Ummah Channel in trouble with Ofcom

Ummah Channel has landed itself in hot water with Ofcom over a show it broadcast in February 2017 about Trojan Horse, which discussed the controversy surrounding the decision by the Department of Education to investigate several schools in Birmingham in 2014 for evidence of radicalisation by extremists.

Ofcom considered that this programme was dealing with matters of political controversy and matters relating to current public policy, namely, the UK Government’s counter-extremism policy, the Prevent programme, and the government’s Trojan Horse Inquiry.

Ummah Channel stated that upon reviewing the programme, it was of the view that the presenter “did not act in an independent manner nor was impartial”. It added that after it had discussed the incident with the presenter, and she had:

– “apologised and accepted that she did not show impartiality” but added that “this has occurred for the first time in 8 years of hosting this weekly discussion programme”; and

– indicated that she had invited “a couple of colleagues from Blackburn with Darwen Council to take part which would have given a more balanced view but they did not materialise as they cancelled on last minute”

It also stated that before, during and at the end of the programme it had shown “a 10 second disclaimer”4 which suggested “that Ummah Channel does not always have the same views of various hosts and guests taking part in certain shows”. Finally, the broadcaster said that: “We pride ourselves in taking a balanced view on our shows and are sorry that we [were] well under standard on this one”.

Ofcom took into account: the fact that both the Licensee and presenter had apologised for this incident; UCL’s statement that the Presenter “did not act in an independent manner nor was impartial”.

Ofcom underlines that the broadcasting of comments either criticising or supporting the policies and actions of any government is not, in itself, a breach of due impartiality rules. However, a broadcaster must maintain an adequate and appropriate level of impartiality in its presentation of matters of political controversy and matters relating to current public policy.