BBC trans coverage ‘censored’ by its own reporters Corporation’s LGBT desk ‘keeps other perspectives off air’, leaked internal dossier claims

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/5ac2c6a0bb851134

absolutely shocked.

no really….

Evil corrupt biased public paid broadcaster, we all need to cancel our licence and withdraw our funding, MASS PROTEST NEEDED TO SHIT DOWN BBC ASAP

shit was typo but very appropriate lol

Yes, I think that's fair. (I agree about religion reporters too, some of the dumb stuff you see in reports on those topics is just embarrassing.)

I would have thought though that those are topics that might have specialists, but that they would also be general news reporters, and other reporters wouldn't be prevented from picking up stories on those topics too. Especially if the other guy doesn't want to touch it.

This is what I am seeing where it is being discussed at all. This should be international but so far I've not seen anything in the Canadian press.

And reddit is full of people saying the speech splicing thing is just fine. They are a bubble of course but I think they do indicate what the "real" left types will say.

@TempestTost The more right wing media is frequently quite anti- BBC. I don't think I would have noticed if it wasn't a topic I was familiar with, even though I try and read a variety of sources.

I wish I found it shocking, but it really just confirms all the things I have suspected about the reporting they do on this topic. Which to me has been deeply suspect for a long time, in terms of their ability to understand statistical analysis.

It seems like it's been generally accepted for years now among the id pol/CRT theory types that all you need to do to show racism is find some kind of plausible correlation, and that's it. The Marxist American academic, Adolph Reed, has been complaining about this for a decade or more, what totally bollocksy shit information it produces.

Personally, I think this is what has driven the increase in real racism and racial divisions over the past 15 years or so - this kind of bad statistics and using it for headlines. People know intuitively that a lot of it is inaccurate, and it's used to justify giving race advantages within the system. It's gone a long way to undermine principles around racial equality and just foment dissent and anger.

I wonder if the government getting more involved will mean other news outlets have to pick it up?

The Telegraph has another article

https://archive.ph/Fl9ZF

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/07/bbc-gender-correspondent-tried-block-coverage-trans/

And the purpose of your whatabouttery is...?

Whenever I've drawn this sort of comparison to Trump it's been with deep irony that for all of their evident hatred of the guy, particularly about his shaky relationship with facts and truth, that they'll look at some of what he does and think "actually that's a rather effective trick so let's do the same".

They're discussing it on Radio 4 World At One right now.

I wouldn't mind so much if they put in the Trumpian disclaimer of "I haven't looked into it but many people say so"

WATO desperately reying to ignore women YET AGAIN

This is being "covered" on The World at One at the moment. The new line is that we can't discuss what the BBC did because they're refusing to comment.

They might get away with this. But if they don't the minimisation campaign they've been running will make things worse.

They got Roger Moseley, a recent BBC bigwig, in to do today's minimising.

And he focussed ENTIRELY on Trump
not on the BBCs failings to UK taxpayers and licence payers

disgraceful

If anyone is in the mood for a philosophical take on this, David McGrogan is here to help:

What has been going on at the BBC must be understood, then, not as an attempt to simply trick viewers or achieve a real world outcome of some kind, but rather as a particular chapter in a long story of, let us call it, Truth management that has been going on ever since Trump was elected first time around. This is not the behaviour of a newsroom full of journalists chuckling over their cornflakes about how they will dupe their viewers. It is the behaviour of people who are in the grip of a commitment to a set of ‘Truths’ which are simply more important to them than facts. It is the conduct of those who, thoroughly imbued with one conception of reality, will think it entirely natural to distort facts in the service of that conception of reality. It is True that Donald Trump is a threat to all that we hold dear. And the facts must replicate and reinforce that ‘Truth’.

The Truth about Trump - by David McGrogan

He needs more salt in his navel

as he is not looking outside his bathroom

It was very telling when Have I Got News For You didn’t cover the court case earlier this year and in the following episode had to address it due to criticism. I know BBC doesn’t directly control HIGNFY it’s commissioned I believe (?) but very much of the same ilk!

Sadly I can’t read the article, but the truth is that the bbc MASSIVELY influence how people in the uk view the world around them. This is especially true for issues/events which they aren’t hugely interested in, and so don’t have another source/perspective.

The BBC’s approach to the trans debate and women’s rights has been a huge part of why Stonewall’s law was so widely adopted. The bbc are absolutely culpable in the row back of women’s rights. I would love to see what the LGBT+ desk’s response to Isla’s pink leggings was. Some stories can’t be buried - fortunately!

meanwhile in fucking clown land:
https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1oqu7m4/new_telegraph_trans_bbc_video/

"Yeah I saw the article about it and I was aghast. This is the same BBC that won't post any trans positive stories- no mass lobby of parliament, no protest of 150k people. We only get mentioned when we are being blamed for something or CGs are in opposition. sex matters are routinely given the last word and a lot of jk Rowling tweets about trans people get their own articles.
Id love someone to do a report on how the BBC covers and frames trans people."

You can read the article by clicking on the archive link that the PP posted.

Until Davie rocked up & until the imbecile wheeze of austerity, the Beeb had loads of specialist beat journos as well as genuine regional news journalists. Now everything's cut to the bone & a tiny group of people control everything in News. It's a recipie for failure.

I been watching for years how BBC have been promoting transgenderism. Negating the views of women and have neglected their duties towards children. They disgust me.

I think we really need to understand that what to FWR seems like a core issue is one that the majority of people just dont care about.

The BBC like other news outlets is driven by competition. They dont go on about the Royal Family because the are royalist because the majority (idiot?) audience responds to it. Just as the popular news paper put pictures of the Royals on the front page.

Sadly to say most of the news we get is in response to audience reaction. 90% if not more of our news is now personality politics.

ie there is far more media reaction to a presenter being censored for making a face. (In responce to 20 complaints.)

So nice as it is to have somewhere to commisserate and talk with those who have a similar outlook it has no impact whatsoever on the media, bbc or any other, let alone the listening, reading public.

Short of Sex Matters (as no one else is doing anything) starting another legal challenge, its not likely to.

Particulary if as seems possible, somehow Labour negates the changes that the Supreme Court Judgement should bring about.

Sadly the group characterised as silly old women who haven't moved with times, are not going to get the sympathy of the young brave sons and daughters families support.

How do dinasours make themselves as lovable and worth saving.