By Sammie Jones-
Kent News website has been criticised by the press watchdog for none factual reporting that a women’s rights group had engaged in “transphobic abuse”.
The Independent Press Standards Organisation upheld a complaint by Nicola Williams, on behalf of Fair Play for Women, against Kent Live after it reported that a transgender cricketer’s “impressive club appearances have been clouded by transphobic abuse from the group Fair Play for Women”.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
However, the site’s failure to describe what the alleged abuse had consisted of, was found to be significantly misleading.
Fair Play for Women said all it had done was comment on whether biological males who identified as women should be eligible to play in women’s cricket teams.
The organisation said that the term “transphobic” meant having an irrational fear of transpeople, which was not the case, while the “abuse” referenced in the story consisted of Twitter posts in which Fair Play for Women had referred to the cricketer as “male”, discussed their biology, physical body and legal status.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
They also said that the “abuse” referenced in the article consisted of Tweets in which Fair Play for Women had referred to the cricketer as “male”, discussed the cricketer’s biology, physical body and legal status, and asked for sports professionals and women to “speak up NOW”.
The complainant said that these Tweets were not “misgendering”. She further said that a person’s gender identity had no impact on their sporting ability, whereas their physical body and sex did. For these reasons, the complainant argued that the Tweets were not transphobic, but raised a genuine concern and a subject for debate.
In addition, they said that as the article did not describe the alleged “abuse”, the background had not been made clear to readers and the article carried an insinuation that Fair Play for Women may have committed a crime or that the abuse was conduct more serious than Tweeting.
Good Will
. The publication did not accept that it had breached the Code. On receipt of the complaint, as a gesture of goodwill, it offered to delete the sentence in the article that referred to Fair Play for Women and to add a clarification to set out the group’s position.
However as the complainant wanted an op-ed rather than a clarification, an agreement could not be reached and a clarification was not published. The publication nevertheless resolved to delete the sentence as a gesture of goodwill, but due to an error the sentence was not permanently deleted until IPSO’s investigation had concluded.
Tweets
The publication provided the Tweets from the complainant which said: “Male cricketer wins .” “Concern that women are being displaced from their own game is not hypothetical, It’s happening now.
A male called Maxine is playing at county level for Kent. Maxine used to play as a man and now, with no medical changes whatsoever, is rising to the top of women’s county cricket.”; and (in response to the cricketer’s teammate) “Tammy, it’s understandable you want to stick up for your friend Maxine but the argument that males don’t have an advantage in cricket is utter nonsense & you know it.
” It said that referring to the cricketer as “male” misgendered the cricketer and demonstrated transphobia. It also said that the Tweet, by suggesting that the cricketer had not transitioned, was transphobic as transitioning does not require surgery and can encompass a range of medical or physical issues.
Furthermore, it said that encouraging others to “speak up NOW” against the cricketer was also transphobic. During IPSO’s investigation the publication offered to publish the following statement as a clarifying footnote:
”We have been asked to make it clear that Fair Play for Women were speaking up against male participation in women’s sport. They do not consider referring to trans women who do not hold a gender recognition certificate (GRC) as a man, to be transphobic abuse, as described”.
The article had asserted as fact that Fair Play for Women had engaged in “transphobic abuse”, but it had not made clear that this was the newspaper’s characterisation based on the organisation’s references to the cricket player as “male” on social media.
Ipso said this omission was significantly misleading and represented a failure to take care and there was a breach of Clause 1(i). A correction was required in order to avoid a breach of Clause 1(ii).
The publication offered to delete the line after receiving the complaint and, in direct correspondence with the complainant, offered to publish a statement which clarified the position. It then offered specific wording for this statement during IPSO’s investigation.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar