The Nolan team based in Belfast are a group of BBC journalists well used to asking awkward questions. Nolan looks at the influence Stonewall has in public institutions across the UK. This 18 month investigation has already had significant impact behind the scenes in major public institutions. The podcast is the story of how it all unfolded.
A team of volunteers at Fair Play For Women have transcribed the main content from each of the ten episodes spanning over 6 hours of audio content. You can listen to the full audio here or read the condensed transcript below.
Episode 2: Stonewall’s Schemes and the BBC.
How the BBC signed up to Stonewall’s Allies and Workplace Equality Index schemes.
“The BBC’s position is that we accept that Stonewall, as the experts in workplace equality for LGBTQ+ people, work with most large employers. And what is true there is likely to be true at the BBC.” [BBC statement].
That is a huge statement! That’s one of the biggest statements of this podcast. So in that one line that’s that manager from the BBC emphatically stating Stonewall are, quote, “the experts”.
Yes, and it literally says the BBC’s position is that we accept that Stonewall as THE experts in workplace equality for LGBTQ+ people. The BBC’s position is that Stonewall are the experts.
Have you seen the Workplace Equality Index? Stonewall have created a league table, and all of these companies around the UK are trying to climb up this league table in order to say to the public, that you’re LGBTQ friendly, right?
There’s one way you can get further up the league table and that’s to do things that Stonewall wants you to do.
How on Earth are they in a situation where they’re publicly openly saying they want to impress Stonewall?
How is that healthy for the BBC? What about the other lobby groups on behalf of gay rights that disagree with Stonewall? What about all of the gay people in this country who disagree with what Stonewall believe is in the interests of the gay people they represent? Like, how is this healthy?
So in a nutshell, Stonewall are marking the homework of all of these bodies and basically saying to them. Well, look, it didn’t do quite well enough to have that coveted place higher up our league table, but by the way, we will sell you courses so that you can climb up them.
Not only are the public bodies paying a lobby group to be marked by a lobby group, but then this lobby group is also saying, well, you’re not doing well enough. Pay us some money and we’ll tell you how to get up higher next year.
[00:04:13.450] – David Thompson
The Nolan Show wanted to know if there had been any conversations or dates or arrangements between the BBC and Stonewall behind the scenes. How is the BBC not compromised if on the one hand, it is trying to win approval from Stonewall and climb up its Equality Index league table and being marked by Stonewall, while at the same time needing to have enough editorial independence to investigate it. Will the BBC fall down that league table, for example, because of our podcast? Did Stonewall have any role in the creation of our new LGBT and gender identity correspondent jobs? Here’s a question. Is the language the BBC uses BBC language or Stonewall’s recommended language? We’ve been digging for this information for months. Way back in December 2020 we got a knockback from the BBC.
[00:05:58.630] – David Thompson
Absolutely. There’s no other organisation that’s just said no, you can’t have this. So we’ve went to governments. We’ve went to arms length bodies linked to governments or public bodies. Nobody has said no. The Northern Ireland Civil Service tried to redact a bit. We appealed it, and then they changed their mind. They used the commercial interest argument to redact some scores on the Workplace Equality Index. The BBC had refused to release any of it. Basically, it’s the conversation between them and Stonewall every year. But you have to look at the relationship between the BBC and Stonewall and how this started, because the reason we’re doing this podcast was because I saw something on the BBC staff website, which made me think where’s that coming from. So there’s a statement on their page which said it was about the BBC ally scheme. We know about ally scheme, and this one line struck me. “Interventions made by non LGBTQ+ people as they are not done out of self interest can have a greater impact than if raised by LGBTQ+ staff themselves”.
[00:06:58.970] – Stephen Nolan
So here we have the BBC issuing a UK-wide initiative across the organisation. And is it a coincidence that it was taken from a Stonewall policy document?
[00:08:53.150] – David Thompson
We can reveal for the first time why the BBC had driven this policy throughout the organisation. In an extraordinary twist, Stonewall has told us this was actually from an old document of theirs.
[00:09:23.750] – David Thompson
So whenever I asked the BBC manager (beep), which is the diversity inclusion Department, you’ll hear a lot about in this podcast, (beep) responded to me saying the statement you’re querying has been taken directly from Stonewall, who, as you will be aware, I’m sure work with most large employers and from their experience have produced an Allies Guide for employers.
