Public debate surrounding sex and gender identity rights is often presented in news reporting as a battle between two equal and opposing forces, pulling on the same rope in opposite directions. While this framing can vividly capture the intensity of feeling among different groups, it risks reinforcing a false equivalence in editorial policy and practice.
False equivalence occurs when factual, evidence-based positions are framed as no more valid than strongly held opinions, simply to create an appearance of balance. This editorial mindset can unintentionally diminish the importance of verified facts, particularly where legal definitions, such as the Supreme Court’s clarification that “sex” refers to biological sex under the Equality Act 2010, are concerned.
DRAFT: Reporting on Sex and Gender Identity GUIDE
The guidance set out in this post is designed to help community reporters avoid such false equivalences. It emphasises the need for due accuracy, due impartiality, and responsible editorial judgment, ensuring that audiences are informed fairly, clearly, and without distortion.
1. Introduction
- The role of community media reporters is to foster informed, fair, and responsible public discussion. This is especially vital when covering sensitive and controversial topics such as matters arising from the UK Supreme Court’s recent judgment that, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, “sex” refers to biological sex.
- The judgment highlighted that language in law and statute must be consistent, purposeful, and understandable in ordinary terms. As community broadcasters operating under the Ofcom Broadcast Code, we have a responsibility to report accurately and impartially, providing clear distinctions between substantiated facts and unsubstantiated allegations, without stifling legitimate debate or falling into the trap of false equivalence.
- This blog sets out principles to help community reporters navigate this responsibility. Further discussion and clarification will be required to ensure that the general principles are expressed clearly and accurately, while noting how they can be developed in practice.
2. Principles for Reporting
2.1 Accuracy and Clarity in Terminology
- When reporting on legal matters or statutory definitions, use precise language.
- Refer to “sex” as meaning biological sex when discussing legal rights, policies, or protections under the Equality Act.
- Distinguish carefully between “sex” (biological classification) and “gender identity” (personal or social identity). Avoid conflating the two.
2.2 Ground Reporting in Verifiable Facts
- Anchor all reporting on primary sources such as court judgments, official policies, or directly cited expert analysis.
- Where facts are clear and settled (e.g., the legal definition of sex), they should be reported without ambiguity.
- When claims are made that contest the judgment or its implications, report them as such, noting their contested status.
2.3 Avoid False Equivalence
- Do not treat all opinions as equally substantiated.
- Present well-supported facts (such as the legal definition of sex) with appropriate authority.
- Clearly identify when statements or claims are opinions, unverified, or subject to ongoing dispute.
- Ensure that editorial balance reflects the weight of evidence, not merely the presence of differing viewpoints.
2.4 Impartiality in Coverage
- Represent a range of significant viewpoints proportionately and fairly, without editorialising or favouring one side.
- Quote sources directly and allow audiences to hear voices from different perspectives without selective editing.
- Recognise that impartiality does not mean giving equal time or weight to every viewpoint, especially when one side is significantly more supported by evidence or the law.
2.5 Responsibility When Handling Activist Claims
- Treat claims made by activist groups or campaigners as positions to be tested, not facts to be accepted uncritically.
- Request evidence for any factual claims and independently verify where possible.
- Make it clear when claims cannot be independently verified, and state this explicitly to your audience.
2.6 Transparency About Disputed Matters
- Where public debate is ongoing or where the legal, social, or scientific position remains contested, say so clearly.
- Avoid giving an impression of consensus where none exists, but also avoid presenting minority views as equivalent to settled facts.
2.7 Use Understandable Language
- Follow the Supreme Court’s direction that language should be clear, purposeful, and consistent with ordinary usage.
- Avoid jargon, ideological terms, or ambiguous phrases unless necessary — and always explain them clearly if used.
2.8 Editorial Independence and Responsibility
- Recognise that editorial policies and processes are intended to inform the public, not suppress debate.
- Encourage open discussion while maintaining standards of fairness, accuracy, and respect for the law.
- Protect community media’s credibility by demonstrating consistent, principled editorial judgment.
3 Understanding ‘Due’ Accuracy and Impartiality
3.1 What ‘Due’ Means
- Under the Ofcom Broadcast Code, news and factual programming must be reported with “due” accuracy and impartiality. The term “due” recognises that not all perspectives have equal evidential weight, and that editorial decisions must be appropriate to the nature, significance, and context of the subject matter.
- Due accuracy means that facts must be correct and properly sourced, with the level of accuracy appropriate to the importance of the issue.
- Due impartiality means that broadcasters must not favour one side unduly, but also must not treat all opinions as equally valid when the evidence clearly supports one view over others.
- In short, “due” introduces editorial judgment. It is intended to protect journalists from false demands for artificial neutrality or equal treatment of every claim, while also ensuring fairness and accuracy in serious public matters.
3.2 Editorial Direction and Organisational Stance
- It is important to recognise that “due” editorial direction may also be used by broadcast organisations to defend a pre-determined editorial stance. Larger broadcasters may, for example, justify certain narrative framings as being “due” to the weight of evidence or the public interest.
- Community media reporters should be mindful that while the concept of “due” protects against unreasonable demands for false balance, it may also be shaped by an organisation’s editorial values. Reporters must remain vigilant in maintaining personal integrity, ensuring that editorial standards are applied consistently and fairly, rather than being used to shield bias.
3.3 Difference from Newspapers and Online Publishers
- It is also crucial to note that Ofcom’s requirements for “due” accuracy and impartiality apply only to licensed broadcasters — including community radio, TV, and some on-demand platforms.
Newspapers, magazines, blogs, and general online publishers are not subject to the same legal standard of “due” impartiality. They may editorialise freely, provided they comply with general legal obligations (e.g., libel law). - Thus, community media reporters must uphold a higher standard of editorial fairness and accuracy than much of the print or online media. This distinction must be understood clearly when preparing and presenting material for broadcast.
4 Fitting Within Ofcom Duties
- This approach aligns directly with the duties for broadcasters set out in the Ofcom Broadcast Code, including:
- Rule 5.1: News must be reported with due accuracy and presented with due impartiality.
- Rule 5.2: Significant mistakes must be corrected quickly and appropriately.
- Rules 5.11 and 5.12: Coverage of controversial public matters must include an appropriately wide range of significant views, given due weight.
- Rule 5.13: Personal views must be clearly signposted and distinguished from news.
- Community media organisations, by following these principles, can ensure that they facilitate robust, meaningful discussion while fulfilling their legal and ethical duties to the public.
5 Final Note
Community reporters are not required to take sides in public controversies. They are required to be clear, be fair, be accurate, and be responsible. Upholding these standards will strengthen the vital role of community media as a trusted platform for civic dialogue and public engagement.