Trouble at the BBC.

[A0]

I would prefer an HONEST, diverse and pluralistic media in this country. The Sun does not have a history of honesty.


I did think this but I am not so sure now. The media, especially the tabloid media, often don't seem to know how to behave and need a spanking. Phone hacking?

But that "crude" measure is the one the courts will have decide on the next time the Sun or other media is sued for this kind of thing. There is, of course, a difference between " in the public interest" and "what the public might be interested in" which has long been the subject of our learned friends time.

For the avoidance of doubt I think there is a story in this BBC case. I am just not sure it has quite the foundations the Sun have tried to suggest. It increasingly looks like a "fishing trip" designed to "out" someone famous for doing something distasteful and, helpfully, bash the BBC. The Sun have been very reluctant to talk about this story or what evidence they hold to substantiate it which I find a bit odd.

I notice the stance underneath the story has changed from a position of yet more disgusting BBC noncing to a safeguarding issue that the BBC havent dealt with quickly enough. The first is certainly front page news. Is the latter?


and powerful. He still wields incredible influence on government. Is that influence used for good? I am not so sure. It is also interesting who takes over once he shuffles from this mortal coil - they will not be old but will still wield that power and influence.


Whilst the Sun, of course, has utterly clean hands in this regard. Have a look at Private Eye for some stories that you might be interested in! Thier track record of dealing with internal HR matters associated with "safeguarding, values and behaviours" is not very good either.

There are also stories of bacchanalian lockdown parties that make the Tories look like choirboys!

Let me ask you a question - had this story been broken not by The Sun, but instead by the Daily Mirror would you have been as censorious as you have been ? Or is it simply because it's The Sun which has broken the story that you have a problem with it ?

Or for that matter if it hadn't been about a high profile BBC presenter but instead a centre-right politician - would you have still taken the view it's wrong ?

 

[AlterEgo]

Being a foreigner I can't relate to the story, but ironically, media in Western English-speaking nations has become judge, jury and even perhaps executioner.

We had a famous case in Oz where police advertised for complainants when there had not been any, the person was charged after a police interview in a European country, eventually in a second trial found guilty by a jury, the media bayed not far short of suggesting he be hung, the judgment was confirmed 2-1 by a Supreme Court but the dissenting reasons were powerful, served more than 400 days in gaol but the High Court in a unanimous 7-0 decision quashed the convictions. The person, who'd served many others humbly throughout his adult life lived a couple more years before passing away after receiving much disgusting vitriol on social media such as Twitter.

Be careful what we wish for: in similar circumstances I bet we'd like relatives, friends or ourselves to be 'innocent until proven guilty.'

I think a lot of people here have heard of the Cardinal Pell case.

 

[DarloRich]

had this story been broken not by The Sun, but instead by the Daily Mirror would you have been as censorious as you have been ? Or is it simply because it's The Sun which has broken the story that you have a problem with it ?

I don't like the Sun so that colours my views about them!

Story wise I think my views would be the same. I am not sure that this is the story that has been suggested. The more that comes out the less I think the splash was appropriate.

For clarity a BBC noncing scandal IS absolutely front page news. Do we have that here?

Or for that matter if it hadn't been about a high profile BBC presenter but instead a centre-right politician - would you have still taken the view it's wrong ?

You cant beat a good hypocritical Tory MP looks a teat story

The important thing is the evidence to support the story and whether the story is in the public interest. It is a harder position to consider with an MP because of the nature of thier office and public service but several MP's have been suspended for alleged bad behaviour and we havent learnt thier names or in some cases even thier alleged actions.

An example:
MP consorts with rent boys is absolutely a story.
Is MP has an affair a story? Perhaps not unless he or she is one of those than bang on about family values.

 

[A0]

The important thing is the evidence to support the story and whether the story is in the public interest. It is a harder position to consider with an MP because of the nature of thier office and public service but several MP's have been suspended for alleged bad behaviour and we havent learnt thier names or in some cases even thier alleged actions.

An example:
MP consorts with rent boys is absolutely a story.
Is MP has an affair a story? Perhaps not unless he or she is one of those than bang on about family values.

So what's the difference between an MP, a high profile broadcaster employed by a "public" broadcaster, a minister in a church or a school teacher ?

Sorry - arguing an MP is fair game because of "their office" but then arguing another group isn't isn't really credible. Sorry, if you take a job in the public eye or one which holds certain responsibilities, you have to then accept your behaviour - both private and public - is going to be scrutinised. Had he spent time browsing certain adult websites, this wouldn't be a story (I use the word 'certain' because some adult websites are legal in this country) - no question at all. But that's not what we're talking about here.