[00:09:42.110] – Stephen Nolan
So the BBC are not explaining to you when you’re asking them why the policy is logical or how it’s logical. They’re just automatically defaulting to, well, Stonewall like it so therefore we like it.
[00:09:55.370] – David Thompson
Yeah they’ve basically cited Stonewall and I put it to them: perhaps the thing to do then was when they’re telling BBC staff about this, it should be attributed to Stonewall rather than the BBC.
[00:10:38.870] – David Thompson
And that’s where it comes down to the key line where, in an attempt to defend using this line, they say:
[00:10:46.970] – BBC Spokesperson
“The BBC’s position is that we accept that Stonewall, as the experts in workplace equality for LGBTQ+ people, work with most large employers. And what is true there is likely to be true at the BBC.”
[00:11:01.830] – Stephen Nolan
That is a huge statement. That’s one of the biggest statements of this podcast. So in that one line that’s that manager from the BBC emphatically stating Stonewall are, quote, “the experts”.
[00:11:15.810] – David Thompson
And it literally says the BBC’s position is that we accept that Stonewall as THE experts in workplace equality for LGBTQ+ people. The BBC’s position is that Stonewall are the experts.
[00:11:34.630] – Stephen Nolan
Here’s. Benjamin Cohen, CEO of PinkNews.
Is it helpful to LGBT people full stop to have these schemes? Are they actually advancing?
[00:13:13.690] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
I wouldn’t say that they’re unhelpful. So it depends on the context. So in a large employer it’s probably a good thing to have some sort of scheme, and it’s also a way of that including people. So for allies to feel part of things like Pride and things like that. So I think broadly it’s a positive. I definitely can’t see that as a negative.
[00:13:37.810] – Stephen Nolan
Well, here’s a possible negative if you’ve only got one ally scheme within the organisation and there are gay people who happen to disagree with that particular thrust of that particular ally scheme. This is not just homogenising gay people, as if they all think in the one way.
[00:13:54.610] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
I’m not sure it is. I think that you can choose if you’re LGBT, whether you want to participate in something. You might choose not. If an employer has an LGBT+ network or have, I don’t know the BBC it’s called LGBTQ+ network, you might choose not to be part of it for personal reasons.
[00:14:12.970] – Stephen Nolan
The BBC wouldn’t put anybody up from the Diversity and Inclusion Department for interview, nor would they put anybody else up from within the entire organisation. This is an organisation which actually exists on the basis that people come and answer questions. When it was a question about the BBC, absolutely nobody available. The BBC did not directly answer all of the specific questions we put to them. Instead, they issued the following statement from a BBC spokesperson.
[00:14:47.170] – BBC Spokesperson
“The BBC acts independently in all our aspects of our operations, from HR policy to editorial guidelines and content. We aim to be industry leading on workforce inclusion and take advice from a range of external organisations. However, we make the final decision on any BBC policies or practises ourselves. We are not a member of Stonewall. We do not take legal advice from Stonewall and we do not subscribe to Stonewall’s campaigning. The charity simply provides advice that we are able to consider. As a broadcaster, we have our own values and editorial standards. These are clearly set out and published in our editorial guidelines. We are also governed by the Royal Charter and the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.
[00:15:31.610] – Stephen Nolan
On the 30th of January 2020, the BBC told all its staff that they were-
[00:15:38.330] – BBC Statement
Really pleased Stonewall have recognised the work we have been doing over the last year to advance LGBTQ+ inclusion at the BBC.
[00:15:50.450] – Stephen Nolan
The BBC went even further, telling all its staff just how much of an intimate relationship it had with this controversial lobby group.
[00:16:00.110] – BBC Statement
We will be working closely with Stonewall over the coming months in preparation for next year’s index.
[00:16:07.490] – Stephen Nolan
Can the BBC name any other lobby group which it would be working closely with?
[00:16:17.850] – Stephen Nolan
We feel it’s in the public interest to disclose to you what staff in the BBC are being told within a BBC allies training meeting. We think we have enough evidence to ask a question as to whether the BBC’s training behind the scenes because the public don’t get to see this is biased. Now, is the bias apparent when the BBC’s training is using a Genderbread Person to give its staff one particular view on sex and gender? How is this not biased? Because some groups, like LGB Alliance for example, fundamentally reject the whole premise that is portrayed in the Genderbread Person, and yet the BBC is using it in their training. None of the LGB Alliance or other people who objected, none of that is discussed. Let’s have a listen.
