Complaint
Introducing an item in a review of the papers, the presenter said βAnd quite a lot of coverage still of Kathleen Stock, the academic from Sussex University whoβs been abused by students who accuse her, falsely, of transphobia.Β She says her Union has now effectively ended her career.Β Itβs published a statement of support, not for her, but for those who are abusing herβ.Β Four listeners complained that the use of βf²Ή±τ²υ±π±τ²ββ was not only inaccurate but betrayed a personal opinion on the presenterβs part, and three of them complained of inaccuracy and apparent bias in describing the students who had been protesting against Professor Stock of βabusing herβ. Β The ECU considered the complaints in the light of the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔβs editorial standards of due accuracy and impartiality.
Outcome
As the validity or otherwise of the accusation of transphobia are at the heart of the controversy over Professor Stock, the ECU agreed that it was not duly accurate to refer to it in terms which suggested it had been disproved, and upheld the complaints in that respect.Β However, it did not agree that the use of βf²Ή±τ²υ±π±τ²ββ indicated the producerβs personal opinion (which would have been contrary to the guideline on impartiality which says ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ journalists and news presenters βmay not express personal viewsβ on controversial subjects in ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ output), but considered it was better understood as an anticipation of the article being introduced, which did indeed argue that the accusation was false.
In connection to the reference to protestors βa²ϊ³ά²υΎ±²Τ²΅β Professor Stock, the ECU noted that publications by her antagonists had applied terms to her which were incontestably abusive, irrespective of the merits of the arguments they were associated with.Β Accordingly the ECU did not regard the reference as raising issues of accuracy or impartiality. Β Β
Partly upheld
Further action
The finding was reported to the Board of ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ News and discussed with the programme-makers responsible.