BBC complaints

From Saturday's Times
The prevalence of soft news and “clickbait” on the BBC website will be examined during the biggest independent review ever taken of the corporation’s news output.

The media regulator Ofcom is investigating how the BBC is “adapting to the changing news environment”, including online. The review, to be published by the end of the year, will also monitor the BBC’s impartiality and analyse whether it remains trusted by audiences.
A BBC spokeswoman said: “Ofcom has yet to confirm the terms of reference for its review of the BBC’s news and current affairs output.

“The Cairncross review strongly supported the BBC’s role in providing high-quality, trusted and impartial news. It’s vital that people of all ages have access to impartial news which is relevant to them, and we provide younger audiences with a wide range of stories.”

Ofcom will assess the range and depth of news content across BBC TV, radio and online. A spokesman for the watchdog said: “We too want to see a healthy, vibrant news market that supports high-quality journalism.”

Also worth mentioning, Ofcom will look at your complaint against their own broadcasting code, not the BBC guidelines, so it's worth familiarising yourself with those as well.

I get the impression they don't really expect people to persist with BBC complaints to this stage which is why BBC get away with so much shit.

Sorry I haven't come back to this sooner Binglebong.

I'd really like to help but I honestly can barely read the images and really need it in a text format to work with. You could try finding another app that will let you open it in an editable format or convert it to a word doc and then C&P from there, or if that's not possible you (or someone with better eyesight than me!) could just type it out.

I can just about make out that they have referred to the BBC guidelines on Accuracy so have a look at those and also any other guidelines they haven't considered. There are guidelines on impartiality for example.

Ofcom is the next step, The relevant complaints procedure is here (PDF link) which you can find on this page of their site. They say you have 20 working days from the date of your BBC final response to bring a complaint. Assuming you got this on 12/02/19 you have until 12/03/19 to send something.

Just seen this, I'll have a proper look later today when I have more time.

Is there any way at all you can C&P the text from the PDF? Or failing that could you make the images bigger? I can barely read it.

and here's the BBC covering that 'clash', with weirdly enough, quotes from Emily Gorcenski of 'Mumsnet are fascists' fame

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44619374

trying to imply that the actions of each side are comparable

as mentioned above, it smacks of Trump

edition.cnn.com

"I think there is blame on both sides," Trump said during a contentious back-and-forth with reporters in the lobby of his Midtown Manhattan building.

"What about the 'alt-left' that came charging at, as you say, the 'alt-right,' do they have any semblance of guilt?" Trump asked. "What about the fact they came charging with clubs in hands, swinging clubs, do they have any problem? I think they do."

Fucking hell, that's an offensive reply isn't it?

This

I think “clash” is a reasonable means of characterising the intense disagreement between the two groups shown and I don’t believe it precludes the possibility that one side acted with more violence (or provocation) than the other

made my blood boil

naughty Maria Mc, provoking the nice trans ladies

when I complained about Sophie Cooke on Newsnight I got back a reply referring to Sophie throughout as a woman, same regarding Jane Fae, and totally failing to see why the sex of these people could be relevent when discussing women's rights

I really think that if our national broadcaster is now proceeding on the basis that humans can change sex, they should have notified someone.

any how....

as for what next - Ofcom if you've got the stomach for it?

not shamelessly place marking because want to see the response from the BBC

definitely not

This thread is helpful, but there may be others too: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3296433-BBC-Bias-Collecting-Examples-here?msgid=83065425#83065425

Thank you both for great work here. The BBC really do take notice of complaints. A small point to add if this is OK:

I can recommend many excellent speakers with impeccable credentials in fighting bigotry

Where you say this please go right ahead and give a paragraph of individual names with Twitter handles and of organisations with links.

Not only will this establish name recognition within an organisation (that sorely needs it!) by doing so, but also the BBC won’t be getting back to you to ask for these details if you’re offering to do so as part of a complaints procedure.

Spoonfeed them the evidence (like you have done here) and then also provide plenty of easy ways for them to independently access knowledgeable pro-woman individuals and organisations that they can approach in future for media comment on this issue. Twitter handles or other social media like are important because then they can see the amount of followers and tone of the public ‘debate’ around this issue. You may also want to circulate to the MN FWR BBC thread which has other examples of politicised language used by news reporters.

