BBC complaints

[Binglebong]

A while ago I complained about a very unequal article on the BBC. The excellent posters in here helped me reply to their answer (sorry can't find that thread.) Ivd now had a reply to my reply.

Thank you for writing again and please accept our apologies that it has taken us so long to respond.

The report set out some of the background to the debate and views on both sides. It was made clear that views are very strongly held and the debate is divided and bitter at times.

We think it is reasonable to describe the occasions where those with different views have confronted each other publicly as ‘clashes’. It was not attempt to apportion blame but to indicate to viewers that there are strong differences of opinion and as the footage showed, on occasion the police have intervened. Nicola Williams was interviewed in connection with her role for Fair Play for Women and not in connection with her research work, and her caption made clear her interest to viewers.

If you are still dissatisfied, you can contact the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU). The ECU is stage 2 of the BBC’s complaints process. Details of the BBC complaints process are available atwww.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/where you can read the BBC’s full complaints framework.

If you wish to contact the ECU please write to it directly within 20 working days of receiving this reply. Please explain to it why you believe there may have been a potential breach of standards or other significant issue for it to investigate. You can [email protected], or write to: Executive Complaints Unit, BBC, Broadcast Centre, London W12 7TQ. Please include the case reference number we have provided in this reply.

Which article was it that you were complaining about, if you don't mind saying?

It was a BBC report, I cant remember exactly. Lots of TRA being very nasty while saying both sides, very biased.

It may be linked here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3296433-BBC-Bias-Collecting-Examples-here

I think I remember your thread. If you have the energy and time please escalate again. We need to get this, and similar complaints, in front of an ombudsman.

It was a BBC report, I cant remember exactly

Find your original complaint if you can, and the report you complained about. It's important to stick to the original points you made and keep referring to the specific broadcast.

If it's the thread about the footage I am thinking of ...

We think it is reasonable to describe the occasions where those with different views have confronted each other publicly as ‘clashes’.

Feminists have never sought to publicly 'confront' trans activists so there are no occasions that could fairly be described as 'clashes'.

Transactivists have hit feminists in an attempt to stop them meeting to discuss their own rights.

as the footage showed, on occasion the police have intervened

The police were called because trans activists were hitting a woman. The police investigated and one of the activists was caught and convicted of assault.

Presenting 1 sided 'clashes' as balanced is as unbalanced reporting as it gets. In denial as usual.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3404873-Reply-from-BBC-on-clashes-on-both-sides

Nicola Williams was interviewed in connection with her role for Fair Play for Women and not in connection with her research work

Dr Nic does research for Fair Play For Women. That is a huge part of her role.

Not sure how far it's worth pushing this point. I can't remember the original broadcast, were there other interviewees who were given their correct academic titles?

This is the final stage of the BBC complaints procedure. If you're not satisfied with the response to your next reply you get to go to the Ombudsman - i.e. someone outside the BBC looks at it.

I think that this must be the report.

I'm happy to escalate - can someone help me write it? I have too much brain fog at the moment to be coherent. Thank you.

Your link at 21.46 was right Pencils. Wht could I find it on search?!

This was a really good suggestion from the other thread from Fermat, OP:

Might be worth seeing if you can dig out how the BBC covered Charlottesville and Trump's appalling "violence on both sides" crap. If they had any op-eds showing that they'd drawn attention to Trump's egregious use of false equivalence, send this to them as a follow-up and ask why they're not applying the same editorial standards to their coverage of trans issues and physical violence by trans activists versus no violence whatsoever by GC feminsts.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40948812

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-40952796/what-trump-said-versus-what-i-saw

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40915569

All stop short of actually condemning what he said, but the disapproval is clear.

Good find Ereshkigal.

It's also worth stressing that women had not gone to either of the venues to demonstrate or to counterdemonstrate but simply to attend meetings.

Keep an eye on time limits, you have 20 working days to respond. If you got it yesterday I make that 15 Feb.

Full transcript:

Presenter: But the trans debate has become a bitter and divided one between those who want to self identify as a man or a woman, without the involvement of a doctor and without the two year delay, and those who believe this is a threat to groups and spaces that have been women only.

Voice-over (same presenter): At parliament Nicola Williams has been lobbying MPs, worried about the impact the changes could have on other women.

NW: The consultation's been quite unfair I think. Women have been basically smeared and shamed and silenced. If any man can simply declare that he is female and given access to women's rights and women's spaces then that takes away the ability for women to say, 'no, I have a boundary there.'

[SPEAKERS CORNER FOOTAGE]

Voice-over: Those with opposing views have clashed - Hyde Park last year ...

[BRISTOL JAMJAR FOOTAGE]

VO: ... Bristol this year. The government insists there are no plans to change women only spaces, but even an MP who backs reform thinks questions about the impact on women's refuges and prisons must be discussed.

[END OF JAMJAR FOOTAGE]

Jess Phillips: I've spoken to lots of women MPs who feel that if they say anything they're going to be called names, or said that they're a transphobe. But that has not been helpful at all because they are perfectly reasonable questions.

VO: The prime minister, in a video for an award ceremony for the LGBT community last night, indicated change is likely.

Theresa May: ... and the thousands of responses we've received so far show there's a real desire for reform.

VO: Charlie Martin [sp?] says that she just wants the same rights as everyone else. Lucy Manning, BBC news.

So basically they have shown footage of three male people attacking a woman with the voice over saying 'Those with opposing views have clashed'.

Thank you for your further response to my complaint. Unfortunately this still fails to address the points I have raised.

