Martine Croxall flooded with support as she speaks out after 'pregnant people' rule break: 'BBC is a DISGRACE for allowing this!'

The Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) determined that her expression could be interpreted as conveying a stance on transgender identity matters, breaching the corporation's impartiality guidelines.

The ruling stated that Ms Croxall had given "the strong impression of expressing a personal view on a controversial matter", which fell below BBC standards for presenters and journalists.

The incident occurred whilst Ms Croxall was presenting research from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine about vulnerable groups during UK heatwaves.

Reading from her autocue, she stated: "Malcolm Mistry, who was involved in the research, says that the aged, pregnant people ... women ... and those with pre-existing health conditions need to take precautions."

The presenter visibly paused and altered the phrase mid-sentence, replacing "pregnant people" with "women".

Dr Mistry, an assistant professor at the institution, subsequently appeared in the broadcast segment and himself used the term "pregnant women" when discussing the research findings.

The ECU's assessment focused on various interpretations of Croxall's facial expression, which complainants characterised as displaying "disgust, ridicule, contempt or exasperation".

The unit concluded that her expression suggested "exasperation" rather than the more severe interpretations, attributing this to awkward scripting that incorporated terminology from the research press release.

However, the ECU maintained that her facial expression whilst substituting the words remained problematic, as it could suggest "a particular viewpoint in the controversies currently surrounding trans ideology".

On Friday, Ms Croxall returned to X to issue a public post for the first time since the ruling. "Join @LukwesaBurak and me @BBCNews 7-9am GMT," she penned alongside a selfie inside the BBC News studio ahead of her appearance on the channel on Friday morning.

Join ⁦@LukwesaBurak⁩ and me ⁦@BBCNews⁩ 7-9am GMT pic.twitter.com/OJvqcD7kkG

— Martine Croxall (@MartineBBC) November 7, 2025

Before long, the post was flooded with supportive messages from followers who, it's safe to say, didn't agree with the ruling.

"If you look on here today, Martine, you’ll see how much many people respect you. We all support you," one X user wrote, while a second echoed: "Martine, you are a national treasure, best newsreader on BBC, as for the eye roll, you were expressing how we all feel. Have a wonderful day."

"Keep rolling those eyes @MartineBBC we are all behind you," a third added before a fourth commented: "Respect to you, Martine, and none to your ridiculous bosses. Keep saying 'woman' and eye rolling."

"Just know, we have all eye-rolled in solidarity for you. And will continue to do so," a fifth weighed in, and a sixth concurred: "I stand with you, Martine. Accurate language matters."

And a seventh typed: "Thank you Martine for stating the truth and adding clarity to a news report. People don’t get pregnant, women do.

"I’m constantly rolling my eyes and more at the theft and abuse of language relating to women. The BBC is a disgrace for allowing this and censoring you." (sic)

The ruling itself noted the previous social media support Ms Croxall received on the matter, with it being deemed to have reinforced the widespread perception that she had conveyed a personal opinion on the matter.

BBC News management initially defended Ms Croxall, with sources indicating that the corporation's style guide contains no requirement to use "pregnant women" specifically.

Executives attributed her reaction to awkward scripting that incorporated uncharacteristic phrasing from the research press release, including "the aged", which contradicts BBC style conventions.

Author JK Rowling publicly supported Ms Croxall on social media, declaring she had a "new favourite BBC presenter" and expressing concern that the newsreader might face repercussions.

Despite this initial backing and external support, the ECU ultimately ruled against Ms Croxall, determining that even inadvertent impressions of partiality violated BBC standards.

The decision was communicated to BBC News management and discussed with Ms Croxall and her editorial team.