Key Take-away:
· LGBT news is not adequately covered
· A person’s identity does not mean news linked to their identity is false
· Human Rights issues do not always have two equal sides
News networks’ discourse on the LGBT community has a patchy history, mostly filled with anti-LGBT messages or a complete lack in LGBT coverage. Despite the high suicide rates of LGBT teens, the anti-queer bullying that happens in schools, general discrimination, and the increased death rate of transgender people, specifically transgender people of color, the news media has struggled to adequately, and appropriately, cover these issues.
In the past few years, LGBT news coverage has increased within mainstream news media. Outlets specifically directed at LGBT people have also become more numerous and accessible. That does not mean there are not still problems in coverage and methods, far from it. LGBT issues often need to be pressed LGBT focused outlets and social media users before many bigger news outlets will cover them and once a story is picked up, a bigger question arises; “If we cover this will we look biased?”
A large part of writing or recording a news story is sourcing. When it comes to reporting on events within, or impacting, LGBT people a common “other-side” source is religious personnel. They are given room to speak in a lot of LGBT news coverage because journalists are supposed to give both sides of a story equal time to speak. While this may be important in some political debates, it does not always have a place in discussions on human rights.
This debate over objectivity and advocacy has been prominent, especially in the last six years. One such topic constantly popping up in news feeds is transgender healthcare. To represent both sides of this debate, allies and transgender individuals would be given a chance to speak on why gender-affirming healthcare is important for them and on the other side, people who want to deny transgender people this kind of care are also given a platform. This same kind of debate has happened with transgender people in sports, same-sex marriage, same-sex couple adoptions, the list continues.
What all of these debates have in common, in terms of news representation, is one side is defending their right to exist and do all they can to be who they are, and the other side fundamentally opposes their right to do so. For same-sex marriage and adoption, those people are arguing for rights that the rest of the population already has.
When one group of people is being denied rights that others are naturally given most people call that a human rights issue and do not usually give the human rights deniers the time of day. The problem with human rights issues in journalism is that people expect journalists to give both sides, no matter how wrong one may be, a platform to speak on.
In hindsight, most people in the United States are upset to see anti-civil rights activists when they learn about the Civil Rights Movement in history classes. Because of the controversy around Civil Rights at its time, journalists often did give the anti-civil rights activists time to share their opinions, sometimes without the input of Civil Rights supporters. Today, most people would not have an issue with a Civil Rights supporter sharing their story and opinions without also giving time to a racist.
The same is not currently true for LGBT people. If transgender or queer news in general is covered by a news outlet, a homophobic or transphobic person is given just as much space to speak as the LGBT person. When this is not the case journalists are often accused of putting their personal bias into a story. While it is important to be transparent in these stories and situations, the reporter’s identity does not mean the story is any less truthful.
In my personal experience, journalists who belong to the communities they write about often give that community adequate and more rounded coverage than a non-member. LGBT people understand LGBT issues better than anyone just as BIPOC understand BIPOC issues more thoroughly and women know women’s issues. It would be odd to see a white journalist report on their experience with systemic racism or a man report on the “luxury” tax placed on period products. Why would heterosexual or cisgender people have more of a right to cover LGBT issues than the folks who are being effected?
Cover Image Credit: "yarnbombing for lgbt* rights" by distelfliege is marked with CC BY 2.0.