The BBC allegedly was so influenced by Stonewall that it copied aspects of the controversial LGBT group’s use of language, prompting calls for editorial standards to be reviewed. Further, since the publicly-funded broadcaster dropped Stonewall’s scheme over a “perception of bias”, LGBT staff have been told they will have to get used to hearing opinions they do not like.
Last week, the BBC confirmed that it had withdrawn from the Diversity Champions scheme run by Stonewall, the LGBT pressure group that has in recent years taken a turn in the direction of extreme identity and transgender politics, including the group’s leadership claiming that criticism of transgender ideology and the belief that sex is immutable is akin to antisemitism.
The BBC said that it had severed ties with the group over a “perception of bias”, following the government’s Department of Health, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and media watchdog Ofcom quitting the Diversity Champions programme, the latter doing so also over “perceived bias”.
However, senior editors and presenters at the BBC speaking to The Times fear that the cultural damage has already been done, with Stonewall’s language already allegedly heavily embedded in editorial rules for the use of language and that such in-house practices need to be reviewed.
The concern appears to be over the usage of the words ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ — previously used interchangeably, with ‘sex’ becoming less popular over ‘gender’ in recent years — where ‘sex’ relates to absolute, biologically-defined characteristics that determine male and female, and ‘gender’ is now believed to mean the “identity” of a person. Such an identity can exist on a spectrum of — as a BBC-aired lesson aimed at young children claimed — over 100 genders, including “pansexual”, “bi-gender”, and “gender-queer”.
Stonewall’s influence allegedly is blurring the lines of expressing biological reality and ‘identity’, with The Times giving the example of the BBC’s definition of “homosexual” being close to Stonewall’s description as someone attracted to others “of their own gender” (identity) rather than sex (biology). A BBC presenter reportedly told the newspaper of record that the broadcaster needs to “reestablish biological truth” and get rid of progressive phrases such as those which claim that sex is “assigned” at birth, rather than a biological reality.
Another source said there was “no question” that Stonewall had affected editorial standards, with another saying: “The style guide is a battle area where hopefully they revisit things.” Even BBC executives are said to be concerned over Stonewall’s influence on the broadcaster, according to the newspaper.
The BBC maintains that their involvement with Stonewall over the years has not “in any way compromised the editorial integrity of our output”.
Not all at the BBC have such a negative opinion of the radical pro-trans lobby group, with the younger generations said to be generally more in favour of Stonewall’s pro-trans movement.
Recent controversy surrounded the publishing of an article by the BBC on lesbians claiming they had been coerced into having sexual relationships with biological men who identified as women — a number of which had intact male genitalia — some saying they feared being labelled transphobic if they did not.
One member of staff who objected to the article claimed that senior executives were “gaslighting” the younger staff members, while another said: “Metaphorically we should perhaps throw a brick… go to the management team and say: ‘This isn’t good enough. We’re not happy. You can’t fob us off. We’re not going to be quiet.’”
Pro-radical trans ideology staff might not remain “quiet” at the BBC, but they have been warned that from now on, they could hear opinions that they don’t like.
The BBC’s outgoing news chief Fran Unsworth reportedly told a BBC Pride staff network call over Zoom on Friday: “You’ll hear things you don’t personally like and see things you don’t like — that’s what the BBC is, and you have to get used to that.”
Ms Unsworth reportedly said, according to The Times: “These are the stories we tell. We can’t walk away from the conversation.”
“Fran was totally calm but determined about it. She was reacting to questions from the network that implied people shouldn’t come across views they disliked. To me, it felt like she was having to explain journalism to idiots,” a BBC journalist told the newspaper.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.