Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
Easy! Get down to the Olympic Stadium and five minutes in yer life will be on an even keel again! But go when the Hammers have an away fixture!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
It strikes me that the coverage of this story is now - and has been for the majority of the time - dominated by different media camps arguing their own positions.
On one side, you have The Sun (a shit rag of the highest order) who have jumped the gun somewhat in some of the manner of their reporting (implying criminality, splashing the words of what seems to be estranged parents without the confirmation of the young man, etc). They are also, like many cranks completely obsessed with the BBC and trying to discredit it, as part of a nuts culture war.
On the other side, you have the BBC (that I think is a great provider of media, by the way) and most if the rest of the media focusing on what a disgrace The Sun is in the way they broke the story.
However, that's all minor detail, in my opinion and is really media navel gazing. Such discussions should not be dominating the media.
It always has been and always will be a big news story if a 'hetrosexual' married, 60 odd year old, is attempting to meet up with/ sending money to/asking for pictures of young men (and also potentially conducting other unwise interactions with young men in and out of the work place).
There is always going to be huge interest from the general public in such stories and there is a pretty reasonable argument that reporting that is in the public interest. If anyone, including Hugh Edwards, thinks otherwise, they are deluding themselves.
Famous, powerful figure acts in sleazy and deceitful way is a news story and always will be.
Also, as an aside, I imagine that being in Edward's position over the last few days is absolutely horrible and would cause anyone to suffer from severe mental turmoil and, as a statement of fact, describing that in the statement is almost certainly an accurate description of how he feels and is suffering.
However, when he was engaging in this activity, especially as a public figure, what the fuck did he think it would be like if/when he was rumbled. Something doesn't quite sit right with me with this attempt to make the main focus of the story about the impact on his mental health, rather than 'powerful media figure caught leading double life and acting in a sleazy manner towards people a third his age'. I'm not sure other people in the same position, who are not entrenched in and friends with many in the media, would be afforded such sympathetic (or any) focusing on their mental health as an angle.
On one side, you have The Sun (a shit rag of the highest order) who have jumped the gun somewhat in some of the manner of their reporting (implying criminality, splashing the words of what seems to be estranged parents without the confirmation of the young man, etc). They are also, like many cranks completely obsessed with the BBC and trying to discredit it, as part of a nuts culture war.
On the other side, you have the BBC (that I think is a great provider of media, by the way) and most if the rest of the media focusing on what a disgrace The Sun is in the way they broke the story.
However, that's all minor detail, in my opinion and is really media navel gazing. Such discussions should not be dominating the media.
It always has been and always will be a big news story if a 'hetrosexual' married, 60 odd year old, is attempting to meet up with/ sending money to/asking for pictures of young men (and also potentially conducting other unwise interactions with young men in and out of the work place).
There is always going to be huge interest from the general public in such stories and there is a pretty reasonable argument that reporting that is in the public interest. If anyone, including Hugh Edwards, thinks otherwise, they are deluding themselves.
Famous, powerful figure acts in sleazy and deceitful way is a news story and always will be.
Also, as an aside, I imagine that being in Edward's position over the last few days is absolutely horrible and would cause anyone to suffer from severe mental turmoil and, as a statement of fact, describing that in the statement is almost certainly an accurate description of how he feels and is suffering.
However, when he was engaging in this activity, especially as a public figure, what the fuck did he think it would be like if/when he was rumbled. Something doesn't quite sit right with me with this attempt to make the main focus of the story about the impact on his mental health, rather than 'powerful media figure caught leading double life and acting in a sleazy manner towards people a third his age'. I'm not sure other people in the same position, who are not entrenched in and friends with many in the media, would be afforded such sympathetic (or any) focusing on their mental health as an angle.
Last edited:
Gorton_Tubster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 16,319
- Location
- Riding the blue tidal wave.
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I have read cnn and Fox news for a few years and that's all they do, come out with sexual scandals against each other. I guess we're now in the same boat. Newscorp versus the BBC.Can anyone explain why this was a story to start with or is it all part of a Murdoch agenda to try and ruin the BBC? I am pretty sure that there are plenty of married men who are doing exactly what Edwards has be accused of, it may be immoral and ethically wrong but it isn't illegal and the other party seemed to be very happy to receive the money.
Gorton_Tubster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 16,319
- Location
- Riding the blue tidal wave.
