “This defensive reaction from BBC executives is profoundly troubling. It shows problems run deep. Surely it should have been immediately apparent that the programme was fundamentally flawed?

 

The BBC also suggested that ‘usual compliance procedures’ had been followed. But does filming inside Gaza not require something far beyond usual checks?”  

 

Badenoch stated that an independent investigation must determine whether any payments were made to Hamas and whether the BBC had knowledge of such transactions. Further controversy arose when it was discovered that another child featured in the documentary was the daughter of a former captain in Hamas-run police forces, while a third child was photographed posing with Hamas fighters.  

 

The Tory leader also raised concerns about the BBC’s broader coverage of the Israel-Gaza conflict, arguing that allegations of bias have persisted since the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023. She called for an inquiry into the “senior management of BBC News” and emphasized that the corporation must take the accusations seriously if it wishes to maintain public trust.  

 

“The BBC must recognize how serious these allegations are for its public standing,” Badenoch said. “The BBC’s Middle East coverage is widely regarded as unreliable.”  

 

" BBC removed references to ‘Jews’ and ‘jihad’ in Gaza documentary "

🔴 BBC removed references to ‘Jews’ and ‘jihad’ in Gaza documentary pic.twitter.com/WHFRgoHOYC

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) February 25, 2025

 

The controversy deepened when *The Telegraph* uncovered social media posts from Hatem Rawagh, a cameraman credited in the documentary, who appeared to celebrate the October 7 Hamas attacks. In one tweet, he shared a video of a gunman killing an Israeli soldier, urging people to watch it “a million” times. On the day of the attack, he referenced the 1973 Yom Kippur War, writing: “Whoever missed Oct 6 [1973] in Egypt ... Oct 7 is happening [now] in Palestine.”

 

The following day, he shared footage from the Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, showing a gunman shooting an Israeli at the Gaza border.  

 

These revelations have intensified calls for transparency regarding the BBC’s editorial standards and financial dealings. As the government pressures the broadcaster for answers, the BBC now faces mounting demands to prove its commitment to impartiality and journalistic integrity.

 

Based on a report by The Telegraph  2025-02-26

 

Related Topics:

BBC Faces Fresh Backlash Over Alleged Gaza Documentary Cover-Up

BBC Doc Features Son Of Hamas Leader but Fails to Disclose to Viewers

 

 

 

[coolcarer]

Protests outside the BBC in London, quite rightly, £400,000 the BBC gave for this documentary. Who received that money from the UK public!! 

 

BBC swarmed by furious protesters after spending '£400k on Gaza documentary'

Anti-Hamas activists have gathered outside the BBC's headquarters in London to protest against its Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone documentary.
The protesters were in Portland Place tonight after the BBC spent £400,000 on the documentary, which is narrated by the son of a senior Hamas leader

Police were at the scene and the central plaza was blocked off to prevent protesters from reaching the buliding's main entrance.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2019423/bbc-swarmed-furious-protesters-spending

 

[JonnyF]

6 hours ago, Social Media said:

The BBC is facing more intense scrutiny following allegations that taxpayer money may have been paid to Hamas during the production of a controversial documentary about Gaza. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, has called for an independent inquiry into what she described as “potential collusion” with the terrorist group. The demand comes after it was revealed that *Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone* was presented by the son of a Hamas minister.  

 

 

Wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

They refer to Hamas as "freedom fighters" after all. Why wouldn't they give them licence fee payers money. They probably believe it's "the right thing to do". 

 

A shameful organization. From Only Fools and Horses to Only Fatwa and Hamas. 

[Bkk Brian]

Excellent X thread from the David Collier the investigative journalist who broke this story.

 

As we learn more about the BBC documentary on Gaza. This is an updated thread on who @bbcnews gave £400,000 to for a propaganda documentary that whitewashes Hamas

https://x.com/mishtal/status/1894294955536912883

 

 

More of the BBC bias translations

 

Gazan youth on @BBC2’s #OneDayInGaza speaks openly about his fantasy to “rip a Jew’s (Yahud’s) head off,” yet subtitles are flagrantly changed to “rip an Israeli’s head off.” @BBC statement: “The translation is... both accurate and true to the speakers’ intentions.”

 

 

[Bday Prang]

I am not in the least surprised by this, what an absolute disgrace!

[RuamRudy]

Betteridge's law of headlines:

 

Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines?wprov=sfla1

[Social Media]

UPDATE:

 

BBC Admits ‘Serious Flaws’ in Gaza Documentary, Apologizes for Oversight

 

 

[proton]

Another nail in the BBC coffin, the sooner it's gone the better

[Nick Carter icp]

On 2/26/2025 at 10:40 PM, RuamRudy said:

Betteridge's law of headlines:

 

Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines?wprov=sfla1

 

That law has been disproved now , as the answer to the question of this headline seems to be a "Yes" 

[RuamRudy]

3 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

That law has been disproved now , as the answer to the question of this headline seems to be a "Yes" 

 

Seems to be? So no definitive proof then? In that case the law still stands and the Telegraph is, as it does so very often, muck raking. 

[Nick Carter icp]

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Seems to be? So no definitive proof then? In that case the law still stands and the Telegraph is, as it does so very often, muck raking. 

 

  From the link four posts above this post 

 

"The production company, Hoyo Films, also informed the BBC that they had paid the young boy's mother "a limited sum of money" for narrating the film, with the payment processed through his sister’s bank account. "

 

[Bkk Brian]

11 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Seems to be? So no definitive proof then? In that case the law still stands and the Telegraph is, as it does so very often, muck raking. 

