As we have had cause to note on numerous occasions in the past, the BBC has a Guidance document titled “Removal of BBC Online Content” which states: [emphasis added]
“This guidance note sets out considerations for removing or amending BBC online content and revoking content in online services, such as BBC iPlayer and BBC Sounds, following legal or editorial issues post-publication.”
The introduction to that Guidance reads:
The Guidance later states:
“Content published with the expectation of remaining permanently available, particularly news content should not normally be amended and should only be removed or hidden in exceptional circumstances. (Editorial Guidelines 13.2.4)”
And:
“Where online content, particularly news, was accurate at the time of publication, there is a presumption that it will not normally be removed. New facts that did not exist at the time of publication do not make the original content inaccurate.
However, where the omission of new facts would be misleading and unfair, such as the outcome of a court case, the content should usually be updated.
Where a complainant says the content was inaccurate or seriously misleading at the time of publication, it should be investigated and corrected, where appropriate.”
In the reality of our information overload world, in which anyone and everyone can put online what they regard or chose to frame as facts and particularly in situations in which conflicting narratives abound and factual information often takes time to emerge, such as wars, the updating of content to include new facts is critical, not least for “future reporting and historical research”.
A case in point is the considerable volume of BBC content dating from 24 years ago and still available online which describes a ‘massacre’ and ‘war crimes’ in Jenin but has never been updated to clarify that the “facts” reported at the time were not facts at all.
MYTHS AND LETHAL NARRATIVES ON THE BBC WEBSITE
More recent examples appear in a report by David Gritten that was published on the BBC News website on June 26th 2024 under the headline “‘High risk’ of famine in Gaza persists, new UN-backed report says”.
Most of that report – previously discussed here – relates to the topic of alleged famine in the Gaza Strip, focusing on an IPC report published the previous day and telling BBC audiences that:
“A UN-backed assessment says almost half a million Palestinians across Gaza are still facing “catastrophic levels” of hunger and that a “high risk” of famine persists as long as the Israel-Hamas war continues and humanitarian access is restricted.”
That BBC report was one of many promoting the notion of famine in the Gaza Strip published by the BBC from March 2024 onwards and still remaining online. As we noted in December 2025:
“CAMERA UK has repeatedly observed that there is no evidence to suggest that the BBC carried out any independent assessment or verification of the IPC’s claims and methodologies before widely promoting its reports. The failure to do so in relation to the August 2025 report declaring famine in Gaza City is particularly remarkable given that the corporation continued to refer to the findings weeks later, despite the fact that the predictions fortunately failed to materialise.
As was noted here in October 2025:
“On October 9th Sky News reported that the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry claimed that 461 people had died from malnutrition in the two years since the beginning of the war, including 192 since the IPC declared famine on August 22nd. Under actual famine conditions, the expected number of deaths during that period of time would be 9,522.
Remarkably, that discrepancy has been of no interest whatsoever to the BBC, which continues to promote the famine narrative (along with the no less redundant ‘genocide’ libel) on a regular basis.”
BBC NEWS AGAIN UNCRITICALLY PROMOTES AN IPC REPORT
More recent figures published by the Hamas ministry of health show that throughout the years 2023, 2024 and 2025, a total of 475 malnutrition deaths were recorded. Nevertheless, numerous BBC reports promoting the claim of famine in the Gaza Strip remain online as “permanent public record” and, according to the BBC, the basis for “future reporting and historical research”.
Another part of the same June 2024 report by David Gritten tells readers that:
“Médecins Sans Frontières meanwhile expressed outrage at the “horrific and cynical” killing of one of its staff members in an attack in Gaza City on Tuesday morning.
Physiotherapist Fadi al-Wadiya was killed along with five other people, including three children, as he cycled to the MSF clinic where he worked, the charity said, without blaming any party.
The Israeli military later announced that it had killed Fadi al-Wadiya in an air strike, accusing him of being a “significant [Palestinian] Islamic Jihad terrorist” who had developed the group’s rockets array.”
As noted here previously, in February 2026 the Palestinian Islamic Jihad released a list of its commanders killed during the war, including Fadi Jihad Mohammed al-Wadiya who was described by the PIJ as the deputy head of its military manufacturing unit.
MORE OF THE BBC’S ‘THAT WAS WHAT WE KNEW AT THE TIME’ EXCUSE
However, the BBC’s failure to amend its reports mentioning al-Wadiya means that as far as the “permanent public record” is concerned, his military activities with a proscribed terror organisation are nothing more than an Israeli ‘accusation’.
Gritten’s June 2024 report also tells readers that:
“In Gaza, at least 24 people – including the sister of Hamas’s Qatar-based political chief Ismail Haniyeh – were reportedly killed in three Israeli air strikes in northern Gaza early on Tuesday. […]
The other 10 people were said to have been killed in a pre-dawn strike on a house in Shati. A neighbour and Palestinian media identified those killed as Ismail Haniyeh’s sister Zahr and nine members of her family.
Mr Haniyeh – who also lost three of his sons and several grandchildren in a strike in April – said the killing of his relatives would not make Hamas change its stance and reaffirmed the group’s demands for a ceasefire and hostage release deal.”
In March 2026 a Hamas-affiliated Telegram channel revealed that at least one of the ten people killed in that strike was a Hamas combatant. In addition to Moamen Nahed Haniyeh, a further four of the Haniyeh family casualties were adult males. That obviously relevant context to the reported “pre-dawn strike on a house in Shati” will not be included in the “permanent public record” made available to anyone conducting “historical research”.
If the BBC really does aspire to maintain an archive that its audiences – and its own staff – can trust to provide factual accounts of events upon which they can rely, then clearly its policies concerning the amendment of online reports – and in particular the addition of newly emerged facts to existing reports – need to be far more proactive.
A good start would be recognition that “new facts” sometimes do “make the original content inaccurate” and appreciation of the opportunity to amend reports flagged up by members of the public, rather than brushing off complaints with the “that was what we knew at the time” excuse.