[00:17:14.250] – Training session speaker
Okay, next slide, please. So this is what’s called the Genderbread Person. So this is quite a nice way of explaining gender, and it can help us understand a bit more about it visually, if you look at gender identity, so that points at the brain. And this is how we in our heads define our gender, and it is based on how much we align or don’t align with what we understand to be the options for gender. It means that it doesn’t always correlate with sex that we are assigned at birth. So if I go on to biological sex, this is a physical sexual characteristic you’re born with, though this could include your genitalia, your body shape, your hormones, so that it’s very much the biological side. And then expression. This is the line that goes around the whole of the Genderbread Person. So expression is the way we sort of present our gender. So this would be our actions, the way we dress or mannerisms, and how we sort of interpret those against gender norms.
[00:18:19.890] – Stephen Nolan
What is the Genderbread Person, Thompson?
[00:18:22.650] – David Thompson
Genderbread Person is a graphic that’s been used by different organisations like Stonewall, and it’s literally like a gingerbread man, but it’s called a Genderbread Person. It points to different parts of this Genderbread Person that talks about their identity, that’s in the brain, the attraction is in the heart, on the external there’s gender expression and sex. And it gives definitions of how these things are spectrums.
[00:18:51.990] – Stephen Nolan
So where’s the disagreement than that? Why would anybody disagree with the Genderbread Person?
[00:18:56.670] – David Thompson
Well, if you’re like the LGB Alliance and you don’t believe that gender identity is real, that it’s a real tangible thing, then you wouldn’t agree with staff and organisations being told actually, everyone’s got this gender identity.
[00:19:12.510] – Stephen Nolan
Why are we talking about this? Ring up the LGB Alliance. Malcolm [Clarke], how are you? Malcolm have you seen this online graphic of the Genderbread Person?
[00:19:29.370] – Malcolm Clark
I have, indeed, it’s become infamous.
[00:19:33.150] – David Thompson
And what do you make of it? What’s your position on the message within it essentially?
[00:19:38.250] – Malcolm Clark
Oh I mean it’s ridiculous, I mean it basically is telling children and teachers that everyone has a gender identity. If you look at it in detail, it contains complete nonsense. I mean at one stage. I think the last time I looked at it, it said that some people are born male or female. 99.99% of people are born male or female. It’s absolutely absurd. We don’t believe that people have gender identities. We believe that the vast majority of people are male or female 100%. If they weren’t, you know, the human species would have disappeared long ago.
[00:20:17.730] – Stephen Nolan
How would you feel Malcolm if the BBC was using that Genderbread Person as part of training for wider staff?
[00:20:26.190] – Malcolm Clark
I mean, if that was true, it would be appalling, it would suggest that an institution that is known across the world for the quality of its actual television had somehow allowed idiots to take over its own internal education.
[00:20:41.910] – Stephen Nolan
Well now, you know, you’re being pejorative. You’re describing people as idiots. I’m trying to keep this respectful. And this is about BBC impartiality giving you and them a fair crack of the whip.
[00:20:55.170] – Malcolm Clark
Yes, but unfortunately, if the BBC doesn’t realise that 99.9% of human beings are biologically male or female, and if they’re teaching inside the BBC that that’s not true. Okay, I would say it was an idiotic thing to teach. Maybe the people who are doing it aren’t idiots, but the content is idiotic. And if any science producer within the BBC worth their salt will tell you that.
[00:21:25.950] – Stephen Nolan
Okay, pretty clear. Malcolm, think we know where you stand on that one.
[00:21:31.110] – Stephen Nolan
So that’s what we’re talking about. The debates around sex and gender is what this is all about. Stonewall on one side of that, there’s the other side of it. And yet the Genderbread Person has been used in training sessions in the BBC
[00:21:45.750] – David Thompson
Undisputed. Unchallenged.
[00:21:47.670] – Stephen Nolan
Yeah, there was no other perspective given in that training session. And why would there be? Because when ally schemes are set up, they’re set up with training from Stonewall.
[00:22:20.690] – David Thompson
Have you seen the Workplace Equality Index?
[00:22:25.010] – Stephen Nolan
Let me see if I’m getting this right. Stonewall have created a league table, and all of these companies around the UK are trying to climb up this league table in order to say to the public, that you’re LGBTQ friendly, right?
