The BBC’s former chief content officer has had a complaint against The Telegraph rejected by IPSO over an article linking her OBE to a Gaza documentary that broke broadcasting rules.
Charlotte Moore complained that a Telegraph article headlined: “BBC boss handed OBE despite being blamed for discredited Gaza film” was inaccurate.
The piece, published on 30 December 2025, reported that she “bore much of the blame for the Gaza documentary” in reference to the corporation’s film that broke broadcasting rules.
The documentary Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone was pulled from iPlayer in 2025 after it emerged that its 13-year-old narrator was the son of a Hamas official in Gaza. The BBC was found to be in “serious breach” of Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code.
The article appeared in print and online with the subheading: “Charlotte Moore’s award among several in Honours List that could be accused of rewarding failure”.
It added that a group of 45 prominent Jewish journalists and members of the media wrote to Moore, director-general Tim Davie and BBC News chief executive Deborah Turness “demanding to know why the broadcaster had failed to discover the narrator’s background”.
Moore, who left the BBC in September 2025, contacted The Telegraph on the day of publication complaining of inaccuracies.
She said it reported that she had been blamed for the Gaza documentary when it did not fall under her remit.
She requested the online article be amended and a correction published.
The Telegraph later replaced the word “blamed” with “criticised over”, referencing the letter sent to Moore, Davie and others.
The correction added to the bottom of the online piece said: “An earlier version of this article described Charlotte Moore as having been ‘blamed’ for the BBC’s documentary Gaza: How to survive a war zone. Whilst Ms Moore faced criticism at the outset of the controversy surrounding the film, in fact she had no involvement in commissioning or overseeing the production. We are happy to correct the record.”
A similar correction appeared in the newspaper’s print edition in its Corrections and Clarifications column on 31 December.
Moore was not satisfied with the corrections, arguing that “criticised over” was still inaccurate, and said the original headline had resulted in harmful comments and a petition to revoke her OBE.
She added that the correction had not clarified she had no editorial control or input into the programme and the article was inaccurate by suggesting she was not worthy of an OBE.
In addition, she said neither she nor the BBC were given the right of reply for the piece.
The Telegraph responded by highlighting its correction on Moore having no input in the programme and said it was prompt to act.
The paper added that given that the letter was addressed to Moore and she was on the BBC board, she could be expected to receive criticism over the film.
It added that right of reply was not necessary as the article’s reference to the complainant “was accurate and a matter of public record”.
IPSO did not find The Telegraph breached the Editors’ Code on accuracy as it recognised Moore was sat on the BBC board at the time of the documentary’s broadcast, and had been “responsible for the strategic direction of the BBC at the relevant time”.
The press regulator found “reasonable basis for the article’s claim that the complainant had been blamed and criticised for the documentary”, adding The Telegraph’s corrections made clear the complainant had “had no involvement in commissioning or overseeing the production”.
In response to the OBE “rewarding failure” and complaints related to this, IPSO found hypothetical language such as “could be accused” and “growing concern” meant this was not a breach of accuracy.
Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog