Today's @ObserverUK editorial position statement is a journalistic nonsense - an affirmation of a controversial court outcome as opinion rather than reporting.
Further it affirms some flagrant scientific errors which the court could not possibly decide on the evidence available.
Further it affirms some flagrant scientific errors which the court could not possibly decide on the evidence available.
The reason why this matters as a position statement from the @ObserverUK rather than a piece of journalism is it indicates their unwillingness to report on or question (for instance) the significance of an ADF expert witness w no expertise in trans health. https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/12/13/alliance-defending-freedom-developed-stable-anti-lgbt-expert-witnesses
Prof Paul Hruz' speculations in his expert witness about possible alternative courses for young people undergoing trans healthcare run right through the rationale for the judgement, and yet his own university disclaimed his expertise in this area.
https://www.boom.lgbt/index.php/news-a/98-localnews/1869-trans-community-protests-university-pediatric-professor
https://www.boom.lgbt/index.php/news-a/98-localnews/1869-trans-community-protests-university-pediatric-professor
Where are the journalists and WHY ARE THEY NOT DOING JOURNALISM?