  |
 Huw Edwards named as BBC presenter at centre of scandal |
| Track this thread | Email this thread | Print this thread | Download this thread | Subscribe to this forum |
 13th July 2023, 07:38 PM
Post
#81
|
|
 Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,417 User: 18,639 
         |
Let's see how the Sun treats that story
|
 |
 
|
|
14th July 2023, 09:54 AM
Post
#82
|
|
 #38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
Joined: 27 October 2008
Posts: 16,190 User: 7,561
   |
Quite an interesting snap poll released from YouGov yesterday: Opinion seems to be quite split amongst the public. I have to admit that in the light of the more recent allegations by BBC staff, I think that there probably was a public interest for that story to be printed- but I still stand by the fact that the initial story printed by The Sun did not meet that criteria. The fact that junior staff didn't feel comfortable reporting complaints speaks to the toxic environment that STILL exists within the BBC. The Sun can still get in the bin for what they've done however. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 10:24 AM
Post
#83
|
|
 Mansonette
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 35,461 User: 54
            |
I think it’s fine to be reported around the whole thing, it comes with the nature of celebrity and in effect holding a public position of sorts - but not with an implication of underage sexual acts unless that is actually what had happened. The Sun’s approach was awful and sensationalist and had no regard or care for any of the people involved. Saying “but the parents said it happened” isn’t enough to justify any article with such obvious and public negative consequences - editors of national papers get paid a huge amount and personally I think a legal part of their job should be to ensure they act responsibly.
I agree with Joops that if you’re using something like OnlyFans then you have every right to assume the people/content is legal. And using it is absolutely not grooming people, if anything the people on there have the power in that ‘relationship’ as they are making money out of the people using it. And those who own the platforms are exploiting everyone involved. The age gap argument is a weird one for me. Just because someone is older are they supposed to no longer find other younger people attractive? Like, for example, should they never frequent a strip club unless the dancers are of their own age? Any industry relating to stripping/porn (and obvs these are very different things) has an entire business model built around trying to make money off of older people by exploiting the simple fact that 90% of younger people are more physicality attractive than older people. Using any of those services is simply not the same as grooming or paedophilia. Totally understand why people would judge Huw’s behaviour as being distasteful or against what they would morally do but we can’t then make a mental leap towards calling it out as being the equivalent of something illegal. As things stand Huw doesn’t even appear to have had an affair with anyone… yet the level of hatred and abuse he’s receiving is WAY worse than other celebrities/people who actually do have sexual intercourse with people in their early 20s - whether that be male or female. I don’t stand by him as such as it seems from the BBC employees that his behaviour has been potentially a little predatory but there’s nothing so far that warrants a media witch hunt. I really hope that we get to a point soon where these types of stories simply don’t exist - where people have been able to socially be with whoever they want (as they pretty much are now) and therefore the number of people who felt societal pressure to end up in sham marriages etc reduce down until there’s no more stories like this to tell. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 11:10 AM
Post
#84
|
|
|
New Entry
Joined: 7 November 2021
Posts: 34 User: 140,258
 |
Victoria Derbyshire is doing the right thing here and proving that the BBC do actually care about their reputation of impartiality and professional journalism. The BBC is not supposed to be a buddy's club where they all cover each others back because they're afraid of how it will look on the BBC. People are trying to make this about Murdoch and the Sun when what they should be doing is proving that the BBC are taking these allegations seriously and proving that the BBC are a truly professional organisation where no matter how high up you are, no-one is untouchable.
Philip Schofield and Huw Edwards are an embarrassment to gay people, anyone defending them have no idea how much they're making it worse for gay people in the UK. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 11:40 AM
Post
#85
|
|
|
Mansonette
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 35,461 User: 54
|
But both your point about the BBC and others’ points about the Sun can simultaneously be true. It doesn’t have to be one or the other! I don’t see anyone here criticising Victoria Derbyshire or the BBC investigating claims? In fact both mine and Dr Blind’s posts (the only ones since the latest news broke) both explicitly say that we agree that part should be reported.
