Complaints about media coverage

You need to speak up and be counted if you want to change the narrative

This.

You will get fobbed off but you can complain again and they have to reconsider again.

Any description of anti-trans should be in quotation marks. It must be attributed. It doesn't stop it being defamatory: in fact, it is defamatory. I hope the protestors lodge complaints on this basis. However if not in quoration marks it is being reported as a fact, not an accusation by one side.

Professional!

You can thank the profession misogynist Owen Jones for the ‘anti-trans’ epithet. He realised that terf was a misogynistic slur so announced on Twitter he’d be saying ‘anti trans’ from now on to describe women standing up for their rights, and his mindless followers dutifully complied.

One needs to be really imaginative, as saying "Lesbians are female homosexuals" didn't stimulate the critical faculties very much it would seem, everyone just immediately rushed to the defence of poor trans.
What would it take? Would anything make them think?

What I mean is, somehow force people to engage their brains. I mean how illogical does it need to get before they say "Now wait a minute..."

I'm getting increasingly disgruntled with all these so-called news outlets. The whole Tra thing is becoming mainstream and unremarkable.

We need direct action. Our lesbian sisters showed us the way. I still feel tempted to march, on my own if necessary. On the other hand, I have a feeling something major will emerge at some point soon, which will present us with an enormous opportunity.

Another angle, as others have been considering, is to push from the trans end until something topples. For example, one could badger organisations like the Labour party for all transwomen shortlists (women wouldn't be eligible). Just thinking out loud here.

If they are stating anti-trans as a fact without quotation marks or attributing it to a third party that’s ridiculous... it’s not difficult to put it in quotes and attribute it to the organisation that offered it as an opinion.

Usually news outlets put quotes in quotation marks and attribute them to a third party, they do this to avoid defamation accusations/claims.

I note that the independent put ‘anti-lesbian’ but simply stated the protest was anti-trans... so... if they are claiming they are quoting another organisation then the question is why did they not attribute the quote to the third party and frame it in quotation marks? Clearly they are able to do this because the did it re ‘anti-lesbian’....

It is basic journalism TBH... fact check, protect the reputation of the business and protect against defamation claims...

'Is it just the women?'

Why not mysogonistic if the same rules of reporting apply? Or why not controversial for the women?

I complained to one of the organisations mentioned above on the basis of inaccuracy. They came back to me saying that X Y and Z had described the protest as anti-trans - apparently that is enough justification for this news outlet to call the protest anti trans in a very misleading headline. No quotation marks, no examining of the issues etc.

I am shocked they positioned themselves on the debate and in such a goady way, too. The response was basically "yeah we know our headline and reporting were misleading and biased but we don't care because we have taken sides and we are not going to address any of the points you have made".

The Pink News branded female protestors as transphobic, yet yesterday's projection stunt was deemed controversial.

I complained to the BBC and had this reply:
We’ve reviewed the article and note that it’s the behaviour during the protest by the group Get The L Out, at Pride in London, that’s described as “anti-Trans”. This is in the context of noting that the organisers of Brighton Pride have said that behaviour such as that seen by the group at Pride in London wouldn’t be tolerated at their event in Brighton.

The article also notes Get The L Out saying their protest in London was "on behalf of all the lesbians intimidated, threatened and silenced by the GBT community."

When the Board of Pride London and prominent feminists describe it as anti-trans, the media isn't just free to do the same, they could be accused of bias if they didn't describe the protest as anti-trans.

Don’t be dense snappity, surely you know what ‘free press’ ‘defamation’ and ‘fact checking’ are!

And when Trump described the crowd at his inauguration as bigger than Obama’s the press could be described as bias for not doing the same? Snappity don’t you think the press should report the facts rather than regurgitate propraganda?

They are biased because they deliberately ignore what the protesters themselves tell them is the reason for the protest.

You need to speak up and be counted if you want to change the narrative.

When the Board of Pride London and prominent feminists describe it as anti-trans, the media isn't just free to do the same, they could be accused of bias if they didn't describe the protest as anti-trans.
So we can only read this protest as a deliberate attack on trans women.
solidaritystatement650530505.wordpress.com

This is tosh. The media needs to give right to reply to the protestors if they report Pride's comments in a news story. Unfortunately Indie and Guardian are not IPSO members so can't be subject to complainants process for breaking guidelines for balance.

Pride is a fallible organisation just like any other as its reaction shows.

When the Board of Pride London and prominent feminists describe it as anti-trans, the media isn't just free to do the same, they could be accused of bias if they didn't describe the protest as anti-trans.

So we can only read this protest as a deliberate attack on trans women.
solidaritystatement650530505.wordpress.com

There were a lot of complaints to the BBC by transactivists, because the BBC did report more fully after the 'anti trans' headline. I do suggest complaining to them, because the complaints from TRA will have an impact and the bbc will be even less likely to use the feminist voice. I would write and say, 'thanks fir accurately reporting the activists' quotes, BUT..' because if we don't complain it looks like we don't mind.