"The myth of toxic media coverage"
IPSO report on media coverage of transgender issues in the UK is interesting.
They looked at 12,000 articles in the 10 year period up to May 2019
The report is 132 pages. The word 'toxic' does not appear once.
ipso.co.uk/media/1986/med…
IPSO report on media coverage of transgender issues in the UK is interesting.
They looked at 12,000 articles in the 10 year period up to May 2019
The report is 132 pages. The word 'toxic' does not appear once.
ipso.co.uk/media/1986/med…
What it notes is that over time there has been a shift from disrespectful stories about 'gender benders' to human interest to policy focused stories. 
Driven in particular by stories about key policy issues - prisons, self ID and the transitioning of children
While the overall volume of stories went up over this time, the proportion of stories being written by broadsheet newspapers fell drastically.
Yes - @guardian - we are looking at you.
Yes - @guardian - we are looking at you.
The Tabloids picked up the shift from individual human interest stories to policy and legal questions, but some of the broadsheets dropped the ball
It is traditionally the broadsheet newspapers, alongside broadcasters and civil society orgs who take big complicated stories and unpick them, and who invest in scrutiny.
As the report notes they didn't.
As the report notes they didn't.
When people say "toxic media coverage" what they mean is "shut up and don't talk about it"
It is another effective facet of policy capture -- make grown ups with serious jobs too scared to talk about this.
It is another effective facet of policy capture -- make grown ups with serious jobs too scared to talk about this.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
