BBC email re bias on Woman's Hour

[Judder]

So having emailed Woman's Hour yesterday about women being silenced, I am now emailing the BBC today ... bout the same thing.

It was flagrant BIAS.
The number of pro trans lobby guests vastly outweighed the number of pro women's rights. And airtime of course too.

Also since they had a pro trans lawyer they should have had a pro women's rights lawyer too. It made it all very one sided. The BBC have very strict guidelines about fairness and I think this programme contravened them.

TRAs probably will complain the other way.
They are gnashing their teeth the BBC have even discussed it at all.

I thought Nic and Debbie were good enough. To the casual listener I think GC came across well.

The real issue would be how much airtime each side got to speak.

I agree with you about the legal side, however - they should have had someone to put both sides.

Just posted the airtime stats on the other WH thread:

21 mins 02 seconds to pro-GRA speakers
6 mins 22 seconds to pro-women's rights speakers
= 76% pro-GRA

(disclaimer: not scientifically accurate! Just me sitting in my kitchen using a counter app.)

Haven't listened yet but will listen with view to formal complaint. They bill this programme as
'Gender Recognition Act, Rebecca Allen, Adoption
41 mins ago ⸱ 49:01
The Government is consulting on reforming the Gender Recognition Act. It's asking how well current legal processes work when someone wants to change gender and what should be done. The consultation has generated a huge amount of debate. Some feminist groups argue it threatens the legal protections women enjoy to women-only services and against sex-discrimination. Transgender campaigners argue that a change in the law would protect them from an intrusive process involving medical diagnosis. We look at the current debate.'
i.e. it's about the debate so views and issues should have been presented equally and fairly. Think this needs to be forensic so any response from bbc can be taken to Ofcom.

My feeling that the air time was unbalanced in favour of pro-Self ID; and there was not enough opportunity to question some of the flagrant fudges and avoidance of direct response to questions and issues.

A lot was made out of the 'fear factor' in the gender critical position, and how this is supposedly unfounded; and no approach to wider implications around re-defining the word and category of woman. No questioning of the 'Trans Women are Women' mantra - which is the main sticking point.

Thanks AbsintheFriends These stats are going in my email. I don't suppose it will get anywhere but one of the places the BBC are sensitive about is accusations of bias and frankly I'm concerned that if no GC people complain and all the TRANS complain then we will just get shafted that way instead.

There are plenty of lawyers who would have argued that the GRC is not 'just a piece of paper' but Woman's Hour just brought in the Stonewall lawyer who clearly has an agenda. It is maddening.

Shame everyone had to listen to a load of drivel while serious criticism of stonewalls definition of transgender could have woken them all up. Waste of time. I did hear they are going to something about girls transitioning AG another time. We will see.

thanks for the stats AbsintheFriends

I will be drafting an email of complaint this evening and will use them, they're pretty damning

Judder - just be aware those stats are an approximation. I was listening again and making notes (for my own complaint email) so there were times when my finger wasn't quite as quick on the counter as others, though that was definitely the case throughout and not just with one side of the argument! I'm confident it represents a fair analysis of the content.

For me, one of the most unfair parts was the introduction by a Stonewall spokesperson who was able to set the scene before the debate, but was then absent from the studio conversation.

However, the teacher was magnificent. Her two pieces cut to the heart of the matter.

I do think WH and the BBC will come back and say they had to explain why the GRA needs to be changed, hence Bex got a lot of air time.

(If you took Bex out of the timings Abs, how do the airtime stats look? )

I do still believe they should have allowed a GC person to have had much more time, but I think acknowledging the GRA and trans perspective had to be aired, should be done in any complaint.

Sorry I’m not explaining myself very well and maybe my point is silly. I just know trying to complain is very frustrating with the BBC, so it’s best to try to second guess what they’ll respond with.

Important point: if you don't want to receive a reply, then you have to give the first half of your postcode but you don't need to give your name or email address. I figured I'd just get the rote response anyway so said I didn't need a reply.

If you don't want a reply then your complaint can go out in the daily communication to staff tomorrow.

Here's the online complaint form, though you can also call or email:

ssl.bbc.co.uk/complaints/forms/?lang=en&reset=&uid=234358874

Could be worth getting in touch with Feedback too (the radio 4 programme for listener's views on programmes).

It will be interesting to listen to programs that follow.

For clarity, if there is a break down of time could someone do it by individual speakers please?

Thanks Lizzie, that’s really helpful.

I do think WH and the BBC will come back and say they had to explain why the GRA needs to be changed, hence Bex got a lot of air time.

Shouldn’t it be explain why some people think it should be changed? Many transexuals strongly oppose Stonewall’s push for self-ID. Someone like Debbie Hayton could have given a view on changes that could be made and why self-ID doesn’t need to be part of that.

Also Stonewall has tried to get the exemptions from the EA removed, and have said they won’t even acknowledge the clash with sex based rights. Their position that self-ID transwomen literally are women (which is what they’ve built their ideological position on) is a radical view most listeners wouldn’t agree with - and wasn’t made explicit or even questioned.

Plus having a Stonewall friendly lawyer with no proper discussion of EA/GRA interactions during an open consultation hinging on issues like this was about as far from balance as you can get.

I've complained, leaving postcode and details.

I've complained, including those stats.

How many fucking hours of airtime have they dedicated to giving the whole trans perspective? They couldn't even allow time in a dedicated programme to discussing WHY there are views that the GRA is problematic for women. Anti Woman Broadcasting service. And they can pack in their public funding, give up the licence fee and heteronormative off.

I've complained to the BBC and messaged Feedback. Very straightforward and easy.

You know what though, my friend just initiated a conversation about safeguarding with me after hearing this. This is not at all his area of interest but he's a critical thinker with anarchist tendencies. After hearing this he thinks there is serious corruption & desire to abuse at the heart of it all.

Mind you I agree with all the criticism. Wonder if its time for a boycott?

Now is the time to keep emailing with specific concerns.

This was the first time it was discussed, it won't be the last.

Thanks for help and advice. I have emailed but did not rely too heavily on the stats. They'll have all that info on their system, it's part of the paperwork as far as I know. I will now get in touch with Feedback. Boring but necessary I feel. The more the merrier.

I've had this response from Feedback. Can anyone tell me what DM means?
we're hoping to cover this on Feedback this week. Would you mind following us please so that we can DM you? Thanks

It means Direct Message (on Twitter). If you follow them, they can send you a private message.

ps Well done!!!!

thank you