You state that 'We think it is reasonable to describe the occasions where those with different views have confronted each other publicly as ‘clashes’', however this context is factually incorrect. The footage of both incidents you used - Hyde Park and Bristol - showed women attempting to meet to discuss their rights, and trans rights activists attempting to stop those meetings from happening. The women were not there to 'confront' these activists, and as far as I am aware, there are no occasions when women have sought a confrontation.

The first clip, at Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park, shows three male assailants hitting a woman while the presenter's voice says 'Those with opposing views have clashed'.

The woman who was hit was not there seeking a 'clash' or a 'confrontation'. None of the women's side were, they were simply attempting to attend a meeting. Incidentally, the meeting was not in Hyde Park itself, the women had arranged to meet there to be given details of the venue because it was the only way the meeting could be held without these same trans rights activists harassing the venue to shut it down. The police attended after the assault, they did not intervene. They were called and took witness statements because three male assailants had hit a woman. One of the assailants was later caught and prosecuted.

The second clip, at Bristol JamJar, shows trans rights activitists attempting to prevent women from entering a venue which they had booked for a meeting. Once again, the women had not come for a 'clash' or a 'confrontation', they simply wished to enter the building and attend a meeting for which they had bought tickets. The behaviour of the trans rights activists was extremely aggressive and intimidatory. The police did intervene on this occasion, however this was not to break up a 'clash' or a 'confrontation', it was to ensure the speakers and ticket holders could safely enter the venue.

In my previous response I said, 'You state that the press have reported on incidents on 'both sides' yet fail to provide any evidence of this. Please provide details of which violent and intimidatory 'incidents' have been carried out by women's groups.'

You have not provided details of any such 'incidents' in your latest response. To reiterate, to the best of my knowledge there are no incidents where women have been violent or intimidatory, or have 'confronted' trans rights activists. Women's groups do not protest these activists' meetings or events. If you have any evidence to the contrary then please provide it. Otherwise please concede that there is no evidence to support the dangerous and biased 'both sides' narrative presented by this report.

[add stuff about trump?]

Pencils thats brilliantly written

Thank you, I do love writing a complaint letter

I should do more of my own.

Brilliant Pencils. And yes I do think it would be worth adding something about their coverage of the trump "both sides" rhetoric which they acknowledge as "controversial".

Well done Pencils. That is a great letter.

Pencils that’s excellent.

And a huge thank you for the transcripts (here andesewhere.) So much now is videos and text is so much more valuable.

Sorry for my delay in responding - I have been unwell.

I have used Pencils excellent suggestions and added on the end

I sincerely hope that you are able to see why this misogynistic response is inappropriate and downplaying serious concerns to women's well being and freedoms. I also hope that there are plans to rectify this dismal report by showing both sides of the debate (I can recommend many excellent speakers with impeccable credentials in fighting bigotry), displaying full fact checking (a number of other programs have left exaggerated facts unchallanged) and preventing speakers from talking over each other in order to hide the concernes many women and men who know the full details quite reasonably have.

as it seemed unfinished and I simply didn't have the energy to do any investigating into Trump coverage. Rather wordy but best I can manage right now.

Many many thanks. I'll let you know what happens next.

Brilliant, well done!

Getting complaints taken seriously is generally a matter of plodding through stage after stage until it lands on the desk of someone important. They rely on people giving up at stage 1 or 2. A complaint about a BBC programme has to go through 3 stages before ofcom even get to see it which is excessive and works against accountability.

I admire your tenacity

I can take no credit - all I had to do was click things. You've done the hard work!

Thank you both for great work here. The BBC really do take notice of complaints. A small point to add if this is OK:

I can recommend many excellent speakers with impeccable credentials in fighting bigotry

Where you say this please go right ahead and give a paragraph of individual names with Twitter handles and of organisations with links.

Not only will this establish name recognition within an organisation (that sorely needs it!) by doing so, but also the BBC won’t be getting back to you to ask for these details if you’re offering to do so as part of a complaints procedure.

Spoonfeed them the evidence (like you have done here) and then also provide plenty of easy ways for them to independently access knowledgeable pro-woman individuals and organisations that they can approach in future for media comment on this issue. Twitter handles or other social media like are important because then they can see the amount of followers and tone of the public ‘debate’ around this issue. You may also want to circulate to the MN FWR BBC thread which has other examples of politicised language used by news reporters.

Then once you have sent all this they can’t say they didn’t know or didn’t understand what the issues were or who to go to to find out more.

In some ways it a bit understandable that this happens: there will be lazy and busy generalist newsroom journalists who doesn’t care and think feminists are as silly and niche as they think TRAs are, and there will be journalists who are actively promoting the erasure of women because they think that is the way they should support trans people. We have documented elsewhere on FWR the media training that they are offered.

The mainstream well known ‘women’s organisations’ like Fawcett that you might go to for comment also both aren’t involved in these debates (because they choose not to be) and also when asked, tend to apparently literally believe that TWAW and perhaps more accurately they do definitely believe it’s not OK probably discriminatory to say that TWATW (ie they believe that this is less a truthful observation of fact than it is a kind of insult )

The good thing about adding specifics in your letter is they will get seen by very senior BBC higher-ups eventually AND they will also eventually get circulated back down to the newsroom staff who did the original reporting and to their managers. Usually once the complaint is concluded and maybe before as it goes through the different stages. (Not an expert in BBC process but just assuming from process in other big organisations).

Thank you for pursuing this on behalf of women.