Discussing the British Press, and I'm reminded of the time when I had a moderate amount of celebrity in the UK LGBT community, and the press tried to do a hit piece on me.
Now here's the thing. There's a cheat code, and I'm going to explain what it is:
They will contact you for comment.
If you say nothing, they will publish the piece and say you were offered the chance to comment.
If you tell them to fuck off, they will publish the price and say your response was foul and unprintable.
I did neither of these things. I told them that this piece wasn't journalism. It was ridiculous tittle tattle and represented everything that was wrong with a failing and dying industry more obsessed with clickbait than proper reporting. I asked them if they didn't have proper news to report, and said that they should be ashamed of themselves.
They're basically screwed at that point. "We contacted Ms Brown for comment and she said that this was ridiculous tittle tattle and that the reporter should be ashamed of herself."
They're not gonna say that.
I'm struck by something one of my history teachers once said about medieval castles. They weren't meant to be impregnable. They were meant to be annoying enough that an invading army would decide to investigate other priorities instead.
The piece never ran.
If you're a trans person in the crosshairs of the British press, make yourself an annoying target. They're on a deadline, and if you make them conclude that life is too short, they will leave you the fuck alone.
Seems to me they're not screwed at all, as they can either flat out lie or hedge with, "did not reply to our question by press time."
Which is technically true: even if you replied to their email, if your response didn't answer their question, then they can simply say you didn't answer their question.
Sadly, the only real solution to this problem is for the general public to move to better press outfits, which is an issue coming and going, the lack of better press outfits PLUS a public that kind of likes the rubbish.
