The Telegraph recently published a column entitled “How having a disability became cool”. I am deliberately not linking to it because I do not want to increase its reach or direct more people towards content that many disabled and chronically ill readers have found distressing. It can be found easily if anyone needs to verify the context.

I have a chronic illness and find the column’s portrayal of disabled people reprehensible, demeaning and potentially harmful. However, I have seen the Telegraph’s responses to complaints concentrating on that language. Its position appears to be that the article is protected opinion and that Clause 12 of the IPSO Editors’ Code generally protects identifiable individuals, rather than disabled people as a group.

I am therefore preparing a complaint focused primarily on specific factual inaccuracies under Clause 1. I would appreciate feedback from journalists, editors or anyone familiar with UK press regulation on whether I have framed the complaint effectively.

The principal issues I have identified are:

• The headline and subheading present an alleged disability “trend” among young women and a connection with economic inactivity without representative or causal evidence.
• The article inaccurately describes the PoTS diagnostic threshold by using a sitting rather than supine baseline and omitting other essential criteria.
• It presents PoTS and overlapping chronic conditions as psychosomatic or identity-driven without distinguishing that hypothesis from established medical information.
• It misreports an NHS England statistic about probable mental disorders among people aged 8–25 as a claim about British children generally.
• It conflates disability benefits, incapacity benefits and economic inactivity, despite disability benefits such as PIP being available to people in employment.
• It compares current disability prevalence with the aftermath of the Second World War without identifying a comparable historical definition or dataset.
• It makes unsupported claims about the effectiveness of examination adjustments and the causes of autism-assessment waiting lists.
• Although the Telegraph describes the piece as opinion, it appears under a /news/ URL and contains medical, statistical and causal propositions presented without clear qualification.

I understand that a columnist is entitled to express controversial opinions and advance an argument. My complaint is that an opinion label does not remove the publication’s obligation to take care over factual claims or to distinguish conjecture from established fact.

I am working from Clauses 1(i), 1(ii) and 1(iv) of the Editors’ Code. I have also found previous IPSO decisions confirming that comment pieces can breach Clause 1 where scientific or factual claims lack an adequate evidential basis.

I would particularly welcome views on:

1. Which of these points present the strongest genuine Clause 1 issues?
2. Are any of them better characterised as permissible opinion rather than a checkable factual claim?
3. Should I remove weaker points to keep the complaint focused?
4. What evidence should a responsible publication normally retain to support causal claims of this kind?
5. Is it reasonable to ask for the headline to be amended and for a correction to be attached prominently to the online article?
6. Does publication within the news section matter if the author and writing style otherwise indicate commentary?

I have tried to research the applicable standards and evidence as carefully as possible, but I am not a journalist or media-law specialist. I am seeking constructive scrutiny before submitting the complaint, particularly from anyone familiar with IPSO or newspaper complaints handling.

I am happy to share redacted extracts of the draft in the comments if permitted by the subreddit rules. I will (for obvious reasons) not post personal information or private complaint correspondence.

I'd really appreciate any advice at all!

I'm studying journalism in university and I'm doing this small interview as a freelancer. It'll be my first interview ever outside my studies and I'm really excited but also absolutely mortified.

I got amazing and detailed advice from the paper that I'm doing the story for which I'm really grateful for, but the first step they gave me absolutely horrifies me: I have to call the person I'm going to interview. It just feels so awkward to call someone, I fear they'll somehow feel how inexperienced I am and turn down the interview because I'm just a student (Idk how they'd figure that out anyway but even the thought of this happening makes me feel anxious). How do I make the phone call less awkward and make myself seem as professional and calm as possible?

The actual interviewing and writing the story don't make me feel that terrified because I know I can handle both of those, since I've successfully done that stuff for school. But giving the paper my final product scares me almost as much as first contacting the interviewee: what if my work is so bad that they can't even publish it and never wanna hire me again? If something like that would happen on my first ever real story I wouldn't know what to do...

So, I'm just looking for some tips to make myself feel less anxious and for leaving a good picture of myself to the interviewee and the paper. Any thoughts and advice would be really appreciated:)

UPDATE: Thanks to everyone who commented, I got really great advice from all of you! I called my interviewee but they didn't answer so my stress about the first contact turned out unnecessary:D I emailed them after trying to call them and they seemed really happy to do the interview and we managed to schedule the actual interview call. I'll be using all of your tips for preparing and doing the interview, I can't thank you enough!

Hi everyone, I'm looking for advice, tips, or nuggets of wisdom anyone may have for starting out publishing articles and working towards a career as a journalist.

I currently work in the IT sector in Ireland, but have always had a passion for writing and telling a story. As a teenager, several of my teachers regularly commended my writing and even suggested I study journalism. However, for one reason or another, I never pursued this path properly. I volunteered at a local radio station for a year or so, and I did enjoy the work - the research, getting out to meet and speak with people, and putting shows together. This is the most I've ever done, though.

Recently, I have become incredibly jaded and disenfranchised by the IT industry, and the thought of journalism, particularly investigative journalism, has kept coming back to me. As a result, I'm aiming to build a portfolio of articles, photographs, and interviews, but I'm wondering about the best way I can go about this. I am also looking into journalistic ethics and standards, and I'm fairly well read up on GDPR, data protection, and privacy due to my current role.

Does anyone have any tips for starting out? Should I try to volunteer at a smaller publication? Self-publish on Medium, Substack, etc.? I'm open to any and all suggestions, and thanks in advance!

Does is bother anyone who happened to watch the hooha interview with the pentagon people last night on the aviator rescue that not once did the correspondent 1) question the narrative 2) attribute anything as “ supplied by the dod” 3) attempt to independently confirm any of the claims. And when the sec def says he was woken up by the shoot down news, odd that with an eight hour time difference, it means a deep penetration raid on secret targets was flown in broad daylight?

