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.

The point you wanted to make was clearly not the one you originally made. That not on me.

Also, it is exactly the grouping of beliefs you'd expect from an organisation that chooses to label itself as 'anti- oppression'. And I say that as someone politically aligned more with Kropotkin than Braverman. It's the Guardian-reader Bundle of Good Beliefs.

Many of which I do believe are good - it's not the beliefs that are the problem. It's bundling them rather than assessing each on its own merits. That's how otherwise sensible and well-meaning people get swept up in the BeKind arguments and don't see how unkind they are to women.

Also, it is exactly the grouping of beliefs you'd expect from an organisation that chooses to label itself as 'anti- oppression'. And I say that as someone politically aligned more with Kropotkin than Braverman. It's the Guardian-reader Bundle of Good Beliefs.

This.

I made exactly the point I wanted to make. You didn't understand it.

The comment from SeenInJournalism under mines them as an organistion that specifically should NOT be seen as politically aligned and stooping to the pathetic name calling of both the left and the right.

It undermines the work they say they want to achieve, and potentially alienates future members because it makes it look that they too are more interested in the "woke" war. As well as implying the issues listed aren't worth bothering about.

Women's rights are far, far more important than this sort of juvenile name calling.

And could well damage what could be a valuable support for women.

Sounds more like a Telegraph editorial than something that people who claim to be journalists would indulge in ie posture politics.

I think the point about NEON is much more important than quibbling about the language here.

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.

It is. It's really important to challenge these networks.

I worked in a BBC newsroom and I'd heard of Neon but had no idea it was an activist led organisation, I just thought it was a useful database resource that journalists used to find 'experts'. If it included different points of view, ie if Helen Joyce or Maya Forstater were on it for example, I wouldn't have an issue with it so much. It's the fact that it is obviously not impartial that's an issue. I'm sure there used to be a link to it on BBC Gateway website. I don't work there anymore so don't have a login to check.

Although it doesn't have the same commercial pressures as other media outlets, BBC News still needs to show it's creating content that people read and engage with. There's no doubt that these endless stories featuring drag queens and gender identity obsessives act as clickbait. You only have to look at the number of replies and reposts these stories get to see how successful they are. Because of that, I don't see them changing their approach any time soon.

I agree with this. They are clickbait.

The speed of online journalism encourages laziness. Once reporters had a certain amount of luxury in going out occasionally to talk to people in person but most often it was phone calls.
Databases of rentaquote types have always been used as well as a particular ‘expert’ favoured by one reporter or another. PR agencies have always pushed stories and packages for journalists to pick up with pre-cooked quotes or a list of quotes/contacts. And when they can speak well and to the point they get over-used. The main issue is to get a variety of voices that are vaguely representative but it would seem Neon have cornered a market. Once it would have been the friends of journalists or their kids or the producers/camera man, which is equally unrepresentative. It’s also important that experts get paid - not a huge amount but it’s not for free so a nice little earner if you get asked

I think what’s weird is that the two recent examples made for quite strange stories, which I suppose still gets them clicks and is a win-win for the BBC, but shows the agenda underneath. IIRC the last one, involving Mika upthread was supposed to be showing an everyday woman with children struggling with rising costs or something and not only were they a transwoman breastfeeding they had 2 degrees and I think had a well paid job somewhere I can’t remember. It also does trans people a disservice - the story about not being able to afford a house could have been a piece about LGBT people being affected by prejudice by landlords or abusive relationships and homelessness - something actually useful or relevant. Instead they’re so focused on shoehorning their agenda into stories that it renders the story basically useless as a piece of reporting.

I think had a well paid job somewhere I can’t remember.

A middle class climate etc activist working for a left wing think tank IIRC. And obviously the least convincing "ordinary mum facing the cost of living crisis" ever.

That was it, thanks Eresh.