ExiledElsie · 06/03/2023 21:16
Here's Sex Matters' response
They seem to be unimpressed and with good reason.
The draft guidance states that it “strikes a balance between the rights of the public to freedom of speech and the rights of the individual not to face personal discriminatory abuse”. But it encourages an expansive conception of what might constitute “discriminatory abuse” that will have a chilling effect. While the previous guidance asked editors to consider in relation to trans-identifying people: “Is the terminology being used pejorative or prejudicial?” the new guidance goes further, warning that:
“References to someone’s gender identity and/or sex may be pejorative, even in the absence of any pejorative term.”
It is highly irresponsible to give such vague and sweeping encouragement for self-censorship when journalists and the media are under intense pressure from lobby groups not to report clearly and accurately on sex and gender issues.
^Overall, we think the current draft fails to improve on the flawed guidance published in 2016. In fact, it is worse.
It is so vague, and so unrelated to the issues that arise in practice, that it is unlikely to provide any meaningful support for editors and journalists seeking to stand up to lobbyists’ demands that they cast aside accuracy.