[00:22:41.150] – David Thompson
Yeah. It’s like a stamp of approval to say, look, we’re really good for LGBT employees. So some of the documents we’re getting in, we’re seeing like public bodies who are setting it as one of their goals, their strategies to get further up the league table. But there’s one way you can get further up the league table and that’s to do things that Stonewall wants you to do. Stonewall are a charity. But they’re also a lobby group. And they’re a lobby group that have controversial positions on certain things that lots of public sector employees might disagree with.
[00:23:12.590] – Stephen Nolan
The BBC is keen to climb up that league table in the same way that the BBC would be asking itself very very serious questions. If it was trying to climb up some type of league table that the Conservative Party had created, the top 100 organisations that the Tories like. The top 100 organisations that the Labour Party thinks are good companies in the UK. The BBC would run a mile from that. They would go nowhere near it because it would question their impartiality. So how on Earth are they in a situation where they’re publicly openly saying they want to impress Stonewall?
[00:24:00.590] – David Thompson
Or like a woman’s rights group? And like, you can imagine the mess they would get themselves into with that if they picked one group over another, because obviously every group has different lobbying aims and different policies that they pursue. And there’s this kind of presumption that all lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender people must think like Stonewall if they think that Stonewall are the people that can fairly judge all of us.
[00:24:28.110] – Stephen Nolan
But if the BBC is de facto accepting that Stonewall are the experts, then in order to get up Stonewall’s little chart of ranking, then they’ve got to do what Stonewall tells them.
[00:24:41.970] – Stephen Nolan
How is that healthy for the BBC? What about the other lobby groups on behalf of gay rights that disagree with Stonewall? What about all of the gay people in this country who disagree with what Stonewall believe is in the interests of the gay people they represent? Like, how is this healthy?
[00:25:08.110] – Stephen Nolan
The BBC didn’t give us the documents we were asking for as part of our investigation. Those documents were the submissions they made to Stonewall to help them get up Stonewall’s league table, in other words, that Workplace Equality Index. But other organisations did, like the Northern Civil Service. The information on those documents was really interesting. We could see the scores Stonewall were giving out and we could see Stonewall’s feedback. And even more Interestingly, we could see what Stonewall we’re trying to sell.
[00:25:44.950] – David Thompson
One bit that really stuck out for me was at the bottom of every page of feedback they have offers, so civil servants could go to London to a conference and the tickets are priced at 349 plus VAT.
[00:25:58.210] – Stephen Nolan
So in a nutshell, Stonewall are marking the homework of all of these bodies and basically saying to them. Well, look, it didn’t do quite well enough to have that coveted place higher up our league table, but by the way, we will sell you courses so that you can climb up them.
[00:26:21.250] – David Thompson
Not only are the public bodies paying a lobby group to be marked by a lobby group, but then this lobby group is also saying, well, you’re not doing well enough. Pay us some money and we’ll tell you how to get up higher next year.
[00:26:34.030] – Stephen Nolan
How is there not an obvious conflict of interest? Insofar as if Stonewall were to mark a company immediately, highly, then that company would not possibly need to buy courses from Stonewall. And therefore it would be a financial disadvantage to Stonewall to mark someone immediately high. Whether that happens or not we have no evidence, but it’s the perception of this. Sometimes perception is also what’s important. And here’s the reality. The reality is that organisations that surely should have their own momentum to do the right thing are farming that process out to Stonewall, and then what they’re doing is they’re being marked by a company who will sell them courses, which will help them move further up that scheme. How is that not an obvious conflict of interest?
[00:28:13.990] – Stephen Nolan
Just a quick explainer. You’ll hear a lot in this podcast about schemes run by Stonewall. There are two that we’re looking at. First, there’s the Diversity Champions scheme, that’s a scheme that organisations pay for and Stonewall will provide support and advice for those organisations on staffing issues and diversity. Organisations can promote themselves as Stonewall Diversity Champions. And then secondly, there’s the Workplace Equality Index. Now that’s a public ranking of organisations and there is no fee to enter. Organisations will submit evidence to Stonewall and Stonewall will mark them on how they’re doing on LGBTQ+ equality according to Stonewall’s criteria. That’s the key. It’s according to Stonewall’s criteria. You don’t have to pay to be in the Diversity Champions scheme. They apply to be publicly listed on the Workplace Equality Index. But what you do have to do is please Stonewall in order to be scored high enough to reach their Top 100 list. Here’s the Labour MP, Rosie Duffield.
