a day ago
Ofcom still isn't sure what a woman is
Earlier this week, GB News again found itself at odds with Ofcom. The channel had written to the broadcast regulator asking if, in light of the Supreme Court judgment affirming that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act means biological sex, it could now treat the dispute between trans-rights activists and gender-critical feminists as a 'settled' matter. 'Broadly settled' was the phrase Ofcom applied to the 'theory of anthropogenic global warming' in a guidance note issued in 2013 stating that broadcasters were no longer under an obligation to be impartial when discussing the issue. GB News wanted to know whether the regulator would extend the same latitude to debates about sex- and gender-based rights.
Incredibly, Ofcom's answer was 'no'. Indeed, it described GB News's view that the word 'woman' should be defined in reference to biological sex – and that it was acceptable to refer to athletes by their biological pronouns – as 'dogmatic propositions'. Such editorial judgments, it said, 'require nuanced decision-making'.
So, to be clear, the regulator thinks the view that man-made carbon emissions are causing global warming is so scientifically robust that broadcasters are under no obligation to present alternative opinions, but the notion that sex is binary, immutable and biological is so contentious that if GB News interviews some heretic who thinks trans women aren't women it has to interview someone alongside them who thinks they are. Presumably, that means if the channel interviews, say, Sharron Davies on why women should not have to compete against trans-identifying men in swimming competitions, it should also feature a bloke with a beard who identifies as a woman making the opposite case. Oh, and if a GB News presenter refers to said bloke as 'he/him' rather than 'she/her', he could complain to Ofcom and it would likely be upheld.
We're through the looking-glass in which television viewers are expected to believe six impossible things before breakfast. This decision is bizarre, not least because, among scientists, the claim that carbon emissions have caused the average global temperature to rise over the past 150 years is far from 'settled'. Ofcom's decision may have been influenced by the infamous 2013 paper which claimed 97 per cent of climate scientists agree that 'climate change is real, man-made and dangerous', to quote Barack Obama. But that paper itself is highly contested, with an army of climate sceptics lining up to debunk it.
My go-to document to disprove the 'settled science' claim is the World Climate Declaration, signed by almost 2,000 scientists, which points out that natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming, the growth in average global temperatures is slower than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, that CO2 is not a pollutant but essential to life on Earth, and that global warming is not causing more intense hurricanes, floods, droughts, etc. In short, the notion of a 'climate emergency' is bunkum.
I'm not arguing for putting the trans debate in the same 'settled' basket as climate change, although I admire GB News's chutzpah for suggesting it. But if either is to be regarded as beyond debate, surely it's the biological reality of sex? Until about ten minutes ago, that really was a settled issue among scientists. Now we're told it needs to be handled with kid gloves.
I suppose we should be grateful that Ofcom has at least moved away from the position its chief executive took five years ago when the regulator was a Stonewall Diversity Champion. In a discussion with the SNP MP John Nicholson, Dame Melanie Dawes agreed that it was 'extremely inappropriate' for the BBC to 'balance' the arguments of trans activists with the views of gender-critical charities like the LGB Alliance. She affirmed that for the BBC to feature 'anti-trans' voices when discussing sex- and gender–based issues was no more appropriate than including 'anti-gay' voices in a documentary about homosexuals. 'I can only agree with you,' she told Nicholson.
It seems extraordinary that the head of Ofcom should have once regarded an organisation like the LGB Alliance as beyond the pale. I imagine that's because she never left her metropolitan echo chamber, where such views are rarely challenged. But that's all the more reason for broadcasters to feature people on both sides of such debates instead of regarding one side as 'settled'. I hope Ofcom reflects on its absurd response to GB News and issues a new guidance note restoring the obligation to be impartial when discussing issues like net zero.
