In early February 2025, Scotiacon faced an unexpected wave of media attention. What followed was a cascade of articles, ranging from sensationalist headlines to more balanced coverage. It’s unfortunate that the convention faced this scrutiny - which was entirely unwarranted and not the fault of the organizers, but it provides an opportunity to examine how media coverage can spiral and what we can do as a community to mitigate this emerging threat.
Below is a chronological collection of the media coverage that emerged during this period. The progression shows how initial stories were picked up and reframed by different outlets, often with increasingly sensationalist angles.
Media Coverage Timeline
1 Somewhat positive article, but contains links to harmful headlines
2 BBC article publish time not preserved in archive
So, what exactly started this?
Through no fault of Scotiacon, Andy Beaven, a freelance writer at The Sunday Post, stumbled upon the convention and saw an opportunity to stoke the “anti-woke brigade” rhetoric he is well known for.
Given the visually unusual nature of the furry fandom and some existing negative connotationsâmany of which are exaggerated or outright misrepresentedâhe identified it as an easy target for culture war discourse. Beaven then visited the Scotiacon website, found the event’s code of conduct, and wildly extrapolated its contents into a sensationalist headline.
While Scotiacon’s rules were listed in good faith to ensure clarity and inclusivity, their public accessibility made them an easy target for journalists seeking to highlight something “weird” or controversial. This is particularly disingenuous when you consider that detailed codes of conduct are standard practice across the events industry. Major nightclubs, music festivals, and cultural events all maintain comprehensive policies that prohibit various behaviors. These policies aren’t implemented because venues are overrun with bad actorsâthey’re proactively maintained to prevent incidents and ensure all attendees feel safe.
From there, the story was picked up by other outlets, with each iteration amplifying the initial misrepresentation and steering the narrative further into controversy. This is a textbook example of how press coverage can snowballâby the time it has reached this stage, it is often too late (though not impossible) to correct the narrative.
The Snowballing - The Telegraph article
Once the Sunday Post set the tone, other outlets quickly followed, each escalating the narrative. By the 5th, Daniel Sanderson at The Telegraph had reframed the story into full-blown moral panic, falsely portraying Scotiacon as a fetish event. Sanderson, whose writing history shows a pattern of anti-trans rhetoric and culture war fearmongering, cherry-picked elements of the convention’s programming, twisting them to fit his angle, while also fixating on the event’s code of conduct as though it were an admission of wrongdoing rather than a standard policy which has almost always been in place.
At this stage, For Women Scotland, a known TERF group, saw an opportunity to wade inâeither after noticing the media frenzy or being approached for comment. Eager to latch onto any culture war issue, especially one involving a community with a high proportion of LGBTQ+ members, they called for Saving Wildcats to sever ties with Scotiacon, using the false framing of the event to stir moral panic.
Adding to the ethical breaches, The Telegraph also went to Scotiacon’s website, downloaded images they had no entitlement to, and published them without permission. While crediting a photographer via EXIF metadata is standard practice, outright stealing images for use in a hateful article is not. This was not only a blatant disregard for copyright but also deeply distressing for the photographer, who had to watch their work be weaponized against the very community they enjoyed. A takedown request was issued, and within an hour, the photos were silently removedâno apology, just erased as though it had never happened. This is never acceptable and shows the lack of editorial standards from The Telegraph’s Scottish correspondent, Daniel Sanderson, who chose to publish this vile hit piece.
This is a textbook case of media-driven outrage: what starts as a misleading headline snowballs, with each new article escalating the framing, until bad-faith actors seize the moment to push their own agenda. And when the press is willing to cross ethical linesâwhether through distortion, pressure campaigns, or outright theftâthe damage is already done, regardless of how quickly they try to cover their tracks.
Moving forward - How do we protect ourselves?
The sad reality is that the furry fandom is a spectacleâwhile most of the public are genuinely just curious, sensationalist headlines can tarnish our image and put us in disrepute. Sometimes, despite our best efforts, press coverage is sometimes unavoidable. However, while we can’t prevent every incident, we can take steps to reduce their likelihood and severity. While such incidents often don’t warrant a full communications strategy overhaul, small changes can significantly bolster your resilience to such attacks.
Some practical steps conventions can consider:
-
Code of Conduct Placement: Move detailed conduct policies to later stages of the registration platform or behind a registration portal. Consider using a simple banner at the bottom of post-authentication pages to remind attendees of the CoC’s existence. Consider whether your code of conduct could be written more generically while still maintaining clear expectations for attendees.
-
Public Communications: While transparency is important in the fandom, consider where incident updates and similar communications live. Could these be moved to closed channels or member portals rather than remaining prominently on public-facing pages, if they do need to sit in the public realm, should they sit there indefinitely?
-
Image Rights Protection: If you maintain an official image gallery, include clear warnings about rights being reserved and usage being prohibited for articles. Consider including specific terms with substantial penalties for unauthorized useâthis often discourages misappropriation.
-
Event Signage: Prominently display that this is a private event with a reasonable expectation of privacy near entrances and in throughways. Include QR codes & URLs linking to press resources or contact information. Make it clear that registration is required and unauthorized news gathering on-site may be considered trespassing.
-
Media Resources: Develop a PR/Media page which prominently highlights your convention’s positive impact: Charity fundraising totals, community benefits, and what the fandom means to participants. Include authentic interviews, videos, and stories. This helps control the narrative and provides accurate information about what the fandom really represents.
-
Press Preparation: Consider appointing a press officer and prepare statements in advance for various scenarios. This should be someone with media experience, who is comfortable with the media and who understands the fandom. (I appreciate this is a major ask). If you are a large enough convention, it could be worth considering a third party to handle this role, if you’re unable to source someone in-house.
-
Attendee Media Guidelines: Communicate clearly with attendees about media involvement and its risks, especially for those without media training. Many furries engage with press interviews hoping to “set the record straight,” but their words often get twisted and misrepresented, making situations worse. Additionally, warn against attendees uploading or selling images and stories to stock image sites or news outfitsâthis should come with clear penalties. It is not attendees’ responsibility to interact with media in this way; it creates unacceptable risks and must be curtailed. There have been numerous instances over the years where well-meaning attendees’ attempts to help have backfired.
There are additional and rather important media strategy tips that could help protect conventions from negative coverage. However, publishing them will make them less effective. If you run a furry convention and would like to strengthen your media resilience, get in touch, I’d be happy to help develop your media strategy privately. (I want to make clear, this will never be at any cost.)
If we could do it all again…
Looking back at this incident, there is not much that could have been done differently - the Scotiacon team handled an unexpected media storm with remarkable grace and professionalism. However, this serves as a wake-up call for the wider furry fandom. We need to seriously evaluate how we’re perceived by the outside world and take proactive steps to protect our events and community members.
While the media attention will inevitably die down until the next incident, we shouldn’t wait for this to happen again. Now is the time to strengthen our approach to media relations, improve our public image, and better prepare our events for potential scrutiny. The suggestions in this article are just a starting point - the real work begins with implementing these protections before they’re needed.
Disclaimer
Note: All links use archive.is to preserve articles as they appeared and prevent traffic to potentially harmful content. This documentation is for analysis only - no harassment of any individuals mentioned is condoned. Views expressed are my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer, conventions I attend/volunteer for, or any organizations I engage with. This is not legal or media advice.
I want to stress that Scotiacon did absolutely nothing wrong and did not deserve any of this media attention. They handled an incredibly difficult situation with grace and professionalism, especially given the sudden pressure placed upon them. I am deeply sorry this happened to their event and their team.