Fair reporting and transgender trials


Rachel Broady on how guidelines can help but also present their own problems


W


hen Karen White was sent to prison in 2018, the Daily Star wrote “she was in jail on remand charged with three rape offences on a woman”. The Telegraph reported “she was accused of pushing her hips and penis against


another prisoner”. The Mirror reported White “insisted she was not attracted to females and had erectile dysfunction”. White is male bodied, identifies as a woman and was


temporarily placed in a women’s prison. White’s crime of rape, under UK law, is defined as when, without consent, “he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person with his penis”. Such a complicated news story creates difficulties for reporters seeking to fairly and accurately report on transgender issues. While there are guidelines available to journalists, they can bring their own complications. The Editors’ Code of Practice is seen by many as the


foundation stone of UK press self-regulation. The Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) applied the code in developing its guidelines which, it states, are “designed to support editors and journalists who are researching on transgender issues”. The guidelines conclude that an individual’s gender identity and sexual orientation must not be referenced unless genuinely relevant to the story. It also states the press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information and that everyone has the right to respect for his or her private life. Ipso received complaints about Metro’s coverage, which


had the headline ‘Prison Service apologises for sending transgender rapist to women’s prison’. Complainants, Ipso writes on its website, believed “the article discriminated against transgender individuals and was trying to stir up a moral panic that transgender people are deceitful, violent and sexually predatory”. Press coverage elsewhere had referred to White as a ‘transgender prisoner’, ‘trans predator’, ‘transgender person’ and ‘transgender rapist’. Many questions arise from the coverage. Must journalists


avoid suggesting White had been deceitful, violent and sexually predatory? Was being transgender relevant? Did using the judge’s description of ‘predator’ risk contributing to a moral panic? Did journalists risk breaching privacy guidelines by mentioning White’s genitals? Were pronouns accurate or necessary?


The Ipso guidance does not provide all the answers a journalist might need when navigating such a complicated


12 | theJournalist


and emotional case. On its website, Ipso states that ‘an individual’s gender identity must not be referenced unless genuinely relevant to the story’. Gender identity, however, is not defined. Trans Media Watch, an organisation that informed the guidelines, does not offer a definition. Stonewall, recommended as a resource by Ipso, states that ‘gender is largely culturally determined and is assumed from the sex assigned at birth’. NUJ guidelines on LGBTQ+ reporting suggest “transgender people are those for whom their current gender identity differs from that declared at birth, whether or not they have later undergone surgical gender reassignment”. The different approaches can mean accuracy is hard to


achieve and offence difficult to avoid. Trans woman Debbie Hayton, a teacher who has written on the issue and her experience for, among others, the Morning Star and London


CIGDEM SIMSEK / ALAMY STOCK PHOTO


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24