Colour me surprised
Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
Ni, they should have reported on it, as they have done, as it is news.
Wtf you are on about about being on trial and me being on the jury, I don't know.
I'm not saying that there should be any consequences or punishment. I couldn't care less. That is up to his employer.
You are arguing that he deserves special treatment from the media compared to hundreds of other celebrities in comparable positions in the past but struggling to express why, ignoring valid comparisons to similar situations and pretending that some of the allegations against him don't exist or are just what many 60 year olds do and not noteworthy.
GB News isn't going to go anywhere near this because one of their biggest presenters has been accused of something very similar on twitter (and actually much worse) as part of the fallout from this Edwards story.
There's a really good interview on yesterday's News Agents podcast with the former Sun editor David Yelland where he talks about what the mood is like at The Sun and newscorp, and how there's big infighting between the Sun and Sunday Times because The Sun think the Times threw petrol on this story with their reporting and editorials last weekend and took it to a level of hysteria even the Sun wasn't comfortable with given they're the ones exposed legally.
He also talks about how the BBC need to wake up and realise they're in an existential fight with the papers for their survival, that the owners of all papers want the BBC dead and the license fee gone, and how they are their own worst enemy in the way they try to pretend they're above all that.
It's a good listen. Yelland was also the first person I heard who talked about how if the Sun didn't name Edwards, they can't have real proof of what they were accusing him of, becaue if they did there's no way they'd conceal it.
Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 17,029
They've already covered it on most of their programming.
They'd be perfectly happy to throw Wooton under the bus just like they got rid of Brillohead and Shit Steyn.
They have absolutely no loyalty to their "stars".
MellowJoe
Well-Known Member
Makes me feel good, knowing that some 60 odd year old bloke reading the news on the telly pays a youngster to send nudes.. there's life in the old dog yet
Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 17,029
Well, in fairness, until this week, it has also been difficult for the whole of the media and the vast majority of the general public to understand too, given that this is the first time that there has been a concerted media led effort - shaping some public opinion - to banish discussion if his actions because such consequences might disturb the person who chose to do if knowing it would invite a shitstorm. Previously, the media and majority of the public took the view "they chose to act recklessly and knew it would get reported, if discovered, when taking that risk'
It is no coincidence that the first person to be afforded a huge push on an alternative narrative is someone at the centre of the media. That's my central point.
And I think the BBC is brilliant and generally won't hear a word against them.
But I don't think he is deserving of special sympathy/requests for media blackouts denied to others, given it is his choices that brought him here, with the knowledge of what was likely to happen if discovered.
You really aren't grasping it. I'm making no moral judgement on his predilections, or on workplace behaviour.
A newspaper with an anti-BBC agenda made what now appear to be untrue claims that an unnamed BBC presenter had committed criminal offences. That's why it's been dealt with differently, and it appears to be based on no evidence.
Yet you're here with others (some inventing even more outrageous stuff than The Sun) still making false equivalances.
Because they're not stars and there are soon-to-be-unemployed Tory MPs queuing up for a job?