Oh FUCK OFF, BBC!

Agree, MrGHardy. The very title raises questions. Someone - especially a someone who is afraid of being “on the wrong side of things”will immediately think there is something problematic about Harry Potter.

The BBC do this all the time. I now keep spotting those faux questions (I’ve seen anti-vaxxers employ the same tactic on MN) posed in an innocent manner, but getting their biased point across, eg “Should we be afraid of a fourth wave?” (Eeek! Is a fourth wave coming?) even if in the last para they mention that no one knows.

"It’s actually quite a balanced article:"

No, it isn't. The mere publishing of this 'article' is a joke to journalism. They are fuelling a hate driven ideology by posting ridiculous nonsense. The simple answer is yes. There is nothing more to discuss. By making an article about it they lend credibility to the bullies.

This is an old piece isn't it?

Have they made it prominent again?

My comment on the person first in the article is. How do they react when they hear people read mein kamf or the little red book etc etc because they're interested in finding out what they say?

I mean also there must be scores of authors who've murdered and so on.

I don't get it.

Lol at title

Will read

The BBC are privileged woke little shits.

PurpleWh1teGreen: I'm not sure I can take any article about a wannabe wizard seriously.

That was my reaction to the BBC article, but I thought I would listen to as much of the program as I could stomach.
After the initial resistance (“another whiny woke American”) I got quite interested in her account of why trans and LGB people might feel particularly possessive about JKR’S work, and interested also in the discussion of changing relationships between writers and their readers and changing relationships between readers and texts. Not at all what I expected.

I think the BBC’s relentless promotion of the trans agenda is appalling, but I wouldn’t complain about the content of this particular program.

But surely the actual sodding point is that JKR isn't transphobic just because she happens to believe humans can't change sex.

She refers to her ‘disagreement’ with JKR. Beyond that, there’s no attack on her views or character.

In late 2019, J. K. Rowling faced criticism for expressing support for Maya Forstater, who lost her job at a thinktank after writing a tweet that said, “men cannot change into women.” Rowling was accused of transphobia

That is the actual crux of it.
That is the reason for this ridiculous crusade against her.

How many people will read that and be puzzled and think - that is just common sense?

Or do people just accept that if somebody at the BBC deems this to be transphobic then that is the matter settled?

Miserable state of affairs.

The BBC are hypocritical bastards. They have employed Geoff Boycott and Phil Tuffnell for years, both convicted of assaults against women. Jeremy Clarkson hits a man and he is sacked, Boycott punched a woman 20 times, and still has a long BBC career.

There are many many other examples I'm sure, those were just off the top of my head.

It really is time to defund the BBC.

Millions of people are absolutely sick and tired of this sort of vacuous woke PC drivel being constantly rammed down our throats by an organisation we are forced to fund if we want to watch any TV. I’m sick and tired of being preached at and made to feel guilty for being a straight, white, English patriot.

The BBC should be privatised and forced to compete for audiences in a free market. Netflix has no problems selling millions of subscriptions, so why shouldn’t the BBC, if It’s confident there is a mass market for the virtue signalling crap it spews out every hour of every day.

Her book sales have increased by 9%

All book sales are on the up during lockdown and it does not seem surprising that a popular series like Harry Potter helps wile away dull hours. They could not have picked a worse time to cancel her.

..........and are employed by the BBC

"But surely the actual sodding point is that JKR isn't transphobic just because she happens to believe humans can't change sex."

Ah, but the people who do believe that, also believe in unicorns.

And that is one of the many reasons why they no longer get a licence fee from this household.

I'm not sure I can take any article about a wannabe wizard seriously.

But surely the actual sodding point is that JKR isn't transphobic just because she happens to believe humans can't change sex.

They have some awareness of a row regarding JK (my youngest had heard that she was 'racist' which we have now talked about) but have clearly made up their own mind re. the books/movies.

It makes me so sad that there are adults out there trying to take away children's enjoyment of such brilliant books (recent thread re. an English teacher announcing to the class that JK was a transphobe).

Her book sales have increased by 9%? Well I didn't know that. Thank you for sharing! That's made me smile.

It is hardly balance when the BBC has to scour the planet for critical views then blow them up into a j'accuse article. They are leading with a couple of very obscure voices. It took me a bit of googling to find out who Jackson Bird was, wikipedia suggested he was an Australian cricketeer but that did not seem to fit. Yet the whole article is framed from the position of these two nobodies and it is straight out of the American culture war that really does not resonate over here.

I don't really understand why what Romano thinks is worthy of an article. Romano's engagement with JK Rowling's books and whether Romano finds it 'safe' or not is neither here nor there surely?

Mmm. This is Romano writing a piece/making a programme about Romano, and sticking JK Rowling's name on it. I know why Romano think's a programme about Romano's views on anything is worthwhile.

What I don't understand is the commissioning logic. I don't have a problem with this being commissioned, but where are the similar personal stories from the GC side? Maybe that's not fair though - I guess the same year (on TV) there was Martina Navratilova doing trans athletes?

and why does the BBC start off the argument with two American accusers? Why not have something more representative of views in this country. I don't want to be overly nationalistic here, of course all views are welcome but it is plain as day that there is difference of opinion here on different sides of the Atlantic so seems odd to use the opinions of two people outside Britain as the start off for the piece.

I don't really understand why what Romano thinks is worthy of an article. Romano's engagement with JK Rowling's books and whether Romano finds it 'safe' or not is neither here nor there surely? It's Romano's business to deal with alone and it doesn't need amplifying in this rather loaded fashion.
I have reactions, as a woman, to various different books - some written by male or female authors whose views I don't necessarily agree with - but no one is writing a BBC article about my thoughts. Why are Romano's more relevant? Repeatedly dragging this 'issue' with JKR into public view is what makes this feel like unbalanced reporting because it's refusing to let go of this particular author.

In the interests of balance there really ought to be a reader who has no problems with JK Rowling's opinions or her books being given equal weight in this article, with equal text time on their feelings.

The BBC has gone nuts. Talk about the tyranny of the minority....

Complaints link

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints

I think a ton of complaints might help

NotBadConsidering
It’s actually quite a balanced article:

It's not actually quite a balanced article. Look at the style

It's basically written by Romano themself in third person, a non-binary person really very hurt feelings and upset about women's right to same sex spaces.

Starts with JKR has made me feel sad and unsafe I thought I was a wizard like HP.
Other people agree JKR is bad
JKR is like a "helicopter parent" (!)
Oh I just have to mention because it's supposed to be balanced that book sales have actually increased by 9% since her blog because other people are mean
Ends with, They see their relationship with HP to be a "weary divorce"...

I know this person is supposed to be non binary but I can pretty much tell the sex of them just from that article.

I mean FUCK OFF BBC