Predatory woman who incited man to abuse child, 4 jailed

What about tweeting it to the panorama team / news night/ sky news / the times / the telegraph/ gb news to highlight it?

I got the same standard response. Have tried to follow up on the complaint, but BBC website refuses to accept the case number, saying that it 'does not fit required field', despite asking me to enter the number. Convenient.

Can I reply to their email

which email address is it

Yep, Peas. Have done a follow-up complaint once or twice before & it was straightforward. Fairly sure it was following the standard complaints route, but along the way there’s an option to tick a box saying this was pursuant to a prior complaint?

Could someone who knows tell me how to take it further, I’ll have plenty of time after Christmas to email

I always felt I could at least rely on the “tell” until now - the “born male” / “previously known as” / photograph.

If they’re phasing this out to the extent they’re prepared to put in writing what they do above, we’re in real trouble.

All those “Well, women are as much of a risk?” defences? Our gold-standard national broadcaster will evidence it.

The wonderful moments that peppered my childhood of taking pride in reported female firsts? Our daughters will lose that lovely certainty & hope.

Equal opportunity monitoring & reporting? Gone.

Peasand · Today 15:48

I wonder how they deal with criminals referring to themselves as innocent

Please would you write and ask them?

Who is working there, replying to a huge number of complaints over false information in a supposed news report by stating that they describe a criminal as that person describes themselves [rather than describing what they actually are] as though that is the only sane and justified position to take?

How can they think they are making sense?

It is the end of their integrity.

I’m taking it further. It’s upset me more than anything else this year. The standards the BBC proudly proclaim they uphold in this reply mean that the public

• Won’t know about the next Isla Bryson
• Won’t be told if men are setting impossible sporting records women can’t beat
• Won‘t know that the hypothetical female in a red car they should warn their children about is, in fact, a male
• Won‘t know that the woman called Suzie they‘re voting for to defend their interests has an inherent bias against female-only spaces…

I could go on.

This is actively dangerous and profoundly anti-democratic.

And it doesn’t affect men in the same way - when was the last time you saw a transman take a woman’s place in sport, politics or the public arena?

We‘re used to the appropriation of woman, & being de-sensitised to the loss of female, but until now I’ve NEVER not seen this qualified by a reference to birth sex.

Their literally, shamelessly stating that they accept women & female as self-identified is, to me, a watershed moment. It formalises, in writing, on a large scale, their rejection of any obligation to report accurately on sex.

This is huge.

Please fight it.

I see it is a paste answer sent to all.

Very shocked by the BBC answer to my complaint. They say they refer to the person as they refer to themselves, and as the police did.

So what exactly are they, the BBC, contributing to the reporting of facts?

Answer I got:

Thank you for getting in touch about our coverage of the sentencing of Naomi O'Brien, described by a Greater Manchester Police detective inspector as ‘a predatory woman’. We reported: “The 31-year-old was convicted of five offences and jailed for four years and three months at Manchester's Minshull Street Crown Court.”

Some readers objected to us describing her as a woman, maintaining she was transgender and had previously been a man.

Our reporting was based on the court proceedings and a press release issued by Greater Manchester Police in which they describe Naomi O’Brien as a female. We checked with them and they told us that “she identifies as a woman”. They used female pronouns and we reported accordingly.

BBC News editorial practice is to refer to trans people as they refer to themselves. In our reporting we use the term and pronoun used by the person in question, as we did here. Greater Manchester police followed the same style.

We are sorry if you did not appreciate the way we covered this particular case but would like to thank you again for contacting us to make your views known. All feedback from readers is appreciated and shared with senior editors so that they are aware of audience concerns.

Kind regards,

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

They hide behind the Ipso regulations. There is a public interest defence which I took advice on. There can be little more in the public interest than the full identification of a sexual predator who preys on young children.

They got enough complaints that its one of the featured ones

https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaint/httpswwwbbccoukcontactcomplaintsentencing

Yes @AncientQuercus

I got the identical email this afternoon. Is anyone planning to take it further?

Thank you, I sent a follow-up complaint citing that Tameside Reporter article as one which involved actual journalism instead of parroting press releases, and asked why BBC journalists didn't do this.

https://www.questmedianetwork.co.uk/news/tameside-reporter/transgender-woman-incited-lover-to-sexually-abuse-four-year-old-boy/

Yeah I got the same stupid reply. Sod the poor children ey. As long as this monster is validated

I wonder how they deal with criminals referring to themselves as innocent

I got identical response at the same time.

They are clearly emboldened by the poor Brianna reporting. As though there is some equivalence between the two cases.

Apparently I have to complain two more times to BBC before I can escalate to Ofcom. Anyone else going to keep going?

Truth reported@

I got a response too:

Thank you for getting in touch about our coverage of the sentencing of Naomi O'Brien, described by a Greater Manchester Police detective inspector as ‘a predatory woman’. We reported: “The 31-year-old was convicted of five offences and jailed for four years and three months at Manchester's Minshull Street Crown Court.”

Some readers objected to us describing her as a woman, maintaining she was transgender and had previously been a man.

Our reporting was based on the court proceedings and a press release issued by Greater Manchester Police in which they describe Naomi O’Brien as a female. We checked with them and they told us that “she identifies as a woman”. They used female pronouns and we reported accordingly.

BBC News editorial practice is to refer to trans people as they refer to themselves. In our reporting we use the term and pronoun used by the person in question, as we did here. Greater Manchester police followed the same style.

We are sorry if you did not appreciate the way we covered this particular case but would like to thank you again for contacting us to make your views known. All feedback from readers is appreciated and shared with senior editors so that they are aware of audience concerns.

Kind regards,

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

I take issue with this:

"BBC News editorial practice is to refer to trans people as they refer to themselves. In our reporting we use the term and pronoun used by the person in question, as we did here." It contravenes their directive to report in a manner which is informative and educative.

I think it would be useful to ask them to reconsider this editorial practise in the interest of clarity and accuracy. Best editorial practise would be factual accuracy not a criminal's preferred obfuscation, surely?

At least the BBC are admitting, in writing, that you can't believe a word that they say!

I got the same response. They also referred to me as "Mr" so it seems they have form for reversing people's sex.