The BBC’s outgoing head of news has told LGBT staff they “have to get used to” hearing things “they do not personally like”.

[ChristinaXYZ]

From The Telegraph - looks like there is an attempt by BBC management to assert the corporations duty to report all sides:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/14/get-used-hearing-things-dont-like-bbc-news-chief-tells-gay-trans

Apparently:

"In an “extremely hostile” Zoom meeting with the corporation’s Pride network, Frans Unsworth allegedly told employees last Friday they must get used to hearing opinions they disagreed with."

and also:

"Two sources present at the meeting claimed Ms Unsworth,63, said: “You’ll hear things you don’t personally like and see things you don’t like, that’s what the BBC is, and you have to get used to that.”

Ms Unsworth, who is due to leave her position in January, added: “These are the stories we tell. We can’t walk away from the conversation.”

A BBC journalist at the meeting said: “Fran was totally calm but determined about it. was totally calm but determined about it.

“She was reacting to questions from the network that implied people shouldn’t come across views they disliked. To me, it felt like she was having to explain journalism to idiots.” "

The article goes on further to note:

"Meanwhile, Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, has attempted to reassure staff over the corporation’s recent departure from Stonewall’s diversity champion scheme and that he was concerned about LGBT inclusivity.

However, Mr Davies was reportedly told by a member of staff that he was not in a position to make decisions on the issue “because he’s not trans”, while another claimed the BBC was “institutionally transphobic”."

Good, they’re not children. Same goes for all the delicate flowers at publishing companies and teenagers who want to be paid attention to but don’t think they should respect adults with more life experience.

Was this also in the times online today? Article seems to have disappeared

I saw the article in The Mail.

@Ratherly Telegraph not Times

Good. They should go apply to pink news if the have a problem with journalism.

@Ratherly

Was this also in the times online today? Article seems to have disappeared

Yes, it's in the Sunday Times today too - much the same report.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fran-unsworth-tells-bbc-staff-get-used-to-hearing-views-you-dont-like-gz7f07cpk?shareToken=7ef9a34a30be331f1019d0f97427dcce

For some reason, every time I tried to post a comment on the Sunday Times online article, it got blocked. And I wasn’t saying anything offensive or controversial either. Most annoying.

“She was reacting to questions from the network that implied people shouldn’t come across views they disliked. To me, it felt like she was having to explain journalism to idiots.”

Unbelievable. Although after this week's WH interview about BBC leaving Stonewall maybe not.

For some reason, every time I tried to post a comment on the Sunday Times online article, it got blocked. And I wasn’t saying anything offensive or controversial either. Most annoying.

I just subscribed and I haven't been able to comment on articles! The articles were related to this topic but I wasn't saying anything controversial. I wasn't planning on making commenting a regular habit but I really wanted to correct some misinformation in the comment section. It's very strange, the comments are blocked instantly and it doesn't say why.

Quite right too.

If they don't want to hear that, then they can go and work at Pink News or Vice a la Ben Hunte. Glad the grown ups have taken back control at the BBC.

Fabulous that this is finally being said at the BBC.

The idea that only those who are trans should be allowed to comment on trans issues brings only hollow laughter from me, a Jewish woman who has had years of Corbynites not only commenting on antisemitism despite not being Jewish but actually telling me and other Jews that any time we tried to point out antisemitism we were making up 'smears' to make Corbyn look bad and that as Jews we couldn't possibly comment fairly on our own experiences of being discriminated against.

So I don't really have much sympathy for the argument that everyone can comment on the discrimination I face (except me) but I can't comment on the trans issue unless I'm trans.

Sure, trans people can talk about their experiences. But only as long as women can talk about our experiences, Jews can talk about our experiences and as long as there is no sacred caste (usually straight white men) who can get to dictate what everyone else can say.

Bravo BBC I might start watching again!

The very similar report is still on The Times website:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fran-unsworth-tells-bbc-staff-get-used-to-hearing-views-you-dont-like-gz7f07cpk

The best thing about this is it's making the trans activists put forward what they want in public. People are looking at the demands and realising that they're insane. Importantly, they're aware that there are lots of other people around who also think the demands are insane.

This is how the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes ends.

The massive disconnect is the pro-trans side thinking Stonewall above reproach in the first place, and any criticism of it is criticism of the community. They really need to separate the two things.

That and stop crying if they don't like something their senior management has taken the time to meet and explain to them rationally. And saying they have no right to discuss things because they're not trans.

There's 'bringing your whole self to work' and then there's 'having a bit of common sense about professional behaviour' really isn't there.

The BBC does the right thing; after exhausting all other possibilities.
[That is not original]

Fancy! Other people might have different views; what a revelation!!

I don't like war. I don't think many people like war. Does this mean the BBC should stop reporting on unpleasant things like war and the reasons for the war, because it might upset people who dislike war?

Its an absurd position for someone working for BBC news to come out with.

The whole point of journalism is about reporting difficult subjects and exploring why people believe different things and why this leads to conflict.

If you only want to talk about fluffy feel good stuff you like, that lifestyle magazine writing not journalism in its proper form which understands the issues that Orwell talks about in terms of censorship and control of the media and how dangerous they are.

The BBC has a statue that was put up in 2017 which says: ""If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear""

If you fail to understand this as a BBC employee you are in the wrong job. This applies equally to men, women, black, white, gay, straight and trans - or any other identity or political belief. Its not discrimining to state this for that reason.

Judging by the reaction to the article about lesbians experiencing sexual abuse from TW, I'm guessing it was the T staff that needed to be told this, not the LGB staff.

@QueenSue

Judging by the reaction to the article about lesbians experiencing sexual abuse from TW, I'm guessing it was the T staff that needed to be told this, not the LGB staff.

No wonder they didn't want the ugly truth that article exposed to be placed in the public domain and have fought so hard to supress it for years. Their reaction to the article says it all.

I can’t get over little OJ posting this like it’s a terrible, terrible thing to ignore people crying on a work meeting call. I mean, I don’t let my DD get her own way just because she cries about something, I’d expect grown adults to be able to deal with that concept too. It’s the idea that, OMG, someone’s CRYING, the whole thing needs to stop right now! But doesn’t that sum the whole movement up?

I am really, really, really enjoying the pushback.

However, Mr Davies was reportedly told by a member of staff that he was not in a position to make decisions on the issue “because he’s not trans”

By their own arguments; How can you make the decision that you're a woman when born a man, when you're not and have never been a woman?

This is becoming a common trope, also re autism. I was told off in a 'discussion' around trans and asd for having an opinion as I'm neither trans nor autistic.

(Despite the fact that it's entirely possible I'm autistic but never diagnosed,) some of the the pupils I advocate for are barely able to communicate basic needs. So we advocate on their behalf daily. As we would any child.

Would we say "you're not a 2 year old so you can't make decisions for them??"

It's the latest way to shut down debate; highly flawed depending on the context.

It’s the idea that, OMG, someone’s CRYING, the whole thing needs to stop right now!

Unless they're women, in which case they're weaponising their trauma, of course.

Yes, Pink, most people do anything to hide the fact something at work has made them cry. If they were to afraid to voice concerns, that would be another matter. They have every right to disagree. But to insinuate (more than one?) person on that call was openly trying to emotionally blackmail the director of news at the BBC by demanding they shut up and pander to a crying fit is almost unbelievable.

By their own arguments; How can you make the decision that you're a woman when born a man, when you're not and have never been a woman?

Would be nice to hear an answer to this and why they should speak on behalf of women or as women when they are not and never will be women.