Woman's Hour now: BBC walking away from Stonewall

[nauticant]

Emma Barnett is asking the questions.

@Manderleyagain
Sorry, I included the wrong link - it's from this 2018 DM article

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5905129/BBC-chief-stunned-secret-staff-sex-survey-reveals-417-workers-transgender.html

I think it is good that a senior BBC executive has now said on BBC Radio that this culture war is about transgender rights and women's rights and is a debate about public policy. Until now, it has almost always been described as a fight for the rights of transgender people only.

BUT I do not accept the executive's assertion that the BBC's output has not been biased (in favour of transgender rights and against women's rights).

@Manderleyagain

Boreofbabylon where is this from? Tunde Ogungbesan, the BBC's director of diversity, has now launched a major reform to make the Corporation more 'trans-friendly' following the findings.

Mr Ogungbesan told the Westminster Social Policy Forum that the results would lead to the rewriting of the BBC's 'style guide', which sets out the rules on 'fairness and terminology' at the corporation.

That's the BBC saying that in order to be more welcoming as an employer to a particular demographic (2% of staff) it decided to change its public language as a broadcaster and news organisation, changing how it is able to discuss an issue which is currently live in our democracy. And as EB pointed out because of the beeb's cultural position, that influences the language in the public sphere of this country.

The political positions are baked into the choice of language on this issue. They indicate the framework you are using to see the issue, and restrict what ideas/concerns you can communicate clearly. And that was chosen by the broadcaster in order to be seen as friendly to 2% of its staff.

This goes against what the BBC bloke was saying on WH. He kept trying to separate BBC the employer from BBC the impartial news organisation.

Do they really think that people can't see the shiftiness, the cringing lack of transparency? And now frantic attempt at damage limitation, whilst still desperate not to step outside the Stonewall rules, just in case?

@BoreOfWhabylon

I wish so much that another series of W1A would be commissioned covering all this.

I sniggered this morning when I heard the title Director of Nations, surely someone should have said “No, really, we can’t, it would be too W1A “ when they were discussing the role. Or maybe they did say that, but went ahead with it anyway.

They should have run the entire thing past the Director of Better.

Amateurs.

@borntobequiet

He is called Rhodri Talfan Davies. He is Director of Nations. I assume that's to do with the BBC's different output across the UK.

That title alone (if that’s entirely it) is a clue that there’s something very wrong with the BBC. It combines grandiosity and lack of meaning in equal measure.

Yup, it's W1A all over again

m.youtube.com/watch?v=GKWZlWaGKgc

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

Emma Barnett has written a book about endometriosis and how not being diagnosed with it impacted on her life.

She is a bright, tenacious and smart woman - I'm confident that she never had any doubt of what a woman is (crippled by pain because of a neglected female reproductive system) but is professional and strategic enough to do her job and bide her time.

I'm sure there is a network of influential journalists at the BBC with a secret WhatsApp who have been working on this for some time. Nolan did the podcast, but he surely didn't do that on his own. He's too perfect as a "stepping stone", could get the truth recorded because he's not well known outside of NI, and then the London lot can let rip with the BBC's own testimony.

It's genius.

What's after WH? Horizon?

I hadn’t thought about how the Nolan report came about. That sounds like a very plausible explanation. It probably would have been a non starter in London due to the demographic.

@Datun

They should have run the entire thing past the Director of Better.

Amateurs.

Either that or Will the intern has risen up the ranks..........

I've just listened to this on sounds. Who activated Emma Barnett? Such a change!

wonder if the trans issue will ultimately bring Stonewall down?Stonewall has done a great deal of good work until it lost it's way getting tangled up with trans issues.

It's the anti-woman, pro-homophobia activities of Stonewall that is undermining its legacy. It's nothing to do with transgender issues as such and everything about the over-reach that is part of thought totalism and an authoritarian framework in political, social and public life.

I'm so pleased to see the focus on the style guide. There's been such an insidious move to embed these in media organisations and then use them as proof to approach Collins, OED, etc. with these style guides as a justification for 'updating' the canonic dictionary definitions.

nauticant - I envy your facility in coming up with a good analogy (dodgy person packing your flight luggage).

@Whatwouldscullydo

Wow. Well thats backed them into a corner hasn't it.

Well played out.

Between the BBC and stonewall, the options are either say that none of it has any influence In which case raise questions over what the money has been spent on, why it was spent as its apparently useless and has made no difference.

Or admit that its had too much influence because by the very admission there would need to be discussions over basic biological facts being raised when relevant upon reporting the news.

And stonewall statement implies that the training is so useless that there have been no tools by which staff have been given and no learning at all to be had that the secind they stop paying fir said useless service towards employees that apparently cannot retain any information whatsoever , the staff will apparently all be in danger.

