Read on Twitter
1./ Great piece by @jameskirkup about the unbelievably shoddy BBC article on puberty blockers by @BenInLDN. I never saw the pressing need for an LGBT correspondent. But if we’re going to pay for one let them understand basic editorial standards. https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1341697833154588672
2./ Why would you fail to interview a single medical or psychiatric expert on adolescence or puberty blockers while interviewing a controversial GP who in his own cringe-making recent YouTube video admits he is no expert. At least ..DOCTOR Harrop wasn’t lying about that. 
3./ How could any journalist watch this plonker and not spot he’s trying to sound knowledgeable about blockers while reading a script (badly). Do his darting eyes suggest to you he has any more grasp of the subject than the average pompous blowhard?
4./ It’s a basic requirement of journalism you can assess the qualifications and competence of someone you interview. Wouldn’t you wonder at the credentials of someone who arranges their books by the colour of their cover? I would.
6./ That was bad enough. To mention suicide 7 times & imply it’s somehow inevitable among those not given blockers breaches all guidelines. The impact of media coverage of suicide is well-attested. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207262/
7./ The only way you could quote the dodgy Webberley outfit @GenderGP and not mention she and her hubby were struck off for breaching the guidelines on puberty blockers is if you were intending to write a biased. misleading article, or didn’t bother to do basic research.
8./ Read the BBC article while you can. It can’t be long for this world. And once it’s gone ...it’s maybe time the BBC got itself a new LGBT correspondent too. And get a journalist next time. A real one. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-55369784
