.png)
3 hours ago
2 ARTICLE AD
Some of the best-known figures in the UK media sphere have signed a letter requesting a meeting with King Charles over the Royal Television Society‘s (RTS) decision to scrap a special recognition award for journalists in Gaza.
The King is the Royal Patron of the RTS and the group of more than 300 people have asked to meet with him and “demanded transparency” about the body’s decision-making process around its journalism awards.
The letter has been signed by BBC heavyweights including Jonathan Dimbleby, Orla Guerin and Fergal Keane, along with the likes of Channel 4’s Krishnan Guru-Murthy and Matt Frei. Dimbleby branded the RTS “cowards” over the move.
The saga started with the RTS’ shock decision to scrap a special recognition award for journalists in Gaza due to not wanting to “add fuel to the fire” around Gaza: How to Survive a War Zone, the BBC documentary that was pulled after it was revealed that the child narrator was the son of a Hamas minister. The move has been criticized since, resulting in this letter collated by the Artists for Palestine UK group.
Citing the 170 journalists who have lost their lives in Gaza, the letter, which can be read in full below, says: “We urge the RTS to reconsider its stance and re-evaluate the extraordinary efforts of these journalists. Their coverage is precisely the type of work that should be honoured through the Special Award, which aims to acknowledge achievements outside traditional categories”
The letter divides its queries into five sections, taking issue with the RTS’ “decision-making process,” “criteria and justification,” “procedural transparency,” “precedent and consistency,” and “diversity commitment.”
On the first point, it asks for information on how the decision was reached. On “procedural transparency,” it says it has been “widely reported that the RTS has been lobbied on this matter” and therefore asks “Were any external factors or pressures involved in this reversal?” In an email to jurors last week, Adrian Wells, chair of the RTS Television Journalism Awards, said that the award had become a “political football and the RTS is keen not to add fuel to the fire in this current environment.” Wells explicitly referenced attacks against the BBC’s film from right-wing newspapers, as well as criticism of Channel 4 News for also featuring in its coverage 14-year-old Abdullah Al-Yazouri, the son of Ayman Al-Yazouri, the deputy minister of agriculture in Gaza’s Hamas-run government.
Failing to reinstate the award will “cause further serious damage to the reputation of the RTS, and the British media more widely,” the letter concludes, adding: “We look forward to receiving your response in writing on this pressing and urgent matter.”
The group has copied their letter to King Charles and requested to meet with him. We will update on their progress.
Deadline has reached out to the RTS for comment on this letter. Last week, an RTS spokesperson said: “Investigations have recently been launched into a number of news reports from Gaza and, as those reviews are ongoing, we didn’t feel it was appropriate to proceed with the award this year.”
The letter in full
Dear Chair and Members of the Board,
We are writing as television and film professionals, including Royal Television Society (RTS) members, nominees and award-winners, to express our shock and disgust regarding the recent decision to withdraw the 2025 Special Award due to be given to recognise the journalists of Gaza who have been recording the conflict, work which has cost at least 170 of them their lives.
The RTS had initially decided to honour these journalists at the Television Journalism Awards on 5 March 2025, but subsequently reversed this decision on the day of the awards. The RTS Special Award is specifically designed to recognise an outstanding contribution to the advancement of video journalism that goes beyond conventional categories. Journalists in Gaza have indeed achieved this with exceptional coverage that, despite unimaginable challenges, has brought the realities of the war to a global audience. Their work has made a profound impact, showcasing resourcefulness, creativity, and enterprise under extreme conditions, which the RTS itself values in its awards criteria.
We are particularly concerned by the lack of transparency surrounding the decision to withdraw the award. The Special Award, as outlined in your criteria, is given at the discretion of the Society following a process that includes discussions and recommendations from Jury Chairs and Entrant representatives/nominators. This raises the overarching question: who was involved in the decision-making process, and on what grounds was the Special Award for Gaza journalists withheld?
As such, and as members of the broader media community who value the principles of journalistic integrity, transparency, and recognition of exceptional work in challenging circumstances, we are seeking clarity on several aspects of this decision.
1. Decision-Making Process:
Could you please provide information on how this decision was reached? According to your published criteria, Special Awards are “awarded or deferred at the discretion of the Society following discussion and guidance from the Jury Chairs and Entrants representatives” and recommendations are made by “the RTS Committee of Neutral Chairs.” We would like to understand:
2. Criteria and Justification:
The RTS Journalism Awards’ overarching criteria specifically highlight several elements that seem particularly relevant to the work of Gaza journalists:
– “Quality of the journalism… particularly in the context of the type of market where the entry is mainly targeted”
– “Impact and resonance with the target audience”
– “Enterprise… creative, original, resourceful and imaginative approaches”
– “Technical quality… measured in the context of production pressures; for example, turn-round time and the conditions under which an item is produced”
Given that journalists in Gaza have been working under unprecedented danger to provide eyewitness documentation of a major international conflict – often with minimal equipment, disrupted communications, and at great personal cost, including serious injury and loss of life – their work appears to exemplify these criteria in extraordinary ways. We would like to understand the specific rationale for withdrawing recognition that would appear to align so strongly with these stated values.
