• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Guidance on researching and reporting stories involving transgender individuals October 2016 About this guidance About IPSO The Independent Press Standards We can make newspapers and The Editors’ Code of Practice sets the Organisation (IPSO) is the magazines publish corrections or framework for the highest professional independent regulator for the standards for journalists. There are adjudications if they breach the some situations where it is helpful newspaper and magazine Editors’ Code, including on their for IPSO to produce guidance which industry in the UK. front page. explores in more detail how the Editors’ Code applies to particular themes or We hold newspapers and We can investigate serious issues. One such area is the researching magazines to account for their standards failings and can fine and reporting of transgender issues. actions, protect individual publishers up to £1 million in rights, uphold high standards of particularly serious cases. This guidance does not replace or journalism and help to maintain supersede the Editors’ Code, but freedom of expression for the We provide training and is designed to support editors and press. journalists who are researching or guidance for journalists so they writing on transgender issues. It does What IPSO does can uphold the highest possible not limit or restrict editorial decision standards.We work with charities, making, but may inform that decision NGOs and other organisations making. We uphold the Editors’ Code of Practice, a set of rules which all to support and improve press standards. This guidance is aimed at editors and newspapers and magazines who journalists and may also be helpful are regulated by IPSO must follow. www.ipso.co.uk to members of the public. If you need We can investigate complaints [email protected] further advice, please contact IPSO or about printed and online material see the ‘Resources’ section at the end of that may breach the Editors’ 0300 123 22 20 this guidance. Code. 2 The Editors’ Code of Practice The Editors’ Code of Practice to editorialise, must distinguish contains a number of Clauses clearly between comment, Clause 6 (Children) provides relevant to reporting or conjecture and fact. protection to children, to ensure researching stories on transgender that they are protected from individuals (although it is Clause 2 (Privacy) affords unnecessary intrusion and to important to note that all Clauses everyone the right to respect for ensure that their welfare is of the Code may be relevant). his or her private life, home, protected. There are exceptions to some health and correspondence. The Clauses in the Code (including 2, protections provided by Clause 2 Clause 8 (Hospitals) may be 3, 6 and 8 below) where are also relevant to the situation relevant when an individual is publication of material that might of family members or friends of undergoing medical treatment, normally breach the Code would individuals at the centre of such which could relate to their physical be allowed in the wider public coverage, who may be concerned or mental health. interest. Editors invoking the about potential intrusion. public interest will need to Clause 12 (Discrimination) makes demonstrate that they reasonably Clause 3 (Harassment) provides clear that the press should avoid believe that publication would protection to individuals from prejudicial or pejorative reference both serve and be proportionate harassment, intimidation and to an individual’s sex, gender to the public interest. persistent pursuit. In addition, identity or sexual orientation it makes clear that if asked to (alongside other characteristics). Clause 1 (Accuracy) requires that desist, journalists must cease An individual’s gender identity the press must take care not to telephoning, questioning, and sexual orientation must not publish inaccurate, misleading pursuing or photographing be referenced unless genuinely or distorted information or individuals, unless an overriding relevant to the story. images. The Clause also makes public interest justifies the activity. clear that the press, whilst free 3 Points for editors to consider There are a wide variety of stories which may touch on transgender issues. We have developed some key questions and points, based on the Editors’ Code, which may help journalists and editors. Some points may be more relevant to particular types of stories than others, but it may helpful to consider all of the points set out below. Area Points to consider Clauses to consider Relevance • Would the story be newsworthy if it did not concern an individual 12,2 of transgender status? • Is the individual’s status relevant? Language • Is the terminology being used pejorative or prejudicial? 12,1 • If known, have you used the pronouns the individual uses to describe themselves in your story? Publicity • Has the individual made their transgender status known? 12, 2 • If not, is the revelation of their status necessary to the story? • Do you know if the individual has applied for a Gender Recognition Certificate (see ‘Further information’). 