Once a standard-bearer for a more inclusive, tolerant Britain, PinkNews testifies to both the fracturing of its target market and the financial struggles of the alternative press.
PinkNews debuted during a period of radical change. Founded by tech entrepreneur Benjamin Cohen in July 2005, it briefly published a hard-copy edition before realising it wasn’t commercially viable.
For over fifteen years, it thrived as an exclusively online venture. But revenue peaked in 2022, consistent with broad trends in reading-centred media.
In the case of PinkNews, this problem was compounded by the backlash against corporate multiculturalism, particularly when it seemed to repudiate “biological” common sense.
Cohen reportedly told PinkNews staff in 2023 that they have to be “careful” with trans and non-binary issues because they are “incredibly contentious”.
After gender-critical writers like Sarah Ditum jumped on the story, PinkNews faced accusations of throwing trans people under a bus. Although the publication would still run pro-trans articles, that content was no longer frontloaded the way it had been.
That controversy gave way to a different one when PinkNews announced that it was shifting to a “reporter-free newsroom” in March 2026, a cruel euphemism for sacking journalists.
After senior reporter Sophie Perry was made redundant by this move, she lambasted PinkNews on LinkedIn: “How can they make journalism without journalists? I have no clue, either.”
Despite these recent troubles, however, PinkNews has an impressive track record of mainstreaming LGBTQ+ issues that deserves a closer look.
When PinkNews became a full-fledged news source, it signalled a new era. Homophobia in the UK had already fallen sharply since the dark days of the 1980s, when tabloids ran hit pieces on closeted gay celebrities and terrible AIDS coverage.
But the publication put this transformation front and centre. Prime Minister Tony Blair even wrote an op-ed heralding “a new age of equality”.
His Labour government had already presided over reforms to equalise the age of consent for same-sex couples and create civil partnerships. It abolished Section 28 in 2003, ending Margaret Thatcher’s anti-gay propaganda law. Then it implemented the Gender Recognition Act—now widely loathed by anti-trans campaigners—to create a narrow legal route for trans people to change their gender on documents.
Along with greater acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community came greater commercialisation. The London Pride march that had begun as a political demonstration in 1972 became a corporate-sponsored charity event in 2004.
The mid-2000s represented the high point of rainbow liberalism. PinkNews positioned itself as a business-friendly publication and the money rolled in. Naturally, many radical LGBTQ+ activists regarded this as selling out, particularly given Blair’s support for forever wars.
A decade later, PinkNews again turned heads when it named Prime Minister David Cameron Ally of the Year in 2016. Although the Conservative Party was still home to many anti-gay politicians, same-sex marriage was legalised under his leadership.
It wasn’t just Blair and Cameron who endorsed PinkNews. Boris Johnson wrote for the publication. So did Theresa May and the late SNP leader Alex Salmond, prior to his sexual assault allegations.
Within this context, the question of whether gays and lesbians should be accepted seemed settled. That’s when trans rights began emerging as a wedge issue.
As trans activists became increasingly visible in public life and vocal on social media, Twitter became a battleground. It wasn’t just conservatives tangling over single-sex spaces, pronouns and puberty blockers, but centrists and liberals as well.
A backlash against trans rights had been promoted by “sex realist” NGOs with opaque financing. During this period, “gender-critical” feminists who sided with conservatives on trans rights took aim at PinkNews. The publication even ended up in court after Julie Bindel claimed it had defamed her. Although the two sides settled the case in the end, coverage of it highlighted the increasingly ugly atmosphere stirred up by trans visibility.
Meanwhile, right-wing groups in the US like the Alliance Defending Freedom were pumping money into anti-gender campaigns in the UK. These efforts focused on driving a wedge through LGBTQ+ communities in a bid to pit lesbian, gay and bisexual people against trans people. This campaign also contributed toward a revival of antipathy toward queer minorities among straight people, particularly men.
The COVID-19 pandemic added to the pressure, as both public and private institutions incited right-wing rage. Stopping the advance of trans rights became a focal point for political organising, with plenty of people who had voted Remain contributing to the cause.
Desperate for certainty in a world that no longer made sense to them, these campaigners turned to sexual dimorphism, ultimately concluding that biology is destiny.
Many of the people radicalised by the lockdown drew a connection between the government measures and the increased visibility of trans people in media and public life. A preoccupation with bodily integrity and sovereignty resonated with those concerned about the use of puberty blockers for teenagers.
When the UK’s Supreme Court ruled in April 2025 that the meaning of the word “women” in the Equality Act (2010) referred solely to biological women, this was the victory gender-critical activists had been seeking for years. The reverberations of this huge blow continue to play out, with the Labour government preparing new guidance restricting access to single-sex spaces.
As advertising revenue for print media declined across the board, PinkNews found itself caught between a rock and a hard place.
That explains Benjamin Cohen’s reluctance to go out on a limb.
When PinkNews published a column by Health Secretary Wes Streeting after he extended the ban on puberty blockers, it angered trans readers who saw no reason to platform his views.
Unsurprisingly, Streeting’s article convinced no one. Trans readers called for a boycott of PinkNews, while gender-critical activists continued to claim that Streeting cannot define what a woman is.
Making a profit in such a polarised environment is a massive challenge for PinkNews. That’s why it became one of the first publications to partner with Snapchat in order to boost revenue. And why it decided to dispense with professional reporters.
It certainly didn’t help that the BBC ran a documentary in late 2024 raising accusations of sexual misconduct against Cohen and Anthony James. Although they have denied the claims and have taken the broadcaster to the High Court of England and Wales, the damage was already done.
The liberal consensus that once upheld LGBTQ+ rights as a component of common sense is no more. Anyone who goes near the issue of trans rights can expect a torrent of abuse on social media.
To be sure, there is still a large audience for what PinkNews does. But the publication no longer commands the kind of establishment support it once did.
If Prime Minister Andy Burnham wrote an op-ed for PinkNews today, it would be received very differently from the one Tony Blair wrote in the publication’s early days.
Whereas PinkNews was once part of a strong liberal consensus, the publication now seems out of place in postliberal Britain. Many former allies have become far more sceptical, if not outright opposed, to its brand of LGBTQ+ advocacy.
Now that the centre ground has been irrevocably fractured and mainstream liberalism is more moribund than ever, the PinkNews model may have become unsustainable. The door is now open for more radical queer media.
Photograph courtesy of Bastian Greshake Tzovaras. Published under a Creative Commons license.