In a statement provided to The New Arab, the RTS said: “Investigations have recently been launched into a number of news reports from Gaza and, as those reviews are ongoing, we didn’t feel it was appropriate to proceed with the award this year.”
As the RTS has made explicit its assertion of a link between the Special Award and those other news reports from Gaza, could you explain to us what the nature of that link is? What do alleged mistakes made as the results of editorial decisions and/or failures within broadcasters in London have to do with a cohort of people reporting in the most deadly conflict for journalists since the Second World War?
Further, in relation to this statement, we would like to note point 4 of the RTS Awards conditions of entry (below) and to point out that no regulatory investigation has been announced in relation to any Gaza films. On the contrary, OFCOM last week announced they would NOT be conducting a regulatory investigation into the BBC’s film, and would allow the BBC to independently make their own internal reviews. Does this mean that ANY programme which is subject to an internal review by its broadcaster can, as a result, have its designated awards rescinded from it because those internal reviews are underway?
4. REGULATORY ISSUES: If an entry is under investigation for any reason, the entrant should make this known at the time of entry. The RTS may reject an entry which is subject to a regulatory investigation.’
3. Procedural Transparency:
Given that it has been widely reported that the RTS has been lobbied on this matter, we ask the following questions:
Were any external factors or pressures involved in this reversal? What lobbying did the RTS become subject to, from whom, at which time? Where lobbying was done by special interest groups, were any efforts made to seek out counter-balancing sources or views and were those also taken into consideration? If so, please provide details of those counter-balancing arguments and who they were sought from.
Please also provide details of all emails and discussions from the RTS around this discussion and decision.
Was this decision to withdraw the Special Award made in accordance with the RTS Articles of Association and the established rules and procedures for your awards programs?
4. Precedent and Consistency:
Has the RTS previously considered or awarded Special Awards to journalists working in conflict zones? If so, were any of those withdrawn? If not, what distinguishes those situations from the current circumstances in Gaza such that they could be awarded but this award to journalists in Gaza could not?
At last year’s RTS Awards, there was going to be an award presented to Palestinian journalists too, but it was felt that it was too soon after 7 October 2023. Is this still the case 18 months on?
5. Diversity Commitment:
The RTS awards criteria explicitly state that “judges are asked to ensure that these awards reflect diversity within the industry and within wider society.” Given this stated commitment, we question whether the withdrawal of recognition for journalists working in Gaza upholds this principle of reflecting diverse perspectives, particularly from a region where independent journalism faces extreme challenges.
The work of journalists in Gaza during this conflict has been recognised globally for its courage and importance. Many of these journalists have lost colleagues, family members, and homes while continuing to report. Over 170 have lost their own lives. Their commitment to bearing witness under extraordinary circumstances represents the highest ideals of our profession.
We are concerned that the decision to withdraw the Special Award for Gaza’s journalists, and the manner in which it has been made, reveal a concerning lack of independence, due process and accountability at the RTS.
Does the manner in which this has been done mean that ANY award can be rescinded after a RTS jury has decided it?
Is the RTS suggesting everyone in Gaza, and specifically its journalists, can be assumed to be guilty of something and must be proven innocent before they are worthy of recognition for their hard work and sacrifices? Has the RTS ever applied this standard to any other groups of journalists anywhere else in the world?
We urge the RTS to reconsider its stance and re-evaluate the extraordinary efforts of these journalists. Their coverage is precisely the type of work that should be honoured through the Special Award, which aims to acknowledge achievements outside traditional categories. Failure to recognise these contributions undermines the RTS’s commitment to integrity, diversity, and excellence in journalism.
As you may know, a number of RTS members have in the last few days resigned their memberships of your organisation as a result of your decision. We urge you to treat their concerns and our’s with the seriousness and urgency which they merit. It is imperative that British television bodies abide by – and are seen to abide by – the same high standards of impartiality, balance and due process that we demand of the freelance journalists who are dying in unprecedented numbers in order to bring the news to British screens.
We strongly urge that the RTS Board of Trustees reinstates the Special Award at the RTS Television Awards ceremony. Not to do so will continue to cause further serious damage to the reputation of the RTS, and the British media more widely. We ask that RTS leadership meet with a delegation from among our numbers to discuss what has happened, as soon as possible.
We look forward to receiving your response in writing on this pressing and urgent matter.
Yours faithfully,