I don't like the Sun so that colours my views about them!

Story wise I think my views would be the same. I am not sure that this is the story that has been suggested. The more that comes out the less I think the splash was appropriate.

For clarity a BBC noncing scandal IS absolutely front page news. Do we have that here?

The Sun on Sunday didn't say anything about 'noncing' though - always helps to actually look at the headline, which actually said "BBC Star sent pants pic to teen" https://en.kiosko.net/uk/2023-07-09/np/sun.html - I'm the father of 2 teenagers - would I be happy with anyone sending either of my children a "pants picture" ? Probably not, but if it was somebody they were in a relationship with, I might accept it. But when it's somebody who is older than me, who is in a position of authority - then it's completely inappropriate. It may be *legal* but that doesn't mean it's right or appropriate. If a member of staff at the school I'm a governor for did such a thing, it would be a breach of our social media and behaviour policies and action would be taken.

 

[1D54]

Could I just repeat for the benefit of the tape: DONT BUY THE SUN

( and dont click on it's links! Stop giving them money and they will die. Then we will all live in a better world)

I have always purchased The Sun (along with The Mail) and will continue to do so.

 

[DarloRich]

So what's the difference between an MP, a high profile broadcaster employed by a "public" broadcaster, a minister in a church or a school teacher ?

I don't know but suggest there MAY be a difference - the courts spend a lot of time and money considering such questions. For instance: What responsibilities does a TV presenter hold above those of you or I? Is it a regulated profession like a doctor, lawyer or accountant? Is it a job that regularly puts them in an actual position of responsibility or authority like a teacher or policeman?

Is it only "public" broadcasters that have this enhanced responsibility? Would you take the same stance if a GB news person was at the centre of these allegations? Would the Sun have splashed these allegations?

The Sun on Sunday didn't say anything about 'noncing' though -

the inference is clear and that inference was happily communicated on social media.

If a member of staff at the school I'm a governor for did such a thing, it would be a breach of our social media and behaviour policies and action would be taken.

I am sure it would be. I am also sure that the action taken would differ if there were criminality. I am also sure there would be an investigation to determine what actually happened.

I have always purchased The Sun (along with The Mail) and will continue to do so.

That is your choice. Personally I would rather not waste my money and read lies. Each to thier own though.

It may be *legal* but that doesn't mean it's right or appropriate.

I don't disagree AND I don't suggest there isn't a story OR that those involved should get off scot free. I am concerned that the initial story splash doesn't stand up to scrutiny and was therefore inappropriate

 

[A0]

I don't know but suggest there MAY be a difference - the courts spend a lot of time and money considering such questions. For instance: What responsibilities does a TV presenter hold above those of you or I? Is it a regulated profession like a doctor, lawyer or accountant? Is it a job that regularly puts them in an actual position of responsibility or authority like a teacher or policeman?

Is it only "public" broadcasters that have this enhanced responsibility? Would you take the same stance if a GB news person was at the centre of these allegations? Would the Sun have splashed these allegations?

As I pointed out upthread - The BBC seems to have been flat footed on this - when you compare it to ITV / ITN's action against Alastair Stewart a couple of years back - and that was over a Twitter spat where he quoted Kipling.

And interestingly presenter Mark Steyn quit GB News because (he claimed) the channel were going to make him personally liable for any OFCOM fines arising from breaches on his show. That's going an awful lot further than the BBC do in terms of making presenters responsible for what is said on their programmes.

the inference is clear and that inference was happily communicated on social media.

You can't hold the broadcasters responsible for the spin others put on things on Twitter - that's not how it works.

 

[Mikw]

Simple - because I believe in a diverse and pluralistic media - which is what we have in this country. Because the media have uncovered wrong-doings by various people in positions of authority and power. I don't want to live in society where the state regulates the media - in that sense I agree completely with Ian Hislop when he gave evidence to the Leveson inquiry and used the example of France, best viewed here

from 14m 46 s.

Bit in bold - just because the Met have said there doesn't appear to have been a criminal act doesn't mean there isn't a story of public interest and that something wrong or highly inappropriate hasn't been done. That's far too crude measure. The BBC has questions to answer because a member of its staff - a highly paid member of its staff - was the subject of serious allegations which were reported to the BBC and the BBC didn't appear to have acted on them. The BBC isn't beyond a bit of salacious gossiping - the coverage of the police raid on Cliff Richard's house over Yewtree being a prime example - and one for which the BBC lost a case at the High Court which led to them having to pay £2m in costs and damages. This is a simple question of safeguarding and the processes the BBC has and is following - and after the various well publicised scandals of BBC stars you might have thought they'd have addressed that and been swift and robust - except they clearly aren't.