If the BBC conclude that Huw has behaved in appropriately with anyone at work then he should totally face the consequences of that. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 12:00 PM
Post
#86
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 25 July 2016
Posts: 4,376 User: 23,471
    |
QUOTE(JamBlade @ Jul 14 2023, 11:10 AM)  Victoria Derbyshire is doing the right thing here and proving that the BBC do actually care about their reputation of impartiality and professional journalism. The BBC is not supposed to be a buddy's club where they all cover each others back because they're afraid of how it will look on the BBC. People are trying to make this about Murdoch and the Sun when what they should be doing is proving that the BBC are taking these allegations seriously and proving that the BBC are a truly professional organisation where no matter how high up you are, no-one is untouchable. Philip Schofield and Huw Edwards are an embarrassment to gay people, anyone defending them have no idea how much they're making it worse for gay people in the UK. Huw should be investigated internally if he has abused his position with BBC staff — but beyond that? He's an embarrassment to gay people because he paid a sex worker on OnlyFans? We don't know his relationship with his wife — it isn't our business. The Sun created a sensationalist story laced with homophobia that not only outed someone but accused them of paedophilia. That is the embarrassment. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 12:09 PM
Post
#87
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,945 User: 17,376
 |
There's a great episode of The Orville where the crew visit a new world, and one gets arrested, in a society that lives on Trial-By-Media. Everyone votes like it's X-Factor based on mobile phone footage of something innocuous but against the law, and if people don't approve of something you have done you get found guilty and get heavy prison terms or even death sentences just cos they dont like you.
Science-fiction has always been about warning of the way society is heading and what that means. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 01:09 PM
Post
#88
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,221 User: 3,474
    |
I really don’t get the scandalisation of the OF element of this at all. It’s 2023. You either subscribe, have subscribed, are a creator, or know someone who does one of the three. This isn’t some grubby little dark corner of the Internet you need a Tor browser for. There are practices such as FinDom that do end up with substantial sums transferring hands (personally I think it’s a very sketchy exploitative relationship but I do understand the good Doms have certain rules and conduct codes they follow to ensure the safety of all) and other custom content and so on, we have no idea of the nature of that relationship but what we do know is that if it happened via a platform such as OF or JFF, then we have some relative assurances of legality in that creators are SUPPOSED to be ID checked, and in the majority of cases, it is the creator who has the power in the relationship. As Dandy* mentions above.
I don’t see how you can understand that, exist on the internet in 2023, and still think it’s an embarrassment to gay people. What is an embarrassment is the sun outright lying in order to sensationalise something and whip out the good old the gays are peados bullshittery they absolutely adore |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 01:59 PM
Post
#89
|
|
|
New Entry
Joined: 7 November 2021
Posts: 34 User: 140,258
|
If what these young men at the BBC are saying is true about Huw Edwards, then it must have been very difficult for them to refuse advances from him considering he is one of the highest paid presenters on the BBC, even if they found him unattractive and old, it's not as if they could have found it easy to say no when Huw Edwards could have easily damaged their careers.