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Yeah he needs treating more like Caroline Flack.It strikes me that the coverage of this story is now - and has been for the majority of the time - dominated by different media camps arguing their own positions.
On one side, you have The Sun (a shit rag of the highest order) who have jumped the gun somewhat in some of the manner of their reporting (implying criminality, splashing the words of what seems to be estranged parents without the confirmation of the young man, etc). They are also, like many cranks completely obsessed with the BBC and trying to discredit it, as part of a nuts culture war.
On the other side, you have the BBC (that I think is a great provider of media, by the way) and most if the rest of the media focusing on what a disgrace The Sun is in the way they broke the story.
However, that's all minor detail, in my opinion and is really media navel gazing. Such discussions should not be dominating the media.
It always has been and always will be a big news story if a 'hetrosexual' married, 60 odd year old, is attempting to meet up with/ sending money to/asking for pictures of young men (and also potentially conducting other unwise interactions with young men in and out of the work place).
There is always going to be huge interest from the general public in such stories and there is a pretty reasonable argument that reporting that is in the public interest. If anyone, including Hugh Edwards, thinks otherwise, they are deluding themselves.
Famous, powerful figure acts in sleazy and deceitful way is a news story and always will be.
Also, as an aside, I imagine that being in Edward's position over the last few days is absolutely horrible and would cause anyone to suffer from severe mental turmoil and, as a statement of fact, describing thst in the statement is almost certainly an accurate description if how he feels and is suffering.
However, when he was engaging in this activity, especially as a public figure, what the fuck did he think it would be like if/when he was rumbled. Something doesn't quite sit right with me with this attempt to make the main focus of the story about the impact on his mental health, rather than 'powerful media figure caught leading double life and acting in a sleazy manner towards people a third his age'. I'm not sure other people in the same position, who are not entrenched in and friends with many in the media, would be afforded such sympathetic (or any) focusing on their mental health as an angle.
Kinkybyname
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 2,993
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I never said anything to the contrary. I asked a question after a poster made a statement as a matter of fact. It remains unanswered.
Blue Maverick
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 21,777
Just said that to the wife, dont be surprised if he tops himself, fucking media and social media are a cancer on the world. If he’s done wrong sack the bloke and leave him alone, if anyone can come forward and show they’ve not fucked up in life I’ll show my arse on the town hall steps (once the refurbs done).Yeah he needs treating more like Caroline Flack.
, needs treating more like Caroline Flack.
That's an extreme statement and you could state that about any news story where someone has been caught out, if you wish to.
Surely you are not suggesting that his behaviour is the sort of thing that you wouldn't expect to be reported?
Or that he wouldn't be aware of the shitstorm it would cause when rumbled when he was behaving as such?
I'm not suggesting that there should be a witch-hunt but it is naive in the extreme for him or anyone else to think it wouldn't be reported and that it wouldn't cause all sorts of untold stress for him and his family (as with many, many news stories - not just sleaze ones - on public figures that aren't afforded the same sympathetic focus from large sections of the media)
It's a fair argument to make if you think such stories should never be reported at all.
But if you recognise that this type of story will always be of interest to the press then surely you can see that, say, politicians (and many others) for example, are not afforded the same 'concern' when in comparable circumstances. Fair enough if you think they should be - and I might not disagree- but that's not a commonly held view.
That's my point. The speed with which a story on a media figure in the wrong has switched to concern for him, when non media figures would not get that at all.
Last edited:
ganganvince
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2014
- Messages
- 6,652
You having an arse refurb?Just said that to the wife, dont be surprised if he tops himself, fucking media and social media are a cancer on the world. If he’s done wrong sack the bloke and leave him alone, if anyone can come forward and show they’ve not fucked up in life I’ll show my arse on the town hall steps (once the refurbs done).
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
Where the fuck have I said the family sold the story? Go on cunty bollocks - show mePay attention and read again. You said the family sold the story - I asked how do you know that? You haven't answered.
How can the Sun be my "beloved gutter rag of a newspaper" - it is a rival. I carry as much a torch for the Sun as you do for Man United. Ludicrous argument.
Note: Saying that his mother has sold her child down the river isn't the fucking same as saying she sold the story to The Sun, unless you're a thick twat who doesn't understand that particular saying
Last edited:
Centurions
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure that's true TBH.I never said anything to the contrary. I asked a question after a poster made a statement as a matter of fact. It remains unanswered.
That said you've not quoted anyone so I may be wrong.