It said in the article that the hostages’ families warned Ben-Gvir that if he made provocative statements, they would torture the hostages. Relatively early in the article they wrote that the hostages went through severe abuse every time Ben-Gvir spoke about the prisoners.

If I misunderstood something, I’d be happy if you explained it instead of writing that my reading comprehension isn’t good.

I have didactic tendencies, so I try to accompany the learning process rather than spoon-feed.
So now write the two claims you brought here as premises, and what you concluded in the question as the conclusion, and check whether the conclusion follows from the premises.

So, we’re waiting to finally hear the answer after the didactic routine. I’m not the one who asked, “incidentally.”
Maybe that a decision is judged only by the information available at the time it was made? Maybe that the judgment is up to Ben-Gvir whether what he says is important enough to take the risk? Maybe Ben-Gvir shouldn’t be blamed at all, but only Hamas? Maybe the hostages’ families who publicized this idea are the ones to blame, and because of them Hamas acted this way? These are weak answers.