[00:29:23.470] – Rosie Duffield MP
A lot of organisations have left the Stonewall Champions Scheme. We sort of hear more and more names added to that list every day. They’ll say in public that it was costing a lot of money because that’s another issue. If they’re accountable to their customers and their shareholders, they’ve got to justify spending this amount of money on what is essentially a lobby group. And I think, to be fair to those companies, they probably did it in good faith. They probably thought we’re getting this equality and inclusion advice and it’s really great and these people are Champions. And if they’re going on Stonewall’s history, of course, they’ve been a great campaigning organisation, but this is lobbying at the end of the day.
[00:29:59.710] – Stephen Nolan
Benjamin Cohen, CEO of PinkNews. So how is it not a conflict of interest for the same company that is charging to train you to get a higher score, scores you in the first place?
[00:30:13.030] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
I appreciate that. But there’s actually quite a few private businesses that are doing activities not dissimilar, who also run lists of the top 100 executives. Nothing to do with Stonewall, and there’s lists, there’s all sorts of-
[00:30:26.770] – Stephen Nolan
We’re talking about Stonewall here.
[00:30:28.030] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
No, I know, but what I’m saying is that those companies also offer training services, support services, that are actually competitive to Stonewall. So the arena that Stonewell is operating in that is actually quite competitive. So I am both a critic, I suppose, or like friendly critic of Stonewall, but we also, from a business perspective, we are offering not those services, but other things. For example, we run the PinkNews Awards. Stonewall used to run the Stonewall Awards. At the time that they both existed we were competing for both the same speakers and the same sponsors. So it’s not that Stonewall has never been in this space where there is competitors, and it’s not the only player in there. But I do accept-
[00:31:10.930] – Stephen Nolan
It’s a dominant player. This Equality Index, when you look at the type of companies that are trying to climb up that league table.
[00:31:17.530] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
Yes, I agree with that. But there’s quite a lot of notable companies who have either climbed up the league table and decided to no longer enter themselves because they feel that they are in a good position, or other companies who are quite notable in their absence. So if we think about some of the large American social media and digital media companies, they’re not included in that. But we know that they have fantastic provisions for LGBT staff, so it’s certainly not mandatory. I don’t believe, I haven’t actually checked the last one, but I don’t believe, for example, like Google or Twitter were in there, but I know they have really, and Facebook, they have really good policies.
[00:31:50.950] – Stephen Nolan
Let’s take an example. The BBC is trying to climb up that league table.
[00:31:56.470] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
Yeah, no, agreed. There is a legitimate question to say, does the BBC need to expand time on entering that? But as a licence fee payer, I have a lot of questions about the things that the BBC decides to do.
[00:32:10.690] – Stephen Nolan
But isn’t that separate then?
[00:32:12.790] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
No, I’m not sure it is. The reason why I’m not sure it’s separate because being in the Stonewall Equality Index doesn’t cost any money but it does cost time. So if an organisation decides that it wants to spend its time doing that, that is kind of up to them.
[00:32:27.670] – Stephen Nolan
But it does cost money to be part of the Diversity Champions scheme, which will help you go up the Workplace Equality Index because that’s where Stonewall will advise you. They’ll give you the policies that they think you should put in place.
[00:32:40.810] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
The Equality Index is 100 companies, and on that 850 employers that aren’t members of the Diversity Champions scheme. So you’ve only got a one in 8.5 chance of even being included if you’re looking just on an odds perspective. So I’m not sure that they are actually suggesting that you can get up the index if you are paying them as a member. Because if they are it’s not a very good deal because the vast majority of the companies of the organisations are paying aren’t on that.
[00:33:07.930] – Stephen Nolan
The companies pay to be part of the Diversity Champion Scheme and then Stonewall gives the advice and then they’re marked on whether or not they meet the criteria that Stonewall set out.
[00:33:18.310] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
How many organisations are members of the Stonewall Diversity Champions game? I believe it’s about 850. But. There’s 100 places on the Workplace Equality Index. So what happens to the other 750 employers? So I’m saying that by joining one scheme doesn’t mean you get on the other. And are you sure that every single one of the 100 employees who are on the Workplace Equality Index have paid?
[00:33:41.710] – Stephen Nolan
But Stonewall rank those companies way beyond the 100. The 100 is published.
