I always say this about the media (yes you can check this if so inclined, its not just restricted to this subject) - don't just look at what they DO say, also look at the massive gaps and silences about what they DON'T say.
These gaps either reveal something not being released by authorities or gatekeeping by the media outlet. You have to ask the questions, 'why?' and 'who?' as this often tells you more about the story.
Some times these decisions have very important and valid reasons about why they have been ommitted. Some times less so.
On this subject, one of the constant comments is that the public aren't interested and its a niche subject. This doesn't hold up when you are then putting out a huge number of frankly brain dead puff piece drag queen stories. There is definitely a huge demand for these stories - we know this because the Daily Mail started to realise this and started to cover them. Not to mention we know several of these pro-trans programmes have been absoluete ratings turkeys.
Then the other argument is that these stories are negative about transpeople. Again this is actually bias and doesn't hold up. Many of these stories are simply about women wanting privacy and dignity and a space to talk about bodily things with others who know without being mansplained to or feeling embarassed - its actually weirdly TRAs who then go nuts and start wanging on about how they are treated like rapists when they just want to pee. We see it on MN, how the focus gets changes from being centred on these basic and fair women's needs to a sudden guilt trip and accusations of 'phobia' when no one in that particular conversation has even mentioned anything to do with sexually inappropriate behaviour.
Then theres the stories about trans people which are negative which are shoved under the carpet completely because they don't fit with the narrative of the most oppressed and vulnerable because theres more vulnerable victims. And to cap it off the pronouns - omg the pronouns - which NOTE the INDEPENDENT CASS REVIEW stated were not neutral and were a political decision, ESPECIALLY, in cases where there is a legal case and the judge is using male pronouns or has given permission for victims to use male pronouns. This is NOT ok. Other examples include where someone trans has stated they don't care about pronouns and the BBC defaults to pro-trans pronouns and names.
Never mind the wording of headlines. Its always 'anti-trans' never 'pro-woman' or 'pro-lesbian' etc etc.
Never mind who they've gone out of their way to platform - and gone out of their way to not platform. You can go through the list of rent-a-gobs and find the majority deeply problematic and if they were a straight male they would not be touched. But women who have fought against a lot of this? Na, they are persona non grata, and have been for years with no efforts even post CASS or post SC to change this, because they might say something 'controversial' eg males are still males even if they transition and the presenter might implode because their BBC training does not compute at this point.
Then theres the whole fiasco which is on record about just how hard it was for Newsnight - which some of the very best journalists in the country - to break the Tavistock scandal. Which lead to some of those journalists leaving the BBC as a direct result. This if nothing else should have been a massive red flag that the BBC was failing in its commitment to hard investigative journalism. This ISN'T outsiders with a political agenda to grind saying the BBC has a problem. This is some of the most professional and respected journalists in the country (if not the world) saying 'Hang on, this really shouldn't have been this hard. This is totally fucked up and the BBC has a bias problem.'
These clowns that have quit who have said there is no problem with bias and have tried to ignore that this is an area of concern even now, are fucking delusional.
There is no fucking way they are going to convince me differently without a massive wholesale change in editiorial decision making. Right now their gatekeeping is fucked and untenable. It is not ok. It doesn't reflect the general public. It doesn't reflect the law. And they hide behind guidelines when they don't even cover that area or are at odds with journalist integrity.
Martine Croxall was the absoluete final straw for me.