Everything we know so far about the BBC’s Pride rules:
* The BBC’s new impartiality policy does not specifically ban attending Pride parades.
* Across a range of meetings to explain the new rules, most staff were not given the impression attending Pride would be banned.
* The BBC’s new impartiality policy does not specifically ban attending Pride parades.
* Across a range of meetings to explain the new rules, most staff were not given the impression attending Pride would be banned.
* In at least a few of those meetings, *some* news staffers (who face stricter rules than other staff) were told by senior management they would not be allowed to attend Pride.
* The BBC, given many chances to clarify those rules by two newspapers, chose not to do so yesterday.
* The BBC, given many chances to clarify those rules by two newspapers, chose not to do so yesterday.
* This morning, after significant anger, Tim Davie issued a loosely-worded letter that claims to correct “inaccurate commentary” on the issue.
* It does not mention the confused briefings came from his own management team, or explain why the press office didn’t deny the story.
* It does not mention the confused briefings came from his own management team, or explain why the press office didn’t deny the story.
* Davie’s letter says that news staff can attend Pride in general, but has odd wording around “political” issues.
* Background comments suggest “the trans issue” is still seen as a sticking point. Rules on what is and isn’t permitted re trans pride events still unclear.
* Background comments suggest “the trans issue” is still seen as a sticking point. Rules on what is and isn’t permitted re trans pride events still unclear.
So where are we?
* Initial reporting on some news staff being told not to attend Prides was correct. Some were.
* There never was a ban for all staff, nor is it written in policy for news staff - but the rules are vague enough that some senior managers thought it was banned.
* Initial reporting on some news staff being told not to attend Prides was correct. Some were.
* There never was a ban for all staff, nor is it written in policy for news staff - but the rules are vague enough that some senior managers thought it was banned.
* Tim Davie’s letter suggests the BBC management is blaming everyone but itself for a self-inflicted injury. He has made no move to apologise.
* A rush to now dismiss the entire story is misguided. The rules are still nebulous, and clarifications are needed on trans pride events.
* A rush to now dismiss the entire story is misguided. The rules are still nebulous, and clarifications are needed on trans pride events.
* Obviously, it’s an emotive issue. Both the strength of concern, and the angry defences of the BBC, show how important this is to get right.
* Let’s not forget, at the crux of this story, some BBC staff were told not to attend Pride events. They’ve not yet had a public apology.
* Let’s not forget, at the crux of this story, some BBC staff were told not to attend Pride events. They’ve not yet had a public apology.
Worth noting, away from Pride:
* While trans issues aren& #39;t specifically mentioned, the new guidelines refer five times to restrictions around "controversial subjects."
* Advice on whether a subject is controversial is "available from Editorial Policy." This bit is key.
* While trans issues aren& #39;t specifically mentioned, the new guidelines refer five times to restrictions around "controversial subjects."
* Advice on whether a subject is controversial is "available from Editorial Policy." This bit is key.
* As I reported last month, I& #39;ve seen evidence the Editorial Policy unit has already intervened in coverage featuring trans people to require inclusion of cisgender & #39;gender critical& #39; voices. This bit is not theoretical - it& #39;s already in effect. https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/30/bbc-boss-tim-davie-transgender-trans-policy-parliament-mp-john-nicolson-snp/">https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/3...