‘I’m here for all the witches’

[JNicholson]

Watched some of the Emma Watson/Jay Shetty podcast the other day including what she said about how she feels about JK Rowling post their disagreement and rift about trans issues. Have also read JK Rowling’s recent response on Twitter, which she posted above a retweeted clip from GB News in which, among other things, a male newsreader claims that EW was ‘snidey’ at the BAFTAs a few years ago when she made her comment about ‘I’m here for all the witches’ (interpreted as a statement of support for trans rights). He claims that she said ‘I’m here for all the witches bar one’, and thus by implication that it was a clear attack against JKR.

Irrespective of what you think about trans issues or EW and JKR in general, AIBU to find it really frustrating that the GB newsreader makes this false claim? IMO if you watch the clip of EW at the BAFTAs, it’s pretty clear that she says ‘I’m here for all the witches BY THE WAY’ and not ‘BAR ONE’. Some of the news outlets at the time seem to have reported it one way, some the other. But it makes such a big difference, because ‘bar one’ would be a really horrible personal attack, whereas ‘by the way’, whatever you feel about the content of EW’s views, is clearly just saying that she has different views to JKR. JKR makes it clear in her post that she viewed that speech by EW as a turning point, which is her prerogative. She may just feel offended that EW made such a public point of disagreeing with hers which is also her prerogative. But I think it’s a real shame if she incorrectly believes that EW said ‘bar one’ and therefore believes it’s more of an attack than it was. IMO for anyone familiar with EW, whatever you think of her otherwise, making a spiteful remark about ‘bar one’ would be really out of character.

AIBU for thinking the media has a responsibility to report on this correctly, as it really changes the meaning of EW’s statement if you claim she said ‘bar one’?

Not looking for a discussion on the rights and wrongs of trans issues, as there are already lots of these on MN - this is a thread about media responsibility to report the news responsibly and not in a false inflammatory way.

GB News doing what GB News does - twisting the truth to fit a narrative.

Whatever 'side' we fall on in this, or any, debate we need to get better at realising when we are being lied to and start holding our press, media, politicians and public figures to account for what comes out of their mouths.

Agree. Actually in the process of reading and posting on this thread I realise that of course I’ve been naive. It’s in the interests of outlets like GB News to claim they think EW said ‘bar one’ whether they’re actually think so or not, because it feeds their narrative of everything being woke and bad meaning that we must band together and support GB News. But also, more broadly, whatever the political affiliations of the news outlet, it’s in their interests to claim that she did, because it stokes anger and clickbait and keeps the whole cycle going which means revenue for them. ‘Celebrities in polite nuanced debate’ is not a money-generating headline.

‘I’m here for all the witches’ (interpreted as a statement of support for trans rights).

Well, the idiot does not even know the difference between a witch - which always have negative overtones but they were the herbal women of yore - and men wanting to pretend to be women.

She's an idiot and I will always be on the side of JKR.

We're in for a few years of this intensifying.

Lies and propaganda is how Trump achieved both terms in office and Reform are 100% following his handbook!

‘Celebrities in polite nuanced debate’ is not a money-generating headline.
Sorry, I missed that bit. When did EW engage in polite nuanced debate?

Ok, yes I see how you felt I’d misrepresented you. It just seemed like the first part of the sentence was a complete given, of course JKR can speak about what she wants. I don’t think people should then, knowing they may speak, need to pause with concern about how their views on serious topics may impact people who worked for them 25 years ago. She owes EW and DR absolutely no worry about how they might respond to media queries on issues she speaks about.

EW has chosen to be an activist for an opposing ideology and traded on her Potter background and used JKR’s vocal stance as a springboard to air her views. JKR has waited years to address how EW and DR have, over the years, piggybacked off a specific vilification of her to make their points. EW’s latest round of interviews with her driving ban excuses and refound love of Jo seems to be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

Yeah I didn’t think JKR should pause or worry either. But I think people claiming that EW was using trans rights for relevance, etc, should bear in mind that she wasn’t the one originally who put it on the agenda. She got placed in a position where whatever she did (saying something, not saying something) would be a stance. Yes she could afford PR people to help, no she didn’t handle it well. But there was no version of response really where she wouldn’t have been pissing some people off. It’s not a situation I’d like to be placed in, especially about an issue I might not actually be at all knowledgeable about, but now have to scramble to research and take a public position on because somebody else connected to me has decided to make it a central part of their public platform.

And Twitter was bought (in part) because the lefty staff were busy and very openly writing code to supress users and tweets which did not agree with their political points of view.

Sorry but ...
While EW may not have been using TR for relevance yet EW jumped in with enthusiasm and opted for promoting Mermaids a full year after SG and a male director openly lied to claim there was no data breach (ongoing for 3 years at that stage) left the data open on the web after being informed then claimed it was transphobic to have reported it and then tried to blame the reporter of causing harm. Thats ignoring SGs family issues.
All of this ^ information was a phone call away via a SM search service which proved the management had crappy safeguarding controls and were not willing to take ownership of the poor management choices.