There is absolutely no angle upon which any of them look remotely good

Lies are exposed in whatever way you look at it.

The only hope here clearly is that no one is bright enough to figure it out

This is a great summary

As the State broadcaster with a history going back to 1922, the BBC as an organisation likely doesn't fancy being on the 'wrong side of history'. In-the-past, that appears to have been interpreted as meaning it needed to be distinctly seen to be on the TRA side. Perhaps now there is a realisation that it needs to be impartial and unbiased.

By way of example, the BBC managed to avoid any poor association with the SRA (Satanic Ritual Abuse) scandals, and The Daily Mail and The Times managed to escape censure as well. ITV, The Guardian and The New Statesman though fell for it utterly, broadcasting and printing material from conspiracy theorists without any proper critical thinking.

I've just caught up. Have to say, I nearly wept. Emma said everything that I want to say to my boss but can't. Good for her.

@RedDogsBeg

Well what was so wrong with the bbc they felt they needs to pay such a huge amount to an outside agency to influence their internal policy?

Why couldn’t they understand the equality act themselves?

Why couldn’t the treat lgbt+ employees with dignity and without discrimination without an outside agency telling them how to behave?

That alone raises some pretty significant questions.

BloodinGutters, exactly. I say this about any organisation, it's the easiest thing in the world NOT to discriminate, why the fuck should any reputable organisation need a lobbying group to tell them how to do so.

And this. Where is the data that Stonewall membership improves working conditions for staff? Can we compare similar companies, one of which is a member and one which isn't, and honestly say the opportunities, the working conditions and the ethos of one is much better than the other, as a direct result of Stonewall advice? If the MoJ is number five, does this mean lesbian prison officers are well looked after? Or are they continuing to work in understaffed, dangerous conditions, and being forced to search men who identify as women? What exactly has Stonewall achieved for this demographic, who have to deal with violence, mental health problems, and suicides of prisoners on a regular basis? Does removing "mother" from a maternity policy help them in any way? Is anyone even bothering to check?

I have to confess EmbarrassingHadrosaurus to feeling inordinately pleased with myself over that post. Little pleasures, eh?

EB: "Shall I give you examples from the Nolan podcast?

I've listened this afternoon - an excellent interview by Emma. My flabber is truly gasted, however, by the BBC chap implying that stating that only biological women can get pregnant is part of a highly sensitive and complex debate rather than a fact.

When I did jobs at the BBC, a while back, the post was ‘Nations and Regions’ and the bod in charge was one of several people who sat in the Editorial Policy office. What happened to Regions… !

One thing about the twitter response that made me laugh is how many women have been ranting about Tim Davie and his evasive and pisspoor performance on Woman's Hour.

Poor Tim.

@Telesilla

When I did jobs at the BBC, a while back, the post was ‘Nations and Regions’ and the bod in charge was one of several people who sat in the Editorial Policy office. What happened to Regions… !

Yes indeed. I too was remembering regions. This chap is in charge of Wales but also what they call nations - and local programmes. No regions mentioned. Have regions been demoted to 'local''? Oh dear.

I’m listening on catch-up now. I rolled my eyes at the BBC exec’s claim that Stonewall have expertise in creating a fully inclusive workplace. For biological makes with no religion maybe, but not for women or those with religious belief which means they cannot use “gender neutral” (mixed sex) spaces. Not for neurodiverse employees who struggle with imposed pronouns and compelled speech. Definitely not inclusive for everyone.

If you think about other things we learn, like driving, say, you don't expect to be paying for and receiving ongoing training every year, do you? You put what you earned first time round into practice and get on with it!

If you mess up you get sent back for a refresher, but your whole organisation doesn't have to sit in and pay for it.

Unless what you're learning is such nonsense on stilts that the content keeps shifting and growing, of course, meaning what you learned last year at great expense is now completely wrong and highly offensive ...

@jhuizinga

I've listened this afternoon - an excellent interview by Emma. My flabber is truly gasted, however, by the BBC chap implying that stating that only biological women can get pregnant is part of a highly sensitive and complex debate rather than a fact.

I hope I live long enough to enjoy the time when people look back in disbelief at the days when people went around pretending not to know about biological sex.

And this. Where is the data that Stonewall membership improves working conditions for staff?

It’s like QA systems. They don’t necessarily improve quality (garbage in / garbage out) but it makes it look like you’ve done something, you’ve generated a lot of paperwork and ticked a lot of boxes, and someone’s got a well paid job out of it.

OMG the 'pregnant people' exchange, the interviewee is so defensive and prattling about 'hypothetical' when it's clearly not

(Wasn't there a recent BBC segment where a female GP was pregnant people-ing?)