We had two emails yesterday that illustrate the type of problem facing the media over inaccurate descriptions of men as women. What most interests us is that they didn’t contain any substantive defence of the practice. There wasn’t even an attempt at it.
/
It’s an acknowledgment that there is, in fact, no substantive defence for it at all. Nobody says ‘this is the right thing to do because’. Instead there are only references to higher authorities.
/
We don’t ascribe motives - whether well-intentioned or not, the outcome is the same: inaccuracy and the public corruption of information.
We’d asked about the description of Chleo Sunter as female by Teesside Live.
‘The NHS spends as much on controversial transgender treatments as it does on common anti-depressants, penicillins or beta-blockers..In the first ten months of 2024/25 alone the figure was £88 million – up a fifth on the previous 12 months’
@MailOnline
‘The amount is close to what it would cost to supply all 1,000 women in England and Wales who would benefit from Enhertu, a drug that would give women with advanced breast cancer an extra six months of life…It was turned down by the NHS last year for being too expensive’
‘It’s so demoralising. I no longer feel able to defend the BBC as an employee. News and quality children’s output are the cornerstone of public service broadcasting and the best argument for the licence fee. This totally undermines us’
‘I used to take the view that most errors were cock-up rather than conspiracy but this clearly isn’t’
‘Being gaslit on a daily basis by your own employer is not the best motivation. Knowing that activists are being given free rein to dictate BBC content is sickening’
‘As a parent I knew I could leave even very small children alone with BBC output..They’d be entertained, would probably learn stuff and at the very least wouldn’t be exposed to anything I would consider potentially harmful. I would have absolutely no trust if I had children now’
The year in pictures: 124 BBC items and 12 months of affirmation. The year the Director-General told MPs that the BBC had to be 'caring and nice', rather than telling the truth: the year that one of radio's most respected presenters was reprimanded for calling men 'male'.
/
SiJ launched a day before Tim Davie sat before the Media Committee. We knew BBC coverage was weak to appalling (but for Newsnight) but were still stunned when he threw accuracy so visibly under the bus. He's met plenty of people who've explained the problem, including some of us
These 124 items under Transgender People don't include every story - the BBC has a habit of manipulating tagging to show trans-identified people in the best possible light. Crimes by trans-identified males don't appear here, unless there's a 'policy' aspect to the story.
Please complain, and progress to second stage and Ofcom when it’s rejected, as it will be.
There’s no reason for the BBC to comply with this man’s chosen identity.
This kind of outdated and slavish compliance harms everyone, including the BBC. bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…
It’s a breach of the Editorial Guidelines on accuracy and impartiality.
When they tell you ‘we just comply with our own style guide’ - tell them that this is exactly the problem we all want to solve.
This is a great blog from @ClaireLoneragan this week - with BBC receipts
We agree the process is a hot mess. But we think it’s always worth complaining. First complaints are dealt with by Capita but the key is to progress it.