Member's statement: 'Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone'
Member's statement by Mr Tom Buchanan on .
- MLA
- Mr Tom Buchanan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 25 February 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- 'Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone'
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4814929
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Over the past week, the BBC has, once again, shown its true colours with the broadcasting of the documentary 'Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone', which featured prominently family members of the terrorist group Hamas. The documentary, which first aired on BBC 2 on Monday evening last week, centred around the 14-year-old narrator, who is a son of the Deputy Minister of Agriculture in the Hamas-run Government. Another child in the documentary is the daughter of a former captain in the Hamas-run police force. A third child was pictured posing with Hamas fighters. I fail to understand how the BBC did not know whom the children in the documentary were. One of the first questions that a BBC producer should have asked was, "Who are the parents of these children?". The producer should also have asked whether there was permission for them to be shown in the documentary. A little research shows that a member of the documentary's production crew celebrated the massacre of the Israeli people on 7 October 2023. It was only after questions were raised about the children who featured in the show that the BBC added a disclaimer to clarify their links to Hamas. Following fierce criticism over the weekend, however, the show has now been deleted from its streaming services altogether. The broadcasting of the documentary was nothing short of a propaganda stunt for Hamas, promoted by the BBC. Questions must now be asked about whether the BBC used licence fee money, paid by the public, to produce the documentary and about whether the BBC made payments to Hamas officials.
The BBC's impartiality has been in question since the attacks on 7 October 2023. It has repeatedly refused to call Hamas terrorists despite Hamas being listed as a terrorist organisation by the UK Government. Last week, the world witnessed the heartbreaking return in coffins of the Bibas children, who were murdered by Hamas. It is without a shadow of doubt that Hamas are terrorists solely intent on murdering the Jewish people. I strongly urge the BBC to look into its organisational hierarchy, as deep antisemitic views appear to be rooted in it that it needs to address urgently, if it wants to be considered as impartial reporters ever again.
374 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Not flagged on a second assessment, because Jev’s answers did not settle it. The reasons are given below.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.48 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.61).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.88).
- Subject area: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
- The answers did not meet either automatic threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Second assessment
Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 21 October 2026. How the second assessment works
- Verdict
- Not flagged
- Public interest or divisiveness
- Mainly advances the public interest
Against the published rubric
The statement criticises a broadcaster over a specific documentary, citing the family links of the children featured, a crew member's reported celebration of the 7 October attacks, the late disclaimer and possible use of licence fee money or 'payments to Hamas officials'. It takes a side on a foreign conflict but does not map it onto communities in Northern Ireland or portray Palestinians, Muslims or any people as a group in a hostile way; its hostility is aimed at a proscribed organisation and at the conduct of a named institution. The closing claim that 'deep antisemitic views appear to be rooted' in the BBC is sweeping, but it is an allegation about an organisation, not an attack on a community. Under the rubric's treatment of foreign conflicts, this falls short of culture-war activity.
Public interest or divisiveness
The statement mainly addresses a genuine and widely reported controversy about broadcasting standards, impartiality and whether public money reached a proscribed group, which are matters of legitimate public concern even though broadcasting is not devolved. Phrases such as 'shown its true colours' and 'propaganda stunt' are combative, but they are directed at an institution's editorial decisions rather than at a group or community here. It does not seek to deepen communal division in Northern Ireland.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.61 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.54 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.17 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.55 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.54 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.21 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.48 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.03 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.09 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.88 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.99 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:01 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.