[00:33:45.610] – Benjamin Cohen – Pink News
No, I understand that. But the only ones that we see publicly are the top 100 and there are breakdowns. So they used to do like the top ten banking and things like that. But the question I would ask, I suggest journalistically one would want to look at, is there a direct correlation? So for example, I don’t know, I haven’t invested time and we certainly don’t have the same resources as the BBC to be looking into things like this, whether every single one of the 100 employers that are in the Workplace Equality Index, the last one, are actually paying Diversity Champion subscribers. If there’s only 100 places that are public, it’s just a mathematical impossibility that every member would be featured in the top 100.
[00:34:30.380] – Stephen Nolan
The BBC did not make anyone from its Diversity and Inclusion Department available for interview. They also didn’t address a series of specific questions we asked them. They docked the questions.
[00:34:43.810] – BBC Statement
We are not a member of Stonewall. We do not take legal advice from Stonewall and we do not subscribe to Stonewall’s campaigning. The charity simply provides advice that we are able to consider.
[00:34:54.130] – Stephen Nolan
Stonewall wouldn’t put anyone up for interview. They didn’t directly answer any of the 50 or more questions we asked them. Here’s what they said in a statement.
[00:35:05.830] – Stonewall Statement
At Stonewall we’re fighting for a world where all lesbian, gay, bi, trans and queer people are free to thrive as themselves. In 2021 we know that LGBTQ+ people are still held back because of who we are. Our research shows that more than a third, 35%, of LGBTQ+ people have hidden their identity at work for fear of discrimination. We also know that one in five LGBTQ+ staff, 18%, have been the target of negative comments or conduct from work colleagues in the last year because they are LGBTQ+ and one in eight trans people, 12%, have been physically attacked by customers or colleagues in the last year for being trans. This situation is unacceptable, and we’re incredibly proud to work with organisations around the world to better support their lesbian, gay, bi, trans and queer staff. Our guidance to employers supports them to understand the needs of their LGBTQ+ employees and create an inclusive workplace culture through their policies and wider activity. When it comes to inclusive workplace policies, our guidance follows the simple principles that workplace policies should apply to all employees regardless of their gender or the gender of their partner, and they should use language that makes it clear to LGBTQ+ employees that they are included.
[00:36:44.330] – David Thompson
The BBC, unlike any other major broadcaster in this country, is paid for directly by the public through a licence fee. If people are paying into an organisation like this through effectively a tax, of course, those people are entitled to transparency about the arrangements that organisation has, particularly when it’s with a lobby group, a lobby group that’s seen by many of those people as controversial.
[00:37:10.490] – Stephen Nolan
The integrity of the licence fee is built upon every person that pays for it gets an impartial service from the BBC. That’s why I believe this podcast is so so important.
[00:37:23.030] – David Thompson
The real risk for the BBC in this is that there’s a bit of a culture war going on in the UK, which is not dissimilar to what’s happened in America. And if people feel or enough, people feel that the BBC is on one side of that debate like you hear this allegation all the time that the BBC is “woke”. If we have close relationships with organisations like Stonewall, if we are paying money to them, how is that going to help the perception of our impartiality? Some people are going to think, oh yeah, they are woke. They will just associate us with Stonewall and everything Stonewall believe in. And it’s always about the perception. Whether the reality is that the BBC has been massively influenced by Stonewall or not, the public’s perception will be that the two organisations work together. It’s just about trust and confidence in us as impartial broadcasters.
[00:38:15.170] – Stephen Nolan
This is how impartial the BBC is. It is the licence fee paying for us to ask tough questions of the BBC. That’s how impartial we are. We have the freedom to do so. We have the support of the BBC to do so. When you’re wondering if the BBC has intent on impartiality every day of the week, it does. But I guess we’re just questioning whether that’s being played out in actual practice with Stonewall. So in this episode, we’ve just heard how the BBC pushed a Stonewall-inspired allies programme in which they said straight people might be better listened to. But the twist was that it was from an old Stonewall document that even Stonewall said, was outdated. We’ve heard how the BBC were trying to climb up Stonewall’s index, and coming up in the next episode, we get to the heart of one of the most contested topics in the whole sex gender debate. Self ID. Can a biological male suddenly declare themselves a woman with no process? And should nonbinary people be recognised in law?
Want to read more? The transcripts for all 10 episodes are available
Nolan investigates: Stonewall. Episode 2: Stonewall’s Schemes and the BBC
Nolan investigates: Stonewall. Episode 3: Self-ID and Gender Identity
Nolan investigates: Stonewall. Episode 4: Being non-binary in the UK
Nolan investigates: Stonewall. Episode 5 – A gender clinic insider speaks out