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.

I am in awe of your letter writing abilities, Pencils.

Yay for Pencils and Binglebong!

Well done PencilsinSpace and Binglebong . What a fantastic letter.

I clicked on this thread hoping to get some help with complaining about the FPFW/Martina/Rachel Mckinnon nonsense.

This thread shows just how persistent and articulate you need to be to start to get anywhere. I am a bit daunted now; (have been brushed off at stage 1 by the BBC a number of times) but will try my best.

Thank you for your email in response to my finding. It has not caused me to reconsider my decision.

You quote the guidelines on checking sources and corroborating evidence. These guidelines set out processes to be followed towards ensuring that output is duly accurate. Following these processes does not, however, guarantee that what is published or broadcast will meet the BBC’s standards. The test is what is actually broadcast – and in this case, as I explained, there was nothing in the programme which seemed to me to amount to a breach of standards. To give a concrete example, the fact that those recording the footage may have had “vested interests” would only amount to a breach if the programme displayed bias, or presented an inaccurate account of events.

I explained why the word “clash” seemed to me duly accurate. You point again to the motives of those involved, but again there is nothing in that word which goes to what the individuals had in mind, only that there was a conflict – which plainly there was. The fact that the activists did not buy tickets to those events does not therefore demonstrate the use of this word was inaccurate. I explained that this description did not suggest anything regarding the level of violence or provocation on one side or the other. You are correct that this observation on what can reasonably be extrapolated from the word “clash” does not imply that the women’s rights groups acted with provocation.

I appreciate you consider that the BBC as a whole is biased on the issue of trans rights and related issues. However, for the reasons explained in my finding, I do not believe that you have identified a breach of standards in this particular report and I can’t agree that the word you point to can reasonably be held to demonstrate bias or given an inaccurate account of events.

It remains open to you to bring this matter to Ofcom.

Ofcom it is then. And don't I have lots of patronising nonsense to show them.

Had a totally bullshit patronising response to my complaint. Now I’m cross all over again.

They must gave lessons on patronising the little women.

What the fuck?!

I thought the previous ECU email was supposed to be the BBC's final response. Is it me or is there something a little 'off piste' about this latest reply? It's like he's determined to get the last word in. He seems rattled.

Are you going to reply?

Probably best not to reply in case they file you under 'vexatious' and disregard future complaints.

Or maybe just reply with something like 'thank you for your response, your comments are informative and have been noted'

thought the previous ECU email was supposed to be the BBC's final response. Is it me or is there something a little 'off piste' about this latest reply? It's like he's determined to get the last word in. He seems rattled.

No, it's not just you!

I appreciate you consider that the BBC as a whole is biased on the issue of trans rights and related issues

Wonder if this is starting to sink in, that many people feel this way?

I'm thinking of replying "Thank you for your response, your comments on women's rights have been noted."

Incidently that reply was in an email rather than an attachment like the last one.

Perhaps he's had to deal with lots of complaints given the McKinnon debacle.

Poor dear.

I could do with help to be fully succinct with this - you gave very limited space. Thanks