Transgender reporting in the British press: editorial standards and discursive harms in the post-Leveson era

Abstract

This article looks at transgender media representations from the aspect of press regulation which is so far under-researched. Placing the analysis within the fragmented post-Leveson UK press landscape, it examines the two UK press watchdogs’ provisions relating to transgender reporting. The study evaluates IPSO’s and IMPRESS’ editorial standards through the lens of queer legal theory, offering a fresh perspective on the key role of these bodies in establishing (trans)gender ‘outsiders’ and ‘insiders’ in the ongoing trans rights debate of which the press forms a key part. It is argued that, although both regulators have taken steps to tackle trans-discriminatory reporting, IMPRESS’ approach seems to strike a more constructive balance between freedom of expression and trans people’s rights than IPSO. The paper concludes by making recommendations for both press regulators to address the complexities of trans issues and tackle the discursive harm of transgender media ‘othering’ more effectively.