SEENinJournalism thread about media consultancy company NEON

[RadicalisedPastThePointOfSalvation]

https://x.com/JournalismSEEN/status/1815398883951804627

This piece was linked on AIBU today. The thread above may be helpful to understand how and why these articles come about -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7209lk8x2wo

I’ll try and post screenshots for those not on X.

That would be much appreciiated if you could post screenshots.

First lot

Second. Hopefully that’s in order

The last 2 tweets aren’t by SEEN but interesting nonetheless.

Thank you, very interesting thread.

For those who cant read the text in the images there is in fact a threadreader for this.

So much is going on behind out backs. And shows just how much SEENs are needed.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1815398883951804627.html

@RadicalisedPastThePointOfSalvation

Thank you thats very helpful and I can just imagine a busy, complicit or lazy editor or producer falling for it.
I'm so glad Seen exists although I hear there are efforts to shut down some or all of them.

This has certainly been an eye opener and does explain some of the latest news articles by the BBC.

It runs deeper than you could ever imagine.

I'm genuinely surprised that someone who needs a friend, their mum and a support dog to take part in a zoom, is able to deliver training. Quite an achievement.

Ah, that provides some context for the BBCs output recently.

So much for being unbiased.

Explains why there have been way more than 1% of Joe Public interviewed by the BBC lately that are trans.

Maybe we need to set up a media consultancy that specialises in providing women to pontificate when they need an apparently random member of the public to feature?

That's depressing. I work for the BBC but have never come across Neon and wouldn't use that type of service. I have noticed some curious 'case studies' used on occasion but not in my geographical area.

The other thread about this was zapped.

How does this not violate some sort of journalistic standards?

Years ago, I had a boyfriend who was a journalism student. He was doing a story on a particular topic and was looking for a woman to interview who had some relation to the issue. I suggested he talk to my grandmother who had been quite involved.

He did, but I remember him saying that it wouldn't usually have been looked on that well to have interviews someone who you had that connection to, even with one degree of separation. There was too much potential for bias. (In this case it was a very light topic so not such a huge deal.)

How can picking up people from this kind of "service" be anything other than wholly problematic though?

I would hope if the thread could stay on the wider issue around the article, rather than about the actual article it could stay.

Just had a quick look at what Neon are up in my area and they've been offering media training to people from organisations we already know about eg Friends of the earth.

The BBC has become much more reliant on agencies for news than it ever was. This is due to the sheer amount of cuts to the number of journalists it has and it's had a massive impact on the organisation.

It infuriates me no end, how the BBC now puts up articles on things, particularly celebrity type gossip, several days after the original story has appeared on the Daily Mail. I mean what's the fucking point? It's not even a fact checking exercise due to how the articles are written. Whilst I appreciate it may be slower we are often talking 3 or 4 days on a regular basis.

It's led me to give up to an extent on the BBC. It used to be my first port of call, but I tend to use twitter or check the Mail first and then look around for other sources for the same story.

This is clearly being deliberately exploited by Activists.

This is really interesting, thank you, but depressing too: The Omnicause sounds Orwellian. I’ve also noticed this trend in the people featured in some BBC articles.

I hope MN doesn't delete this thread. Apart from anything else, it's a sobering insight for those of us not involved in news gathering into how activist groups (of any description) can manipulate national television news optics.

Others are Palestinian activists, climate activists, exactly the range you might expect from an ‘anti oppression’ consultancy.

I must admit I find this sentence a bit sweeping, and wonder what the politics are in SEENinJournalism.

Using these two groupings used as examples seems a bit crass as within them there will be people having different analysis. Reflecting the range of views held by people on various issues is exactly what the BBC and other news services should be reflecting. Presumably Palestinian activists aren't claiming to represent Israelis and climate activists aren't pretending to represent heavy industry and other polluters.

This is totally different to having Trans presented in an unrepresentative way and at expense of women.

I suppose each SEEN sets its own political position but I dont think it looks good to lump in trans usurping women's rights, with political groups who have an analysis that is against the establishment one.

Using phrases like "anti oppression" plays into the trans agenda that those who are gender critical are all right wing fanatics.

Would be interested to see how other SEENs work.

You do realise all reporters and news outlets get lobbied like this from any number of groups, political activists.

There is no manipulation. It is just part of the rot that has set into the UK news media where there seems to be a prevailing attitue that you are allowed to only take up stories that meet your existing prejudices. Or not reporting eg in the instance of Wes Streeting and puberty blockers.

And editors collude with it.

Or maybe it is just because so many reporters are just lazy.

The number of stories that are based on tweets that are never verified is far, far more troubling.

The real worry is that being a reporter seems to no longer require any one to do any fact checking or actual research. Just using what you are fed is what is dangerous.

One of the replies gives this number for making complaints so I'll put it here to make it easier for anyone who would like to complain...

03700 100 222
The BBC complaints number . They are publicly funded and I urge people to call them to complain about their appaling journalist standards and disproportionate promotion on transgenderism and use of this organization

Using phrases like "anti oppression" plays into the trans agenda that those who are gender critical are all right wing fanatics.

Anto-oppression is NEON's self-description. Not a SEEN term for them. https://www.neweconomyorganisers.org/about/anti-oppression

If you read the thread you will see that this is a direct quote from the SeenIJ twitter feed:

Another of Neon’s offers is Mika Minio-Palluello, of the male ‘breastfeeding’ controversy. Others are Palestinian activists, climate activists, exactly the range you might expect from an ‘anti oppression’ consultancy.

Sounds like the sort of reactionary comment Suella Braverman would make.

And yes, it does make me wonder about the politics within this Seen network.

I dont like the idea of gender critical / women's sex based rights politics being co-opted by what could at best look like sloppy politics ar at worst like the last bastion of "British" values.

If you read my link - or just the URL - you'll see SEEN lifted the term you objected to directly from NEON'S own site.

If you want to take issue with any other part of the statement that is a different point.

" ... exactly the range you might expect from an ‘anti oppression’ consultancy. ... "

It seems to be that you keep missing the point.