Then once you have sent all this they can’t say they didn’t know or didn’t understand what the issues were or who to go to to find out more.

In some ways it a bit understandable that this happens: there will be lazy and busy generalist newsroom journalists who doesn’t care and think feminists are as silly and niche as they think TRAs are, and there will be journalists who are actively promoting the erasure of women because they think that is the way they should support trans people. We have documented elsewhere on FWR the media training that they are offered.

The mainstream well known ‘women’s organisations’ like Fawcett that you might go to for comment also both aren’t involved in these debates (because they choose not to be) and also when asked, tend to apparently literally believe that TWAW and perhaps more accurately they do definitely believe it’s not OK probably discriminatory to say that TWATW (ie they believe that this is less a truthful observation of fact than it is a kind of insult )

The good thing about adding specifics in your letter is they will get seen by very senior BBC higher-ups eventually AND they will also eventually get circulated back down to the newsroom staff who did the original reporting and to their managers. Usually once the complaint is concluded and maybe before as it goes through the different stages. (Not an expert in BBC process but just assuming from process in other big organisations).

Thank you for pursuing this on behalf of women.

Brilliant, well done!

Getting complaints taken seriously is generally a matter of plodding through stage after stage until it lands on the desk of someone important. They rely on people giving up at stage 1 or 2. A complaint about a BBC programme has to go through 3 stages before ofcom even get to see it which is excessive and works against accountability.

I admire your tenacity

Pencils that’s excellent.

And a huge thank you for the transcripts (here andesewhere.) So much now is videos and text is so much more valuable.

Well done Pencils. That is a great letter.

Brilliant Pencils. And yes I do think it would be worth adding something about their coverage of the trump "both sides" rhetoric which they acknowledge as "controversial".

Thank you, I do love writing a complaint letter

I should do more of my own.

Pencils thats brilliantly written

Thank you for your further response to my complaint. Unfortunately this still fails to address the points I have raised.

You state that 'We think it is reasonable to describe the occasions where those with different views have confronted each other publicly as ‘clashes’', however this context is factually incorrect. The footage of both incidents you used - Hyde Park and Bristol - showed women attempting to meet to discuss their rights, and trans rights activists attempting to stop those meetings from happening. The women were not there to 'confront' these activists, and as far as I am aware, there are no occasions when women have sought a confrontation.

The first clip, at Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park, shows three male assailants hitting a woman while the presenter's voice says 'Those with opposing views have clashed'.

The woman who was hit was not there seeking a 'clash' or a 'confrontation'. None of the women's side were, they were simply attempting to attend a meeting. Incidentally, the meeting was not in Hyde Park itself, the women had arranged to meet there to be given details of the venue because it was the only way the meeting could be held without these same trans rights activists harassing the venue to shut it down. The police attended after the assault, they did not intervene. They were called and took witness statements because three male assailants had hit a woman. One of the assailants was later caught and prosecuted.

The second clip, at Bristol JamJar, shows trans rights activitists attempting to prevent women from entering a venue which they had booked for a meeting. Once again, the women had not come for a 'clash' or a 'confrontation', they simply wished to enter the building and attend a meeting for which they had bought tickets. The behaviour of the trans rights activists was extremely aggressive and intimidatory. The police did intervene on this occasion, however this was not to break up a 'clash' or a 'confrontation', it was to ensure the speakers and ticket holders could safely enter the venue.

In my previous response I said, 'You state that the press have reported on incidents on 'both sides' yet fail to provide any evidence of this. Please provide details of which violent and intimidatory 'incidents' have been carried out by women's groups.'

You have not provided details of any such 'incidents' in your latest response. To reiterate, to the best of my knowledge there are no incidents where women have been violent or intimidatory, or have 'confronted' trans rights activists. Women's groups do not protest these activists' meetings or events. If you have any evidence to the contrary then please provide it. Otherwise please concede that there is no evidence to support the dangerous and biased 'both sides' narrative presented by this report.

[add stuff about trump?]