4 Area Points to consider Clauses to consider Terminology • What terminology are you using to describe gender transition? 1, 12 • Have you taken care not to publish inaccurate or misleading information? Unnecessary • Does the article include unnecessary information, such as 2 information irrelevant references to previous identities, publication of pictures of individuals pre-transition, or references to medical details? • Are you considering publishing information which could be considered a breach of privacy? Statistics It is difficult to estimate the number of individuals in the UK with 1 gender dysphoria or who have undergone gender transition editors should present such claims with care. 5 Cases involving children • Children under 16 must not the coverage. You could do this by be paid for material involving omitting details that could identify Children who are experiencing their welfare, nor parents or the child or the school they attend. gender dysphoria or undergoing guardians for material about Editors should be aware that this a gender transition may be their children or wards, unless may not be sufficient to meet particularly vulnerable. The it is clearly in the child’s the requirements of the Code. Editors’ Code contains stringent interest. Such coverage has the potential requirements that are intended to to intrude into a child’s time at ensure that children are protected • Editors must not use the fame, school even in cases where they from unnecessary intrusion. notoriety or position of a not readily identifiable. parent or guardian as sole • All pupils should be free to justification for publishing Vulnerability complete their time at school details of a child’s private life. without unnecessary intrusion. Some individuals of transgender Any coverage of a child’s status will be happy to discuss • Pupils must not be approached personal circumstances must their experiences with the media, or photographed at school be contemplated with extreme others feel extremely vulnerable without permission of the caution and due regard for when their circumstances are school authorities. the requirement that “in cases brought to public attention involving children under 16, through press coverage or are • Children under 16 must not be editors must demonstrate an concerned about the prospect of interviewed or photographed exceptional public interest to coverage. When preparing stories, on issues involving their own override the normally paramount editors and journalists should or another child’s welfare interests of the child.” not lose sight of the fact that unless a custodial parent or individuals who are experiencing similarly responsible adult If you believe that an exceptional gender dysphoria, or are consents. public interest does justify undergoing or have undergone a coverage, you should consider gender transition, will often be in how to limit the intrusion posed by a particularly vulnerable position. 6 Relevant complaints Trans Media Watch v The Sun Trans Media Watch, acting with the consent of Emily Brothers, complained to IPSO about columns pub- lished in the Sun. The first column reported that Ms Brothers, a transgender woman, was standing for election as an MP and questioned how she would know that she was transgender as she is also blind. The second column contained an apology from the columnist and, according to the complainant, made delib- erate reference to Ms Brothers’ former name. IPSO’s Complaints Committee upheld the complaint. The Committee concluded that the first column’s crude suggestion that the complainant could only have become aware of her gender by seeing its physical manifestations was plainly wrong. The column belittled the individual, her gender identity and her disabil- ity, mocking her for no reason other than these perceived “differences”. The comment did not contain any specific pejorative term, but its meaning was pejorative in relation to characteristics specifically protected by Clause 12. However, the Committee did not have sufficient evidence available to conclude that the in- clusion of the complainant’s former first name, which was not uncommon, in the apology, was deliberate. The newspaper was required to publish an adjudication on the same page as the column and on the newspaper’s website. 7 Christie Elan-Cane v The Spectator Christie Elan-Cane complained to IPSO about a comment piece in The Spectator. The comment piece discussed gender issues and the contents of the Transgender Equality report, raising concerns about the recommendations in the report. The columnist named the complainant, a non-gendered person who provided evidence to the Select Committee, and criticised the complainant’s use of the non-gendered pronoun ‘per’. Christie Elan-Cane complained under Clauses 1 (Accuracy) and 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code. The Complaints Committee did not uphold the complaint. The Committee recognised that it was essential for publications to approach the subject of an individual’s gender status with appropriate care and sensitivity. However, columnists are entitled to express themselves – no matter how unpopular or controversial their views might be.

Load more

  10

Copy Link