The BBC has ignored the WPATH leaks, this is a clear bias, ask them to cover the story, say you're a licence payer

[HydraDominatus]

Title says it all, BBC have deliberately ignored the WPATH leaks

If you can, please send them something, a link, a note, anything and ask them to cover the leaks in full.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/questions/getting-in-touch/send-a-story

Here's a template letter if it helps, change it to fit your thoughts

Dear Sir/Madam,

As a licence fee payer, I am writing to express my concern over the BBC's current news coverage. It has come to my attention that there has been little to no coverage on the recent leaks from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). Given the significance of these leaks and their potential impact on public understanding and policy, I find it essential that an impartial and trusted news organization such as the BBC covers this story comprehensively.

The public relies on the BBC for unbiased and thorough news coverage, and it is imperative that issues of significant concern are not overlooked. I urge you to consider the importance of this matter and allocate the necessary resources to investigate and report on the WPATH leaks promptly.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to seeing your coverage in the near future.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

Claire Fox mentioned BBC's silence in H of L speech

Bumping in the hope more people write and complain.
was just idly mooching round bbc website and searched WPATH files. I thought I’d find a tiny paragraph ..am shocked to find there is nothing. No mention of anything at all.
f.

They haven't responded to me... Will nudge them.

It's really appalling.

I gave up on the BBC years ago. It was an epiphany moment when the fact they clearly work to an agenda could not have been more obvious.

Any complain receives a boilerplate reply - which if you read carefully makes it clear they didn't actually read your complaint.

Being forced to pay for them under threat of prison feels terribly East German.

The reason no impartial news outlets have not reported is either:

It’s a conspiracy - a shadowy cabal of trans activists have silenced it

It’s a junk story - a compilation of out of context screen shots topped by a transphobic screed

The BBC reported on puberty blockers. They didn’t report on WPATH.

I got their boilerplate "Stage 1a" response this morning. Partial quote:

This is our response at Stage 1a of the BBC’s complaints process. If you’re dissatisfied with this reply, a follow-up complaint may be considered at Stage 1b. You must submit a follow-up within 20 working days through the BBC Complaints webform. If you do decide to contact us again, please include your case number, and explain why you feel your complaint has not been addressed. We will then review your complaint.

Of course I'm not satisfied. This is just boilerplate! 😡

And then today they have a story about leaked emails, but from GIDS staff saying that they don't know about new arrangements. The BBC is so shockingly partisan about this matter. Impartiality just goes out the window.

I've written the following. Does it look a bit hectoring?

I am a BBC licence payer and I am upset that the BBC has not been covering the recent WPATH scandal. This story has been covered well by other news outlets and has trended strongly online, this story is of huge significance and public interest and I would like to know why it has been virtually ignored by the BBC. There are accounts and film footage of doctors laughing and joking about the inability of children to consent to meaningfully, or understand the lifelong poor health implications of taking puberty blockers and having so called gender reassignment surgery.

In my opinion, this is highly partial, by not covering this important story, many people are unaware of the serious implications of such treatments. Ignoring this story is not an appropriate, impartial action by the BBC.

Please rectify this by reporting the story.

Thank you for your time and attention on this subject. I look forward to your response, many thanks.

I’d mix it with the Justin Webb feedback and the article says a woman killer (all on the bbc Justin Webb thread) as growing evidence the bbc is completely totally partial on this and shouldn’t qualify for license fees.

And the CAN-SG conference, protested by a BBC employee!

Was that the awful doctor who posts about her elective mastectomy on socials but also presents CBBC?

No conflict of interest there....😳

Yep. Dr Ronx.

That's appalling. If anyone in pretty much any other industry turned up shouting aggressively at any other protest and was so blatant about it online, they'd probably be in breach of a company policy.

I've written to them twice about Wpath, no reply. Think I'll stop paying my licence fee.

Here's an example of a story that is nowhere on the beeb.

I wonder why ?

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-farmers-protest-london-tractors-trade-deals-imports-parliament-b1147758.html

I wonder how many of those farmers voted for Brexit?

I didn't want to derail - there are other threads for that. But there are a distinct set of topics the BBC is clearly steering a line on. How on earth can they justify "not noticing" a sizeable protest in the UKs capital city ? Who's their editor ? Lord Nelson ?