14th October 'Nolan Investigates' podcast - Stonewall?

[Helleofabore]

This sounds interesting.

A special ‘Nolan Investigates’ podcast drops tomorrow afternoon on @BBCSounds. An 18 month investigation into the influence of a lobby group on public bodies throughout the UK. More details in the morning

It seems to be about Stonewall.

Anyone know more about it?

There is some chatter about it on Twitter.

twitter.com/stephennolan/status/1448052827088109568?s=21

twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1448205588253618176?s=21

(Tweet from JCJ says:

Okay, at last, here it is.

The BBC Ulster documentary on the influence of Stonewall on public life in the UK.

Many GC women have been interviewed for this.

Let's take the lid off this thing shall we?

@NecessaryScene

I think part of it is the circles in which the senior people in the organisations move.

Absolutely this. You see a similar effect in media - journalists and opinion writers writing stuff for their peers rather than their audience. Not so bad in the UK, but really bad in the US.

Another point is systems simply like metrics. I read somewhere (maybe it was regarding an episode of the Nolan podcast I haven't reached yet?) about someone having their company achieving a certain rank in the index as part of their personal performance target for their bonus...

I work in financial services and promoting EDI is now part of all our performance targets. Its part of our annual review. For a lowly person like me I can get by sitting in on a few webinars but for senior management/exec team, there are targets involved. Because our industry is still very male-dominated, these senior guys just want to hire in the "expertise" to help them reach the targets and I guess an easy way to do that is get Stonewall to help. Giant tick in the diversity box and very little thought/effort on their part. Also "social responsibility" is very popular now for all kinds of companies. I saw a well known alcoholic drinks company on Twitter promoting their social responsibility agenda (but not so much that they encourage actual stuff like clear labelling etc). In my sector, clients are asking about these policies before they invest so you have to be able to prove you are "doing the right thing". Its easier to roll out the "member of Stonewall" blah, blah. And when your regulator has bought into the gender woo......game over.

Telegraph - The BBC podcast holding the corporation's feet to the fire over Stonewall

"the masterfully produced Nolan Investigates has much of the pace and unfolding urgency of Serial, The Missing Cryptoqueen or The Teacher’s Pet, classics of the modern investigative podcast genre"

"This isn’t the first time the BBC has self-cannibalised in a kind of tortuous flagellation; who could forget the Panorama documentary on how the BBC flinched from reporting on the allegations against Jimmy Savile, and George Entwistle subsequently allowing himself to be interrogated by John Humphrys on the Today programme in 2012?"

www.telegraph.co.uk/radio/what-to-listen-to/bbc-podcast-holding-corporations-feet-fire-stonewall/

@PenguindreamsofDraco

As a fully paid up not self identifying deaf woman I would be thrilled and grateful if anyone could do a transcript.

Transcript: twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1450506719856050182

I'm just on episode 10 and Ben Cohen basically admits he would discriminate against an employee based on their beliefs if they held GC beliefs. He then tried to weasel out of the question and wouldn't directly state it, by saying that a GC person wouldn't want to apply to work there anyway....

@MonsignorMirth

I'm just on episode 10 and Ben Cohen basically admits he would discriminate against an employee based on their beliefs if they held GC beliefs. He then tried to weasel out of the question and wouldn't directly state it, by saying that a GC person wouldn't want to apply to work there anyway....

Ben Cohen many times during the documentary showed himself up to be an absolute idiot. His statements and arguments had absolutely no conviction and multiple times it was obvious that he was saying what he felt his audience would want him to say. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that he’s spent so long trying to please other people, that he doesn’t even know his own mind any more - other than that of course, that GC is bad.

It’s also worth mentioning as I’m not sure if you’re aware, that Ben Cohen is an employer. I’m sure you’re not an employer, but Ben Cohen is.

For what it’s worth, I actually think that a GC column in Pink News would be interesting to their readers and a positive addition to the publication. The thing that I hate most about all of this is that there is no debate or discussion.

Is Ben an employer? Really? I don’t think he mentioned it. 😂

For anyone who doesn't have the time to listen to all of them, FPFW has produced condensed transcripts of all 10 episodes.

fairplayforwomen.com/stonewall-transcripts/

Nolan Investigates review — examining Stonewall, brick by brick

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d76b182e-3274-11ec-afd6-aa3ee2eb8a34?shareToken=702d47451fc18a3850ef98ecb994e491

From the Times today

This in the Times: BBC podcast host Stephen Nolan was warned about reporting on Stonewall

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/8d125c16-342b-11ec-a1f1-3deca2439cf5?shareToken=d091869dd62e96098d6f3577565a78c0

And this article which states that the podcast is one of the most popular in the UK:

www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/stephen-nolan-transgender-series-now-among-most-popular-in-gb-–-as-fellow-bbc-man-william-crawley-circulates-criticism/ar-AAPQhWJ?ocid=st

Good for Stephen Nolan and David Thompson for showing the BBC how to BBC!

Can anyone recommend the best contact details to use for thanking the BBC? I’d like to include the two journalists.
For the first time in the many years I have been aware of these issues, my partner and I have been able to bring it up in conversation with others, thanks entirely to Stephen Nolan finally legitimising the having of a debate. As it turns out our friends completely agree with our GC views. But the key point is that he has enabled the conversation to be had. I don’t mind if people disagree with me, we don’t all agree on everything, ever. But no more #nodebate.