Murdoch's an old man - the reality is the BBC hasn't exactly been helpful to the UK and it's been given a privileged position for the best part of 100 years. Whilst I accept the position in the 1920s and 1930s it made sense for a single, national broadcaster, that it was put in place without any other broadcaster being licensed was utterly wrong - and was the reason why 'off shore' broadcasters such as Radio Luxembourg or Radio Normandie set up. By the 1950s things did start to change - but don't overlook the fact the first commercial radio station in the UK wasn't licensed until 1973 and even then only 'local' stations were licensed, it wasn't until the 1990s that national commercial radio was licensed and even then it was given 'cast off' frequencies that the BBC didn't want in order to hobble it. Only now with digital radio, digital TV and streaming are we starting to see some form of parity. So I don't have a great deal of sympathy for the BBC - and don't support a 'flat fee' TV licence which you have to pay regardless of whether or not you want to consume BBC content. If you believe the BBC wants a pluralistic media landscape any more than Rupert Murdoch does, then you'd better DM me your bank details, because I've got a relative who died in Africa recently and left a couple of million dollars for me to disburse.......

Yet, you defend Rupert Murdoch for wanting a broadcaster to be shut down.......

 

[alex397]

I have always purchased The Sun (along with The Mail) and will continue to do so.

You can do so if you wish. As long as you know who the proprietors are and the right-wing agendas they want to push. They are not exactly newspapers to read if you want a balanced view of the world. They are designed to put fear in to people.
I have older relatives who read the Mail, and believe every word they say, and seem scared of the world. One seems to think that if they go into town, an immigrant will assault them “it’s too dangerous to go into town with all those immigrants about” is something they have said.

 

[AlterEgo]

Had he spent time browsing certain adult websites, this wouldn't be a story (I use the word 'certain' because some adult websites are legal in this country) - no question at all. But that's not what we're talking about here.

Well it may very well be that he just went and paid for content on OnlyFans. We don't know.

The Sun on Sunday didn't say anything about 'noncing' though - always helps to actually look at the headline, which actually said "BBC Star sent pants pic to teen" https://en.kiosko.net/uk/2023-07-09/np/sun.html - I'm the father of 2 teenagers - would I be happy with anyone sending either of my children a "pants picture" ? Probably not, but if it was somebody they were in a relationship with, I might accept it. But when it's somebody who is older than me, who is in a position of authority - then it's completely inappropriate. It may be *legal* but that doesn't mean it's right or appropriate. If a member of staff at the school I'm a governor for did such a thing, it would be a breach of our social media and behaviour policies and action would be taken.

So teachers cannot send erotic or risque pictures to other consenting adults? You go on about a position of authority; Edwards was not in a position of authority over the original complainant.

 

[brad465]

Could I just repeat for the benefit of the tape: DONT BUY THE SUN

( and dont click on it's links! Stop giving them money and they will die. Then we will all live in a better world)

This should be a sticky. Worthwhile evergreen advice for everyone, unless of course you're the type to buy into hackery, lies and hypocritical BS design to lure in simpletons. The biggest failure of all of this is that The Sun will continue to exist because there are - amazingly - still people buying it.

They have actually been a loss making outlet for a while. The problem is Murdoch sees value in keeping it in existence, so it won't be allowed to fail yet.

 

[DarloRich]

They have actually been a loss making outlet for a while. The problem is Murdoch sees value in keeping it in existence, so it won't be allowed to fail yet.

Most ( all?) print media outlets make a loss. They continue because of the access and influence they offer to the owners.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You cant beat a good hypocritical Tory MP looks a teat story

For those of us "not in the know", what exactly is a "teat story" ?

 

[nlogax]

For those of us "not in the know", what exactly is a "teat story" ?

Something I'm definitely not going to Google from a work laptop.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

For those of us "not in the know", what exactly is a "teat story" ?

At a guess, a way of sneaking past the naughty word sensor. Think small birds that come in blue, coal, and great varieties.

 

[Moderating team]

We are going to lock this thread until such times as the BBC have completed their internal inquiry and the results have been made public.

thanks all

BBC resumes Huw Edwards inquiry as no criminality found by police

Police say no evidence of criminal behaviour over claims he paid a young person for explicit photos.

www.bbc.co.uk

The BBC is resuming its investigation into Huw Edwards, after police found no evidence of criminal behaviour over claims he paid a young person for explicit images.