Martine Croxall was out of order, says the BBC

[MassiveWordSalad]

FFS

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3epwz08ewzo

Is Sky any better in this respect?

What consequences will Martine face because of this at the BBC? And agree with all the comments that say it shows how out of touch the BBC is. They uphold this complaint but none of the ones about them referring to rapists as she? Fuck sake. I really hope someone does take them to a tribunal.

I’d send any postcards to MC as anything to TD will doubtless be reviewed by underlings who may screen out material deemed “inappropriate”/transphobic/insufficiently respectful.

Actually I think they are just paying lip service to the baying TRAs and are not really fussed about it.

The report says it upheld just 20 'impartiality' complaints. Let's face it, that's a really minor niggle, not a charge of discrimination or misconduct or anything serious.

It said the views from the public that tended to confirm what her expression conveyed were 'congratulatory messages' so not in any way negative.

And finally, it admitted some responsibility for a clumsily written script which turned out to be inaccurate reporting anyway.

The ECU noted that "Ms Croxall was reacting to scripting, which somewhat clumsily incorporated phrases from the press release accompanying the research, including 'the aged', which is not the BBC style, and 'pregnant people', which did not match what Dr Mistry said in the clip which followed".

The only outcome was that the finding was 'discussed' with the team. So not even referring to a slap on the wrist.

EXACTLY - this is just the point at which they could lie low and reflect on how they could do things better. Instead they pull this batshit stunt. They must have a death wish.

The BBC have a death wish. They were so respected worldwide - not any more.

Ooh - referring to "pregnant people" is highly politicised language in itself and it's not what the expert said so she's got a nice case for belief discrimination. I think her expression had nothing to do with any views about trans people, it reflected her disapproval of scriptwriters mangling what the expert actually said for their own political reasons.

And possibly sex discrimination too - woman is censured for not wearing a nice pandering expression when told to misquote an expert. When was the last time a man was censured for the look on his face?

He has said he wasn’t personally aware of any complaints about various issues, implying they didn’t happen, so yes.

Goody Croxall did curdle the milk with her strange looking.

That wasn't considered 'OK and impartial' at all, she was taken off the air.

I saw that incident live - it was during the News Review not reading the news - and at the time I thought she was excited to be on duty when the story broke, that's what she was 'gleeful' about. I didn't think it was directed at Johnson individually, it was just her reaction to a huge story breaking on her watch.
The BBC interpreted it differently, and suspended her.

Saying 'pregnant' people would also "indicate a particular viewpoint in the controversies currently surrounding trans ideology." so by the same token the BBC should investigate itself and suspend itself...

The BBC making an idiot of itself once again. No surprise.

But such unfortunate timing.

This is just utter bollocks.

she changed the script to something factually correct

"20 impartiality complaints"

Curious as to how many impartiality complaints BBC receives when they use terms like "pregnant people."

As an ex-employee I have never known an organisation so willing to destroy itself from within. The day after the Telegraph article, seriously?
The BBC does have a lot of powerful enemies but it doesn't really matter as it's quite capable of destroying itself without help from others.
I honestly despair.

Print off masks of her 'facial expression' and wear them?

Now that would be a court case I would garden hard for.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/articles/c1jgw944z2ko

You can message Morning Live on WhatsApp using the number 0800 032 1100 (Data charges may apply depending on your mobile or data provider)

You can also send an email to [email protected]

https://www.facebook.com/bbcmorninglive/
https://www.instagram.com/bbcmorninglive/

I don't think this was deliberate timing by the BBC. I think the rebuke of Croxall had been lined up to happen today without knowledge of what was going to come from The Telegraph.

If I'm right they must have been in a real panic when the story broke in The Telegraph knowing that pulling the rebuke of Croxall would have been made public and would have added even further to their woes.

The staff at the BBC are unwittingly destroying the public trust in the corporation and at the very best the management are looking on helplessly while wringing their hands. It's breathtakingly dysfunctional.

The BBC have really lost the plot with this one.
Censoring expressions is something that happened in Mao Zedong's China.
It's paranoia & stupidly rolled into one

Making presenters say things like 'pregnant people' is exactly equivalent to making them cross themselves every time they mention Jesus or say PBUH every time they mention the Prophet. If they refuse, they lack impartiality, but the BBC started it.

If they roll their eyes as well then it's an offence under the Bananarama doctrine (might offend believers). But this is a self-inflicted (by the BBC) injury that could have been avoided.

It added that "congratulatory messages Ms Croxall later received on social media, together with the critical views expressed in the complaints to the BBC and elsewhere, tended to confirm that the impression of her having expressed a personal view was widely shared across the spectrum of opinion on the issue".

It's not a personal view you numpty. It's fact.

The publically ridiculed personal view is that all people can get pregnant.

Croxall was one of a group of women journalists who challenged sex and age discrimination at the BBC that took a decade to settle

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c80y1j4r8yeo.amp

So this may or may not impact in the diligence with which the BBC management investigated this apparent gross inappropriate.... Facial expression. Of course a union might consider this a type of victimisation based on prior grievance cases, but then this might imply they are defending Dreadful TERF think so they might decide to go "la la la la la CAN'T HEAR YOU"

Brushing their teeth while eating a peanut butter sandwich.

I did wonder if Martine’s card was marked some while ago and this presented her employers with an opportunity they couldn’t resist.

Punishing whistleblowers? Looks like victimisation, harassment and discrimination to me.

And "pregnant people" is supposedly impartial then? What a load of shite.