@HH76ds31

Can anyone recommend the best contact details to use for thanking the BBC? I’d like to include the two journalists. For the first time in the many years I have been aware of these issues, my partner and I have been able to bring it up in conversation with others, thanks entirely to Stephen Nolan finally legitimising the having of a debate. As it turns out our friends completely agree with our GC views. But the key point is that he has enabled the conversation to be had. I don’t mind if people disagree with me, we don’t all agree on everything, ever. But no more #nodebate.

I used this:

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/comments-feedback/#/Your%20comment

[email protected]

i've just this moment emailed them, having had a very similar experience to you, @HH76ds31. feels amazing to finally be able to speak about this more widely!

Alektopteryx kindly provided a link upthread:

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/comments-feedback/#/Your%20comment

Alternatively you could write directly to Tim Davie, Director-General of the BBC:

[email protected]

Since he was appointed he's been consistent in saying that impartiality of the BBC is very important.

With that in mind, one thing you might want to include is a comment about impartiality and how this podcast series reflects the best of the BBC and it operating in line with the Royal Charter.

Thank you all!

@MonsignorMirth

I'm just on episode 10 and Ben Cohen basically admits he would discriminate against an employee based on their beliefs if they held GC beliefs. He then tried to weasel out of the question and wouldn't directly state it, by saying that a GC person wouldn't want to apply to work there anyway....

This is such a tricky issue... if I were to employ someone (I have done before but currently don't) then my main criteria would be to have logical person capable of looking at facts and interpreting them (and they;d need to have good report writing skills and excellent customer service skills). I categorically would not wish to discriminate or breach the law, but equally I would find it incomprehensible if someone voted tory, believed in god or believed in stonewall and was cable of logically looking at facts.

Clearly it is unacceptable to ask people if they believe in god and cross them off the list if they say yes. Is it legal to choose to not hire someone because they show such massive lack of judgement that they mention their religion unprompted in an interview? (Similarly I would have no problem if I found out a staff member used legal porn in the privacy of their own home and outside of working hours... but if they brought their porn hobby up in the interview then I'd cross them off the list!)

Just listened to the first 3 on YouTube.

Quote Laetitia ASD 'I categorically would not wish to discriminate or breach the law, but equally I would find it incomprehensible if someone voted tory, believed in god or believed in stonewall and was cable of logically looking at facts.'

Are you sure you really mean this? So with the other 3 parties actively trying to erase women as a sex class with self-id, you cannot fathom that someone who voted Tory would be capable of logically looking at facts...?
I think maybe you need to apply some critical thinking yourself.

I've just finished listening to the whole thing. Absolutely brilliant bit of investigative journalism. They should win an award for it.

It doesn't matter what you think about stonewall.

The question is: should a lobby group drive policy at a) a regulator and b) a state-funded broadcaster whose central remit is independence?

Clearly not. And that is what is so clever about this podcast. This is the Trojan horse Nolan has used to air all the other discussions.

LOJ can huff and puff as much as he likes but even he can't defend a lobbying group being allowed to dictate public policy. It goes against everything he believes in.

Check mate.

Martina (on twitter) was asking how to get a hold of the podcasts! 😁

Another thing that occurred to me. I wonder if ofcom pulling out of stonewall is a direct result of this podcast. And Ben Hunte leaving the BBC.

That said, despite news coverage saying they will, I don't think I've read any confirmation that the bbc has left the diversity champions scheme.

I didn't think the non binary person in episode 4 was that bad. S/he seemed alright when talking about him/herself and shied away from having opinions about other people.

I was expecting someone aggressive and monstrous!

anyway it was good in that it didn't make me angry and helped me understand a bit what all those "non-binary" teenagers are telling themselves.

@seethesuninwintertime

I didn't think the non binary person in episode 4 was that bad. S/he seemed alright when talking about him/herself and shied away from having opinions about other people.

I was expecting someone aggressive and monstrous!

anyway it was good in that it didn't make me angry and helped me understand a bit what all those "non-binary" teenagers are telling themselves.

He was reasonable yes but he struggled to define what he meant by non-binary and yet still insisted it should be recognised a legal status in law on a passport. I think he said he had a male biological body but was attracted to both sexes. As he was the UK's first non-binary mayor, I tried to see which political party he stood for but couldn't find it.

@seethesuninwintertime

I didn't think the non binary person in episode 4 was that bad. S/he seemed alright when talking about him/herself and shied away from having opinions about other people.

I was expecting someone aggressive and monstrous!

anyway it was good in that it didn't make me angry and helped me understand a bit what all those "non-binary" teenagers are telling themselves.

This is Owen who reckons you'd need to see their chromosomes to see what sex they are. I think 99.999% of sighted people in Britain would be able to guess right.

And you know what? What he said is rapey shit about it not being of any relevance to anyone but medical staff.

We know that most trans women who get assaulted do so during a sexual encounter with a man who doesn't realise they're trans.

Whatever Owen thinks, genitals and sex matter to most people.