The BBC themselves have admitted it.........new topic.....lol

 

Are the UK Government also muck raking?

 

UK Govt Seeks Guarantees BBC Did Not Pay Hamas For Documentary

By AFP - Agence France Presse

https://www.barrons.com/news/uk-govt-seeks-guarantees-bbc-did-not-pay-hamas-for-documentary-2369b74d

 

Nandy seeks ‘assurances’ Hamas did not receive money for BBC Gaza documentary

The Culture Secretary said she will keep MPs informed on the findings of an internal BBC investigation.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bbc-lisa-nandy-hamas-gaza-mps-b2705862.html

[JonnyF]

26 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Seems to be? So no definitive proof then? In that case the law still stands and the Telegraph is, as it does so very often, muck raking. 

 

Well, no evidence apart from the BBC themselves admitting it.  😄

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo

 

[Eloquent pilgrim]

 

 

The only surprise to me is that Jon Donnison did not have a starring role, and that Lyse Doucet wasn’t swanning around in the background modelling the latest blast-proof vest. Jeremy Bowen has the video on loop apparently; ninety nine, change hands Jeremy.

 

 

 

[RuamRudy]

50 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  From the link four posts above this post 

 

"The production company, Hoyo Films, also informed the BBC that they had paid the young boy's mother "a limited sum of money" for narrating the film, with the payment processed through his sister’s bank account. "

 

 

So the boy's mother was paid for services she provided. Is she Hamas? Is that money now funding Hamas activities or maybe she used it to buy food for her children? Do you know which is correct?

[Eloquent pilgrim]

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

So the boy's mother was paid for services she provided. Is she Hamas? Is that money now funding Hamas activities or maybe she used it to buy food for her children? Do you know which is correct?

 

You are implying that it might be perfectly acceptable for the BBC to have paid money to the family of a senior Hamas official, depending on how she spent it; this is Olympic standard Hamas apologist rhetoric.

 

 

[Nick Carter icp]

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  , with the payment processed through his sister’s bank account. "

 

 

20 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

So the boy's mother was paid for services she provided.

 

  No, it was the Sister 🙂

[RuamRudy]

12 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

You are implying that it might be perfectly acceptable for the BBC to have paid money to the family of a senior Hamas official, depending on how she spent it; this is Olympic standard Hamas apologist rhetoric.

 

 

 

Is the woman an agent of Hamas? 

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

 

  No, it was the Sister 🙂

 

Did the money go into Hamas coffers? 

[RuamRudy]

57 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Well, no evidence apart from the BBC themselves admitting it.  😄

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo

 

 

Is the mother a member of Hamas?

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Did the money go into Hamas coffers? 

 

   It's highly likely that the Father , a high ranking Hamas official received the money 

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   It's highly likely that the Father , a high ranking Hamas official received the money 

 

So you don't know. That would have been easier to write, would it not?

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Is the mother a member of Hamas?

 

   That could possibly be her at the front in the middle , but unconfirmed , so maybe not 

[Nick Carter icp]

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

So you don't know. That would have been easier to write, would it not?

 

   It wasn't just the money paid to the boy , the BBC were broadcasting a supposedly neutral programme which turned out to have a  Hamas connection where the so called independent narrator was actually connected to Hamas 

[RuamRudy]

10 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   It wasn't just the money paid to the boy , the BBC were broadcasting a supposedly neutral programme which turned out to have a  Hamas connection where the so called independent narrator was actually connected to Hamas 

 

Yet you are willing to make assumptions of your own, ones that would fail any standard journalistic test. By all means question the BBC's rigour and approach, but it's somewhat ironic that you so readily fill in the blanks in a story because it suits your own narrative. 

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Yet you are willing to make assumptions of your own, ones that would fail any standard journalistic test. By all means question the BBC's rigour and approach, but it's somewhat ironic that you so readily fill in the blanks in a story because it suits your own narrative. 

 

  IMO the Hamas Father would have been in recipient of the money that the boys family was paid .

   Want is your opinion on that matter ?

[RuamRudy]

57 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  IMO the Hamas Father would have been in recipient of the money that the boys family was paid .

   Want is your opinion on that matter ?

 

My opinion is no more or no less relevant than yours. It was conjecture such as yours that painted the Southampton attacker as a Muslim asylum seeker which, in turn, sparked off the great gammon riots of 2024.

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

My opinion is no more or no less relevant than yours. It was conjecture such as yours that painted the Southampton attacker as a Muslim asylum seeker which, in turn, sparked off the great gammon riots of 2024.

 

  Eh , the Southampton who ?

A  Muslim attacked people in Southampton UK and that's connected to the BBC documentary in Gaza .

 Right  may as well get back on topic now 

[Bkk Brian]

On 2/26/2025 at 10:40 PM, RuamRudy said:

Betteridge's law of headlines:

 

Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines?wprov=sfla1

When a Law is not a Law? When its Betteridges Law.......

 

Betteridge's Law is a journalism hypothesis suggesting that any headline ending with a question mark can be answered with “no.” This rule applies to yes-or-no questions. It wasn’t actually created by Ian Betteridge and… it’s mostly untrue.

https://reporterzy.info/en/4540,betteridges-law-is-every-headline-with-a-question-mark-a-gimmick

 

Nice try but no cigar

 

400k The BBC paid for that piece of Hamas propaganda

 

 

[Nick Carter icp]

On 2/26/2025 at 10:40 PM, RuamRudy said:

Betteridge's law of headlines:

 

Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines?wprov=sfla1

 

 

Grooming gangs and ethnicity: What does the evidence say?

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65174096

 

   So, is the answer to that question a NO ?