Press watchdog censures Daily Mail and nine.com.au for irrelevant use of ‘transgender’
The Press Council has lambasted Daily Mail Australia and nine.com.au over two articles which could cause substantial prejudice to the transgender community.
An article from nine.com.au titled ‘Brighton Le Sands death: Dylan Walker’s sister in court over boyfriend’s death’ and a Daily Mail Australia article, ‘Exclusive: Transgender sister, 31, of football star is charged with manslaughter over the death of her boyfriend, 51, after ‘domestic violence’ incident at a house in Sydney’s South’, both published on May 21, were found in breach of Press Council guidelines for unnecessarily using the word ‘transgender’.
The two articles from Nine (left) and Daily Mail Australia (right) have both been partially censured
The arrogance of these people telling us what we can and cannot hear is beyond belief. It is actually quite relevant to point out that the accused is male > female transgender. If we weren’t told this, it would appear that some biological women were suddenly acting crazy with knife attacks and another well reported random axe attack in a service station, which is virtually unheard of for a woman. Identifying the attacker as a male > female transgender opens a legitimate question about whether people who transition retain some of their original traits and risk factors. You may disagree with this assumption but if so, debate the point don’t try and suppress the facts. If reporting someone’s sexual characteristics is an unfair invitation to prejudice, whey are we allowed to report their sex at all? Why should women suffer “prejudice” by reporting the attacker as a woman, rather than transgender people suffer “prejudice” by accurately reporting her as a transgender woman? Why is it okay to report a male attack as male – doesn’t this invite prejudice against other males?
We are living in a post-fact world.
The news no longer reports the truth and leaves the audience to form their own opinion.
News now tells us what opinion to have and we have to find the facts to support what we believe.
Well said Duncan.
Isn’t it more relevant to report that the (alleged?) attacker is transgender than to report that the (alleged) attacker is some football player’s sibling (I’m not up to date on the correct language so I’ll stick with sibling…)?
And while I don’t necessarily agree with Duncan that it is virtually unheard of for women to commit such acts I do agree that not mentioning the fact that the (alleged) attacker is a trans gender woman would “place unwarranted emphasis” on the “woman” part of trans gender woman.
So we need to be trans-aware and accept the validity of this ‘gender’ in when it comes to everything from public toilets to school curriculum, but if a trans person commits a crime it’s irrelevant? They had to call ‘her’ something – gender identification is a valid part of every news story. Is trans a gender or not? Or only when it suits? Make up your minds people – if it’s irrelevant to a news story about a person, then I look forward to not hearing so much about trans rights and the constant pressure for recognition and wider acceptance. Be careful what you wish for…..
“…It said by identifying her as a transgender…”
Could you please NOT refer to trans people as transgenders. We are transgender PEOPLE. When you use the word transgender as a noun, it is dehumanising. It should only be used as an adjective eg: transgender man, transgender woman ect.
Thanks.
Hi Helen, this was a typo on our part – I have amended now. Thank you for spotting. Cheers, Josie
This a ridiculous, illiberal decision by the Press Council. The term transgender was obviously used because it’s an interesting fact, that is true.
I don’t think it was meant in a derogatory sense – not like the Courier Mail’s She Male headline that time. The story wasn’t outing her.
It was just an interesting and true fact.
Why isn’t every news outlet pulled up for referring to ‘African’ youths in crime reporting?