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….

Confirmation bias is not at all new, it’s baked into humans at a fundamental level. It’s always been here.

Does anyone else think this is going to be really significant? One of the biggest issues GC women have had is alternative narratives to gender ideology being suppressed, with our state broadcaster playing a big role in that. And many leftwing people will just reject things that are written in the Daily Mail etc.

I know there are already attempts to dismiss this as a right-wing campaign against the BBC, being instigated by Boris Johnson and his cronies, but surely some changes will have to happen as a result of this? Will we see more interviews with wonderful, articulate women like Susan Smith on the BBC?

I'm really not sure. I would like it to be but all the media commentators/ex BBC people I see with honourable exceptions from Jon Sopel & Nick Wallis are taking the line that this is a bad faith attack by bad faith actors and can therefore be completely ignored. They accept there have been 'mistakes' but hand wave them away as minor/not deliberate

they are determined to ignore the message and shoot the messenger

I believe it can be equally true that there are some factions very much out to get the bbc while it also being the case that there are areas where the bbc has fucked up massively

Yes, Nick Robinson has said that both things are true (that there are editorial issues and that there are also people trying to undermine the BBC).

My personal feeling (hope) is that they are not going to be able to wave this away though. Now that a spotlight has been put on the LGBT desk, are they going to be able to carry on suppressing stories they don't like? It sounds like there are also sensible, senior people at the BBC who recognise there is a problem.

I think the initial response of some BBC presenters is one of defensiveness, but there will be proper scrutiny of the content of the report next week by parliament. Although it's a bit concerning that this is Lisa 'Protect the Dolls' remit.

Although it's a bit concerning that this is Lisa 'Protect the Dolls' remit.

Definitely concerning. If she can't recognise the significance of "protect the dolls" messaging in her field of influence, she's a liability here.

However, on the off-chance that she or someone in her sphere of influence is reading this thread (I guess you never know 🤞🤞) it's also important to remember that everyone goes on their own journey of understanding regarding gender identity. I think for anyone on the left/progressive side of politics (and I count myself here as a member of the public), recognising that there is a significant problem with autogynophilia in society - and more importantly what that means WRT influence within organisations - takes a long time. I suspect that Lisa's journey will be similar to mine in many ways, where I found it difficult to believe it was this bad. It all sounds very much like conspiracy theory from pearl clutchers etc etc until you delve more into it. Luckily I had my mind prised open and I have hope that she will too 🤞🤞

Lisa Nandy is on Times Radio ignoring Adam Boulton about this very issue and pivoting her answer towards the use of Jews v Israelis when reporting. TOTALLY ignoring the damage the BBC has done to women, girls and poor boys who are deluded into thinking they can magically transform into women.

I think it is interesting that the BBCs one notable attempt to look at the issue and the influence Stonewall had across government and media came from BBC Northern Ireland in 2021. A quick look at the topics covered during the series of Nolan Investigates reminds of what the BBC should have been doing all along.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/p09yjmph

Given Northern Irelands specific sensitivities and requirements for impartiality, I wonder if they are overseen by a different complaints procedure. And that this might have allowed Nolan to go where others feared to go.

I guess it's possible that Lisa Nandy has been told at one point that gender ideology is part of the package of beliefs that progressive people are supposed to go along with and hasn't questioned it too deeply. She is not in the same league as Nadia Whittome, who no amount of evidence and hard facts about the harm that has been done to women and girls will sway.

So I guess we can be optimistic and hope that this report might open her eyes a bit to the levels of manipulation that has been going on by trans lobby groups and activists.

Stephen Nolan gets a lot of credit for this series, but David Thompson was the driving force behind it. He has since left the BBC. He has spoken about the pushback they received, so maybe now he will speak more about it.

We need journalists to keep asking the questions and not letting them off the hook.

They both deserve credit. Nolan put his name and reputation on the line. (Though interesting he did not suffer the level of cancellation that either a woman or someone London based might have received.)

This was a key public interest story, a perfect topic for a Panorama or similar. But nothing, except from Ulster. Yet another example, Jimmy Saville being the first, the Martin Bashir cover-up being another, which suggests BBC impartiality is not fit for purpose.

I think the BBC is in trouble. They had 13 years of being able to blame the Tories for a vendetta against them. I don’t think Labour is strong enough to provide protection especially as the BBC have failed in their mission of being a neutral and unifying news source, so don’t have the public support the once did.

It is not surprising to discover that after all those years of people from this board complaining to the BBC about bias on Women’s Hour and elsewhere, that it was the complaints department that was captured.

I might well watch the committee hearing live on Wednesday.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/378/culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/210093/bbc-editorial-standards-mps-to-take-evidence-from-former-bbc-editorial-standards-advisor-michael-prescott/

BBC today https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wvqx50jpqo

The Trump story was egregious
but it one one item in one programme.

The censoring and gaslighting of women and girls
is on every channel, every network, every website
and has been going on for a decade and more.

Which one will make more people cancel their licence fees ?

Am I the only person who finds this deliberately misleading? To the extent that it seems to completely prove the allegations of bias being made against the BBC on reporting about this topic?

I think we should complain directly.

In response, a BBC spokesperson said "where mistakes have been made or errors have occurred we have acknowledged them at the time and taken action".

They added: "We have also previously acknowledged that certain contributors should not have been used and have improved our processes to avoid a repeat of this."

Reports also said Mr Prescott raised concerns about the BBC's coverage around trans issues.

On Thursday, the BBC upheld 20 impartiality complaints over the way presenter Martine Croxall altered a script she was reading live on the BBC News Channel, which referred to "pregnant people" earlier this year.

The presenter changed her script to instead say "women", and the BBC's Executive Complaints Unit said it considered her facial expression as she said this gave the "strong impression of expressing a personal view on a controversial matter".

I’m depressed by their attitude to women and girls but It’s not as if it was news to me or, I imagine any regular visitor to this board. The frogs in boiling water analogy comes to mind. In a way it’s a relief to see it out there.

I’m shocked and floored by the allegation that they doctored a Trump speech to make it look as if he said something he didn’t. It’s the kind of story I’ve previously dismissed as the fantasy of nut jobs on You Tube. And I’m even more shocked at how many people are playing it down because of either loyalty to the BBC, dislike of Trump and the Telegraph or all 3.

It's important to remember that Nolan and Thompson could do what they did, not just because Northern Ireland has its own peculiar political culture which means BBCNI takes a slightly different approach to impartiality, but also because BBC bosses in London see BBCNI as a regional backwater and don't pay attention to it.

This is one of the many revelations in Andrew Lownie's book on Andrew and Fergie - despite the books and TV dramas giving you the impression that Newsnight did a thorough investigation into Andrew's affairs, it really didn't. It was a Panorama team in NI led by Laura Burns, who's since left the BBC, who did all the digging and came up with the evidence and the list of questions.

The Palace was simultaneously negotiating with Newsnight for a soft soap interview with Andrew, with the result that the Panorama doc was pulled and at 72 hours notice their material was handed over to Newsnight.

With no disrespect to Emily Maitlis, the main reason why it didn't turn out to be a soft soap interview is because ex-Prince Andrew is a very stupid and arrogant man who told a string of outrageous lies, and Emily was smart enough to let him keep on digging a hole for himself.

BBCNI really never gets the credit it's due.

It's absolutely appalling.

It strongly implies that the issues that Prescott were concerned about were somehow "balanced out" by the BBC handling the issue with Martine Croxalln in the way that it did. The inference being that on the difficult issue of gender identity, the BBC had this under control because its journalist had been reprimanded for her supposedly partisan facial expression.

It very much implies that the BBC's only impartiality problem is Martine Croxall's eyebrows shooting up when she sees TRA jargon on her teleprompter.

These are the same geniuses who hired Ben Hunte to be an admitted propagandist.

The Telegraph is saying that the complaints against Martine came from within the BBC.

Surely them upholding said complaints is just further evidence of their internal bias issues?

Exactly this.

Lisa Nandy is saying the BBC will apologise tomorrow but given she is of the "protect the dolls" fame and highly biased I can't see how there will be true accountability.

Also a BBC spokesperson said that Trump was found guilty so therefore the program wasn't that incorrect. It was a "misstep"

I had watched the attacks on the BBC which I thought were unfair however the bias on Trans woke me to their lack of impartiality.

I don't trust them..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cd9kqz1yyxkt

well!

Tim Davie resigns

Hands up, I fell asleep listening to this. Michael Prescott will appear at a later date and not Wednesday, as planned.

Newscast - The Government Reacts To BBC Bias Allegations - BBC Sounds