Its hard to claim that EW did not then choose to make GI part of her actual brand when she decided to proactively promote it.

That place is a fucking cess pit now.

Absolutely nothing but propaganda there!

I've also got a hearing impediment. I've looked at the clip about 30 times, at 0.25 speed, zoomed in.

It clearly isn't "bar one", because she makes a "th" sound in the middle.

That doesnt help much, because "bar the one" would also make sense, but if anyone is categorically seeing "bar one" (verbatim) they're probably projecting.

The video quality, when zoomed in, isn't quite good enough for me to say with full confidence, but I'd say with about 80% confidence that its "by the way". It might be "bar the one" but I dont think so. "Bar one" - definitely not.

Edit - i see others have beaten me to it.

At full speed, I wouldn't have ruled out "bar one" but it absolutely isn't that. Three syllables, middle one is "the", looks very much like "by the way".

"Bar the one" is absolutely a turn of phrase. I use it myself.

I don't think she says it, mind, but I wouldnt rule it out.

Its categorically not "bar one", though.

Lots of us on the thread have also watched it multiple times, zoomed in and slowed down. IMO it’s “bar the one” (sneery smirk).

Its amazing, though, how many people were adamant that it was "bar one".

The more I look at it, the more convinced I am that its "by the way", but the differences between "by the way" and "bar the one" are relatively slight. Undeniable, though, is that its 3 syllables- contrary to the insistence of some.

That is down to the prior designers not EM
Along with shadow baning they sociodemographiced the platform and designed feed to effectively loop within the subgroups and only connect to people who would fit in the subgroup.

They allowed peadophiles to have secondry private accounts along with people openly selling prostitution and any other crap which should not be allowed on a public fourm.

Which is a shame as the potential to be a public square is being lost

Many men and women who regularly conscientiously build and support initiatives to exclude women think they are being kind all day long, and bringing good into the world. Doesn’t make their actions less harmful. It was a clear personal attack whether or not she said by the way.

There have been several lip readers I’ve seen analyse the speech and they all conclude it’s “bar one” NOT “by the way”.

The tongue movement is apparently wrong for “the” and as PP said, she only mouths two words.

The “bar one” is also a whispered addendum which wouldn’t make sense if it was “by the way”.

If she had said “by the way”, surely her spokesperson would have corrected the reports? Because there was tumbleweed.

No matter which was you try and cut it, there’s just zero plausibility in the claims that she said “by the way”.

JKR isn’t normally one to be oversensitive but her description of how this all affected her and her family was just awful. So much for #BeKind - to everyone except JKR, apparently.

Nah, "bar one" isn't remotely plausible. She plainly and obviously pronounces 3 syllables, one of which starts with a "th". Yes - at full speed, its easily missed, but in slow motion its plain as day.

I'm not leaping to her defence as it could be bar the one, but in slow motion it is very obviously is not "bar one". I think those internet expert lip readers are having you on.

It's notable that everyone on the thread who professes to have watched in slow motion sees the "the", however they read the rest.

Not sure JKR really “put it on the agenda”, she responded to a woman losing her job, career, income for saying there are two sexes. Whoever sacked her and other similar actions put it on the agenda. JKR has always spoken up for women. As a UN feminist rep or whatever EW is, she was always going to need a position. I agree with AnSolas that she actually jumped into the topic enthusiastically. She didn’t need to do all her interviews and her BAFTA intro literally traded off her Potter past to have a go at its writer. Sad move by her. Yes, staying quiet on twitter can might have pissed off some of the same aggressors who were threatening JKR, but that’s fame.

All it took was her to check with her people “JKR has just said men can’t become women, I’m fuming. I want to tweet a link to mermaids in response?” They could have said hold on, asked her if she’d be comfortable being questioned about supporting an organisation that has a ceo flying a child abroad to have their genitals mutilated. Or the data stuff AnSolas mentioned. Could have said keep quiet for now Emma and at a push later you can say she’s a great writer, loved working with her, owe her my career but why at 30 something and 20 years away from Potter are you asking my opinion on what JKR does? I recently did this work for the UN on…

Because it looks like that until you slow it down, because she’s mouthing “bar the one”, not “by the way”.

Why mouth anything on stage - it's a very weird thing to do. Say it and own it or shut up. Mouthing a communication is manipulative.

I think people claiming that EW was using trans rights for relevance, etc, should bear in mind that she wasn’t the one originally who put it on the agenda.
No, that would be the bullying TRA who started this whole toxic mess, who made it an 'agenda', who thought that "polite nuanced debate" amounted to phobia.
But the likes of EW and lots of other luvvies certainly didn't help by surrendering to their pressure.

“There are all kinds of courage," said Dumbledore, smiling. "It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends. I therefore award ten points to Mr. Neville Longbottom!”