Kathleen Stock on BBC Woman's Hour today

And quite a sane article from the Graun: www.theguardian.com/education/2021/nov/03/kathleen-stock-says-she-quit-university-post-over-medieval-ostracism

Just now on The World Tonight on Radio 4, they closed the programme with some sensible statements from Kathleen Stock's interview on WH. No commentary, they just wanted to fit it in as being newsworthy. There are factions in the BBC who are keen to get proper journalism back into the values of the BBC.

tonight 222.42/3 on R4 as well.

What matters is that freedom of speech and demonstrating peaceably is their right

Not when it amounts to harassment of an individual. The point of the protest was to put pressure on the university to sack a member of staff despite there being no grounds to do so.

HoardingSamphireSaurus, I'm genuinely not sure what I am I suggesting that you haven't said. If I'm 'ignoring so much', it because I'm making a very simple point.

Your caps question: "What was it they were protesting against?", well I posted that earlier and can't be arsed to repeat. You talk about critical thinking, well yes - in a nutshell, boiling it down it doesn't actually matter what they were protesting about. What matters is that freedom of speech and demonstrating peaceably is their right.

As to what am I teaching my daughter? Well she'd laugh at that as of course she has her own views, but by engaging with the protesters, I was trying to show her never to assume. To find out as much as you can before you make your mind up. She did that - she listened and still came away thinking they were wrong headed, but.. and crucially I think.. she said she still believed they had a right to demonstrate. I have said repeatedly that I abhor what's happened to Kathleen Stock, but I still think students should be allowed to hold peaceful demos. There. End of. It's late and I'm not posting again. We'll just go round in circles.

Julie Bindel interviews Kathleen Stock for unHerd, here.

[quote Leafstamp]Apologies if already posted, but do leave a positive comment for the BBC here - quick and easy and can be anonymous if you wish:

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/comments[/quote]
Done. Thanks for the prompt.

I hope that Kathleen has good, solid support and access to counselling if she needs it. Watching/listening to her it strikes me that she is recovering (I hope) from trauma.

I used to run additional workshops for students who wanted to bone up on research methodology etc. Application of Critical Thinking was always a puzzler for a significant minority. That was about 7 years ago, I hate to think how much larger that minority is now!

Thank you @Gastonia - that was what I was trying to say

Their protest was pretty much

“I am paying you £9,000 a year. Please dismiss this servant who I do not like”.

I used to teach a 3rd year module that started out pretty much as,

What do you think you know about this subject?
And, how do you think you know that?

The discussions were excellent.

I can't imagine them happening now.

you say you don't want to silence student demos, so what would you have done?

Explained the difference between a demo and personal harrassment.

This was bullying. They had no reasoned point to make. The university did not dismiss Stock because in the U.K. you cannot just sack people without reason. We have unfair dismissal laws.

I think Shirazboobaloo is pointing out that those two paragraphs are making allegations about KS, and attributes these to "an online statement accompanying the campaign". However, it doesn't say exactly who this campaign is run by, or give a link to the source. It's like an opportunity to bash KS.

That is quite sloppy, and reads to me like it was inserted at the end, to ensure the article gave "both sides of the argument". Not that it came from the WH piece.

I have explained all of that, outlined it quite clearly.

You are ignoring so much.

And are suggesting shit I haven't said.

But, as you asked: critical thinking used to be a standalone module. It needs to be brought back, every semester, every year.

Then they may have been able to explain to you, so you could then explain to us, exactly what it was they were protesting against.

WHAT WAS IT THEY WERE PROTESTING AGAINST?

Sorry? Kathleen Stock talking about what has happened to her, from her perspective... a talking head piece. All her opinions, experiences etc. Transcribed from a radio interview.

They weren't seeking to impeach a president!

HoardingSamphireSaurus, you say you don't want to silence student demos, so what would you have done? How would you have "educated" them into "having a point"? The demonstrator we spoke to was highly articulate and clearly thought they had a point. I'm not sure how you'd have dissuaded them. I saw no flares or fly posting and they explained why they were wearing masks - they may have been overly paranoid, but it was a reasoned point. If they'd been advocating violence in any way I would be the first to say that's crossing a line, but I saw no evidence of that. Abhorrent things happened as part of the campaign against Kathleen Stock and those should be stamped on and outlawed,, but on that day, that's not what we saw. I didn't agree with them, but I do think they have a right to a peaceful protest. Would you have set Security on them and have them dragged away?

Every time he makes a comment on women’s spaces that tweet of him kicking off because men aren’t allowed access to a mammogram waiting room, that women have to walk through in hospital gowns, should be posted alongside it. The sheer arrogance, entitlement and ignorance of the man.

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

This was NOT an opinion piece - the BBC article is a news story and should reference sources and comments - that's my point.

It is a report of an interview

It should be balanced and follow up substantiated and unsubstantiated remarks made in a broadcast interview

It should be able to reference quotes from social media - otherwise it is another hatchet job

Again, it's a written article that quotes from a spoken one. Just an opinion piece, her opinions, her experience.

And it was all on Twitter anyway. Much of which has been locked down or removed and was anonymous in the first place. So referencing it, beyond KS saying it was all over Twitter, is pretty irrelevant anyway.

Anonymous person/people said on Twitter, which may or may not still be there...

Sometimes an opinion piece, a talking head, is just that!

The demonstrator we spoke to felt let down by their university and felt they needed to protest to be heard.

At best, this just makes them sound a bit thick.

Even if they don’t have enough empathy to understand the difference between right to protest and a sustained personal attack, what do they expect? That the university should be able to sack somebody on their request?

Again, they weren’t demonstrating for trans rights or any other cause. This was about an individual. Objectively they failed to produce any evidence to suggest Stock had done anything wrong.

Actually, I agree. It's like an add-on to give the other side of the argument, but doesn't seem to say where exactly it's from or who said it. It's not clear.

The BBC article has paragraphs saying this (my quote marks not theirs)

"But an online statement accompanying the campaign against her suggested Prof Stock "has spent years campaigning for the exclusion of trans people from 'women's only spaces' and against trans and non-binary people's right to self-identify as any gender".

It also criticised her trusteeship of the LGB Alliance, which describes itself on Twitter as promoting "the rights of lesbians, bisexuals & gay men, as recognised by biological sex". The group is described by trans activists as transphobic, which it denies."

There is no reference to who said this. There is no source. It is regurgitation of anonymous comment.

It would not stand as any level of journalistic integrity if that "hearsay" was run in any other news report

@Ekofisk where I come from we call everyone love, love

As a journalist I leave my personal feelings at the door thanks you but I understand media ethics and media training - this was poor journalism (the article on BBC not the WH interview)

What were the demonstrators wanting to be heard about aber17

Cos if they had read what she said then…..

Standing there imagine you were Kathleen stock seeing this in your workplace. Going into an underpass where the posters were with your name on them

What the fuck were they demonstrating against ?