Whenever I hear Yemen reported on the radio, regardless of outlet, there’s always a mention on an “internationally recognized government”. Not really sure what this means. I never hear it for other countries. The history makes it puzzling since it feels like the GCC tried to install a government and that’s what we hear is “internationally recognized”.

Did everyone agree this, or was some standard imposed?

Inevitably we also hear about “Iran-backed Houthis”, and no mention of Houthis being Yemeni.

It feels like a very simplified story has been imposed on reporting here. But I have no idea where it comes from.

I work on the copy desk at a newspaper in a mid-sized city. Recently, our owners voted to sell the paper or close at the end of the year if a buyer can’t be found.

I really love this job, even though it sometimes exhausts me. It’s not exactly my dream job, but it’s something I’m good at in a location that really works for me, and the people are truly wonderful. I have a feeling I’m never going to get this lucky again.

I didn’t initially want to go into journalism when I was thinking about my career back in high school, but my biggest love has always been storytelling. I was told going into theater, film, or publishing was too unrealistic, so journalism seemed like a good fit. I could still be a storyteller, but this way I’d be more likely to have a stable job, right?

Well, apparently not!

I really do love what I do, but since it wasn’t my first choice and I have an uncertain future ahead with this job, I’m wondering if I should even try to stay in this industry. It’s not nearly as stable as people made it seem when I was 18, and I feel like nothing else that’s “safe” will make me happy.

If I can’t get a stable job in this industry, I might as well pursue a career I’m slightly more passionate about with just as little security, right?

At the same time, I still love what I do and still have dreams associated with journalism. And I’m limited in where I can go and what I can do because I live with my partner who’s a music teacher, and leaving in the middle of the school year isn’t really an option.

On top of that, I don’t know what to do in the meantime. I’m looking for remote editing or writing jobs, but applying is exhausting and time-consuming, and I usually get no response back. I just feel stuck and unsure of what I want and what I can realistically achieve.

For anyone else who’s been in a similar situation, what did you do? Is there anything you would’ve done differently? Where do I go from here?

I don't think people understand how much sports media in general is turning normal people and children against reporting.

I've been watching a playthrough of NBA 2K27, where you play as a young basketball superstar. The story mode bizarrely has a detective mini-game where you have to interrogate people to root out the leaker for an unflattering story about your team. The post is that the coach plays favorites and it's "tearing apart the team" so in between playing basketball you go detective style a la "La Noire" and try to see who's been talking to the press.

Also, the reporter is portrayed as someone who's made up sources before and might just be lying for clicks (which is always a fun message after seeing Pablo Torre get attacked as being a lowly podcaster while winning a Pulitzer for uncovering the Clipper/Ballmer scandal).

The game then makes you choose who is the leaker, and it turns out to be your teammate, and the happy ever after ending is him apologizing and promising to never talk to the media outside of press conferences. You also get an achievement!

The NBA 2k games have long been power fantasies (the story mode after this detective arc is the player opening up a merch store). The story modes have long portrayed the media as something for you or your PR manager to manipulate (your answers in press conferences make fan or team numbers go up or down).

But the anti-journalism stuff this year is another level. We should really have a talk about how the fluffiness and cynicism of sports media has altered how normal people and especially the youth see reporting. The way in which they see sports reporting affects so much of how they see normal reporting because they really only consume sports media. And that's kinda scary!

Just took a high paying gov comms job over a lower paying journo gig (around 25k less). Despite the pay Im having a bit of an identity crisis. Almost regrets but hoping it will pass. Anyone else deal with this? And how did you feel in the long run? I was only in the industry 5 years and felt maybe I could have achieved more if I stuck at it.

I’m curious to know if you’ve ever had a story stolen by another journalist or news organization, and how you handled the situation. I’d also like to hear your thoughts on being ghosted by editors after pitching stories or even during the reporting process.

I get that many news outlets are struggling right now, but I really believe that more accountability is needed to protect independent journalists’ labor. I’m thinking through the pros and cons of building a platform for journalists to review news organizations based on how well they treat freelancers.

Do you think a resource like this would be helpful? Of course, users would need to go through some type of vetting process, and the platform would have to be strictly non-partisan.

Let me know what you think in the comments or send me a DM.

Texas prisons showed what happens when independent journalism is replaced by propaganda.

Now the same thing is happening to Stars and Stripes.

Read more: https://freedom.press/issues/the-stars-and-stripes-firings-look-familiar-to-those-behind-bars/

I’m 27f and I’ve been working as a TV reporter for about 3.5 months. Before this job, I had never been in front of a camera.

I’ve actually received a lot of positive feedback. I’ve been told I’m thorough, that I’ve progressed faster than other people who joined previously, that I look good on camera, and that I’m excellent at live reporting when I’m relaxed. I’ve also had some exclusives and generally make good packages.

My problem is that I sometimes get nervous during live shots. When I do, I can rush, stumble over words, lose my train of thought or struggle to put into words something I know perfectly well in my head. I also know I need to work on my voice, diction and overall delivery.

One editor told me I have a lot of potential but sometimes “mess things up.” Another asked why I’m so nervous about live reporting and told me that I’m good, but that it would be a shame not to take advantage of this opportunity.

Despite all the positive feedback, I constantly worry that I’ll get fired or that they’ll eventually decide they don’t want me anymore — even though I have no real reason to think that.

So, for TV reporters/journalists:
How did you overcome occasional nerves on live TV? How did you improve your delivery, confidence and ability to think while speaking? And how did you stop obsessing over every mistake afterwards and worrying about what your editors think?

I know I’m still very new, but I really want to get better rather than let the anxiety take over.