I wish some people would stop deflecting about The Sun, they're just doing their job, yes it's a grubby newspaper for working class people but then all newspapers are grubby at the end of the day, they just present it in different ways for different demographics. |
|
|
|
|
14th July 2023, 02:53 PM
Post
#90
|
|
|
WINTER IS COMING
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 45,633 User: 88
   |
QUOTE(blacksquare @ Jul 14 2023, 01:00 PM) Huw should be investigated internally if he has abused his position with BBC staff — but beyond that? He's an embarrassment to gay people because he paid a sex worker on OnlyFans? We don't know his relationship with his wife — it isn't our business. The Sun created a sensationalist story laced with homophobia that not only outed someone but accused them of paedophilia. That is the embarrassment. Totally agree. If there has been workplace misconduct, this should be handled internally. I wouldn't expect this to be reported news unless Huw was formally disciplined by the BBC for his behaviour. This is all normal everyday stuff that can happen within the workplace and should be handled internally. The Sun knew exactly what they were doing with the story & I suspect their legal argument will be they didn't name the individual. But when you create a sensationalist article like that, it is designed for people to become sleuths. The fact the story has been buried pretty quickly from the news since Wednesday probably shows the wider journalistic angle now the current facts are all established. |
|
|
|
|
19th July 2023, 07:28 PM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,417 User: 18,639
|
Reporting has begun on Dan Wootton!!! BbTory had an article on him and he talked a bit about thr claims on his right wing show. He said his lawyers are involved
|
|
|
|
|
19th July 2023, 11:13 PM
Post
#92
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 21 February 2021
Posts: 3,667 User: 124,514
 |
It's a story that Byline Times are releasing over many parts so should cause maximum damage. Plus News UK, Sun's paremt company are taking it seriously.
He's still on GB News frothing over trans people and Meghan Markle though. What a strange messed up individual- never changes the record. |
|
|
|
|
29th July 2023, 02:08 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
Joined: 27 October 2008
Posts: 16,190 User: 7,561
|
From the latest edition of Private Eye (1603) // https://www.private-eye.co.uk/media-news
QUOTE Sun v BBC: Huw's sorry now?
With Huw Edwards receiving in-patient mental health care and the BBC warning that its internal investigation is likely to go on at least until the autumn, many questions over the Sun's series of splashes remain unanswered. The Eye has seen details of the complaint made by the stepfather of the young man at the centre of the initial story when he presented himself at the front desk of the BBC's office in Cardiff on 18 May. It specified that Edwards had first met him when he was 18 and there was no mention of photographs being exchanged, or any contact at all, prior to this age. The stepfather also said the family had already contacted South Wales Police to report what was going on, but that the force had already told them nothing illegal appeared to have occurred. Although an amount of more than £30,000 exchanging hands was mentioned, there was no mention of it being used to buy drugs. By the time the family's account appeared on the front page of the Sun on 8 July, however, it had become "giving the teen more than £35,000 since they were 17 in return for sordid images", and, inside, the even more loaded phrase "paid her crack-addicted child for sexual images". |
|
|
|
|
29th July 2023, 02:45 PM
Post
#94
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,221 User: 3,474
|
I hope that huw sues them into bankruptcy
|
|
|
|
|
29th July 2023, 04:48 PM
Post
#95
|
|
 BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 6 September 2017
Posts: 11,924 User: 39,568
  |
QUOTE(Silas @ Jul 29 2023, 03:45 PM) I hope that huw sues them into bankruptcy Me too, it's digusting! |
|
|
|
|
29th July 2023, 05:00 PM
Post
#96
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,417 User: 18,639
|
Now I see why people on Twitter - um, fash X - were calling him the new Schofield, with The Sun framing the story and couching its language like that!! You would think their libel lawyers would have raiswd some questions about that before it went to print!!
|
|
|
|
|
29th July 2023, 05:07 PM
Post
#97
|
|
 there's nothing straight about plump Elvis
Pronouns: they/any
Joined: 21 January 2016 Posts: 13,189 User: 22,895 
   |
Sounds like exactly what I called it as in the first place. A stepfather, unrelated, having an issue with his wife's gay son having relationships at all and going to his stepson's partner's place of work to make threats!
|
|
|
|
|
22nd April 2024, 02:18 PM
Post
#98
|
|
|
It's still will be the return of the Mack 4eva
Joined: 1 February 2011
Posts: 54,008 User: 12,915
   |
He's resigned on medical advice.
|
|
|
|
|
22nd April 2024, 03:50 PM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Baby Reindeer
Joined: 9 March 2008
Posts: 13,712 User: 5,567
 |
Well that's the official line anyway
|
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 16th May 2024, 07:30 AM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
