Examining trends in editorial standards in coverage of transgender issues

[YouNoob]

A balanced report on coverage of transgender issues. Highlights editorial standard issues around suicide stats of 48% for transgender people and the number of transgender (or gender non-conforming) people in UK.

Glinner has posted about this (thank you!) grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/bad-day-for-benny

www.ipso.co.uk/media/1986/mediatique-report-on-coverage-of-transgender-issues.pdf

Bump

Oh this is useful. Thanks!

Pages 79-80 This bit is interesting around the use of preferred pronouns, as per IPSO’s guidance:

If a pronoun is confusing, then the paper needs to explain the complexity. Writers are often nervous about explaining stuff. National newspaper

In a piece about Karen White [a transgender woman who was admitted to the female prison estate and sexually assaulted inmates], I wanted to put a footnote about IPSO guidance on pronouns so my readers understood why I was referring to White as ‘she’ but the editor said it was confusing. So, I wrote around the pronouns, which made for a difficult read. Staff writer, periodical

^When you write, as a journalist, that a woman has lunged at another woman and had to be restrained by security guards - EVEN if you've said that person is trans - you are painting a word picture that is simply not reality, when the reality is that this is male violence against women.

Obviously the IPSO guidelines are voluntary. But I work in a busy newsroom, and I see the strain and stress our editor is under all the time, from all directions. When there's a guideline from an official body, and it seems superficially reasonable - it will be followed. Because it's too much time to think about it deeply, and too much grief to break it.^ Staff writer, periodical

It's taken a long time to produce this. I'm glad it's clear about the suicide stats. Even if papers aren't signed up they must be aware that they are opening themselves up to criticism.

This is very good news, the rise is the number of 'Questioning' articles is a clear sign that the tide is turning.

Our style guide specifies a space in trans woman ‘as any other form may imply that they are less fully women than other women’.

It doesn’t bother with trans men. Plus ça change.

It is good news. The last year researched for the report was 2018-19 so it would be interesting to see how coverage changed since then, particularly in light of newsworthy events such as JKR’s essay, GRA reform and Kiera Bell’s win.

The report clearly shows the pressure faced by journalists at an individual level and at publication level, especially through social media where it has a medium high impact and is a constant factor in coverage. Social media is where groups exert most direct pressure, where the debate is most ferocious. Some individual writers claiming pressure on them might have an impact on willingness to embrace debate.

Not surprisingly drivers of change also include transgender group action as groups have developed engagement strategies for influencing coverage and educating writers at key publications. Some national publications acknowledge that these have been helpful and that it has had medium impact, depending on the publication.

Interestingly, despite not explicitly valuing the IPSO Guidance on transgender coverage, national editors and writers confirmed their default approach towards transgender issues coincides with Guidance areas. Only in the matter of using preferred pronouns was there expression of dissent, with some saying that non-binary pronouns would be hard to use without misleading readers and writers and groups expressing concern about misleading coverage of sexual crimes by trans women that use female pronouns.