Tim Davies Resigns - Can Gender Critical Movement take some credit?

Lisa Nandy is coming to this from an opposing point of view - she is TWAW and this should be borne is mind when she complains about "systemic bias on difficult issues" and "inconsistent reporting". Frankly, I do not trust the Culture Secretary on this issue.

Timing is everything. They've known about the issues since May but due to the leak last week and the forthcoming political scrutiny in the coming days, they are getting ahead of the game with the blood letting. They need to do a massive mea culpa. Although the focus has been on Trump because it is readily understandable and such an egregious fraudulent assertion, I am hoping that the focus will switch to the flawed editing of trans issues and the Israeli war. It is the only story on 24 hour news at the moment so I don't think these will escape scrutiny for much longer.

I think most people will think it is to do with Trump.

But not because they care that much about editorial standards but because they think the BBC sneers a Trump (and Farge) etc..

I doubt anyone thinks GC activists had any impact but on a personal level I think many people with have sympathised with Martine Croxall.

Again not through any coherent political position, but just that she shouldn't have had to uses words like that, or even that they dont care so much about the words, but think publicly criticising her is over the top.

Trump changes the calculus. Trump's lawsuit against CBS (and a far less clear cut case of defamation) was for $20, thousand million. CBS eventually settled for $16 Million to be paid to his presidential library. A $20 thousand million case puts the existence of the BBC on the line. The BBC will have to go to the government and ask for sovereign protection (presumably behind closed doors) and that will come at price and probably require the government to directly negotiate with the Trump administration.

The actual maneuvering and outcome is all speculative of course, but IMO business as usual can be ruled out.

Yes they really can’t see it or admit to it.

Christmas came early!

Actually, Sky News is reporting comprehensively this is to do with Trump and trans-activist ideology. They're dancing around Palestine-Israel conflict more, but being clear on transgender issues being a contributing factor.

Sonia is increasingly on BBC Radio and Television

can’t wait for Nick to take his turn at documenting it all.

🍿👀

You make some good points.

I do think the mood is subtly shifting though - many people are utterly exhausted with all the left wing sneering, superiority and gas lighting.

There are limits.

I'd love to hear Arthur Scargill's views on the omnicause. Surely he wouldn't have any truck with it.

There are two massive issues with the Trump edit:

1. It makes it plain that the BBC is biased and is not longer holding on to the requirement to be impartial.
2. It gives Trump (I am Not a Fan) an absolute gift of, 'Yes, see how biased the leftist media is against me, they do not represent me fairly, trust nothing from these biased shills and others like them...'

And yes, I suspect the Trump issue is the major reason why Davie has gone, but there is so much bias in so many other areas of the BBC's reporting (trans, Gaza, rural issues) that the whole place needs a massive clean out.

I hope it happens, but I very much doubt that it will. There will be lots of fine words and fuck all done.

Many, many of us on this board have complained to the BBC over their trans coverage, especially when they call transwomen murderers and rapists "women" and "she".

Akin to the Labour Government and their lies, when trust is lost, it’s lost….

I think it’s mainly about Trump.

That video was powerful. And I think it’s a very different thing to put words into the mouth of, probably, the most powerful person in the world, than it is to choose and write your stories on a subject with bias. It’s not something you can back away from or argue around.

Panorama was enough on its own, whereas I don’t think either the Gaza or Trans bias are, even if Davie accepted them (but I think they should be!). Put together they give a very poor picture of the BBC and if, as PPs say, BBC journalists are all over SM saying they aren’t biased and its a right wing plot, they reinforcing that view.

🤯

Yes this phrasing (all their coverage) clearly shows they are biased too.

Why is the BBC expected to apologise over a Donald Trump speech edit?
^^
Boris Johnson and White House criticise the corporation, but some journalists say criticism is part of campaign to destroy the BBC

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/09/why-is-the-bbc-expected-to-apologise-over-a-donald-trump-speech-edit

https://archive.ph/D0EFc

The British journalist Adam Boulton, a former political editor of Sky News, said on X that he thought claims of bias on this occasion were “BS [bullshit]”, adding it was “fake news to suggest ⁦Donald Trump⁩ did not egg on what happened on 6 January”.

They clipped his speech, how is that possible to excuse?

Davie's nomination was quite controversial at the time. People advising Johnson wanted to bring in a reformer who would tackle structural issues of bias and accountability in the organization. Davie was a compromise (or perhaps capitulation) candidate. In spite of being sympathetic to Tories, he was an experienced BBC insider whose strength was knowing the ins and outs of how the BBC runs, i.e. an operator not a reformer.

The BBC is presumably run like every other large non-govermental, non-private organization, with a vast constellation of specialties from HR, to sensitivity, to diversity, inclusion and environmental competencies, and those competencies are not to be questioned, and have broad discretion and executive control over their domain. That's the broad outlines of institutional capture. It's not at all a surprise that issues those organizational units dealt with would not rise to his level, and he would think it not his business to intervene.

Ana analysis of the last 72 hours of tweets splits it as

55% angry on trump
30% on the trans bias
15% angry general bias

Grok summary: "the Trump edit has the edge in sheer volume and immediacy, the trans bias feels more insidious to critics, as it's portrayed as deliberate suppression over years. Both exemplify a "broken" BBC, per users, demanding structural change beyond apologies."

This is his statment in full as an image https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/article36217654.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200e/0_Screenshot_2025-11-09_at_193655jpeg.jpg and also in text within article at https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/tim-davies-resignation-speech-full-36217476

I just listened to the SEEN in journalism podcast with Nick Wallis - he said he spoke to Tim Davie at a party and told him that the trans story is even bigger than the post office scandal because it is about trust in institutions - and Davie was dismissive! Wonder if he will ever remember that or care

Add your votes to the big board ... https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5441546-the-bbc-should-lose-the-license-fee-and-be-forced-to-operate-like-any-other-streaming-service-after-the-complete-destruction-of-trust-this-week

The resignation was about Trump. But a lot of the comments on the mainstream media reporting of the story are referencing the Maxine Croxall decision as evidence the Beeb lost the plot under Davie. Plus the allegations of biased gender reporting formed part of the report that brought him down. Apparently BBC staff are furious about Croxall’s reprimand too. So I don’t think his successor is going to be able to ignore this.

Lisa Nandy was on the BBC this morning with Laura Kunsburg. LK bright up the Trump debarcle and I could believe my ears when Lisa Nandy said it wasn’t just about Trump, it was also about Trans reporting and Gaza! But yes the BBC are certainly trying to bury the Trans bias.

I was thinking that, they must be pretty happy atm

Rayner was a biggie, now this.