How does the BBC get out of the presenter mess?

[mids2019]

Seriously how does the BBC now go forward and what can be the conclusion to this story? The story could run for some time with on going speculation about the presenter and eventually in my opinion a name will drop.

Can there therefore be any sort of fair investigation because I think there may be too much aspirational damage now for a career to be as ed. It seems the knives the BBC sit on this the more scrutiny there is and they desperately need a conclusion?

I have had enough and will be cancelling my license fee. Can someone tell me if I cancel the license fee does it stop the bbc programmes etc coming through sky or do I have to do it manually?

Yes it matters as there’s been a lot of homophobia on Twitter due to the assumption that it was a gay presenter and comparisons to Schofield were being made.

This comment won’t go down well but this lad has not had his life ruined. What happened is sleazy and unpalatable but not illegal, and while sending nudes isn’t great, thousands of teens do it every day and unless they end up online it’s hardly a life ruining act. I’m getting a bit tired of everything being described as ‘life ruining’ when really what people mean is embarrassing or very upsetting, using such extreme language helps absolutely nobody and removes all shades of grey from life and people. It also encourages people to give up and be a victim rather than learn from past mistakes and move on with a sense of optimism.

17 year olds are not children either. Are children allowed to leave home and set up on their own? Didn’t think so. Uncomfortably young yes and speaks volumes of this presenter as a person but not a child and no laws have been broken.

If you cancel your BBC licence you aren’t allowed to watch live TV (which includes YouTube live bizzarly). I cancelled mine and had to agree not to watch live tv shows. Seems insane and not sure how they can enforce it really. We only watch streaming services anyway.

He's addicted to crack.
But is that true? We only have the parents/Sun 's word for that. I do wonder how many of the allegations are true and how much is made up /made more of to sell papers.

If you cancel your licence fee, you cannot watch or record ANY live TV from ANY channel.
You can watch On Demand and Catch Up TV. No iPlayer.

Where is this murky poll you speak of? A Twitter poll by any chance😆?

That’s assuming the youth was a crack addict. That’s assuming the BBC presenter knew the youth was a crack addict. That’s assuming the parents were telling the truth. That’s assuming The Sun published the truth.

We don’t know yet - or indeed may never know - what is fact and what is fiction.

I think that the law was broken because some of the pictures were obtained whilst the person involved was only 17 , which is how I've interpreted it in the news anyway. They have laws for a reason and this one was broken.
If they had been 18 or 19 selling them on, then maybe there wouldn't be as much publicity or the papers might not have run with the story
We might never know.

Child and Child can well afford to do pro bono work.

I find it weird people are getting hung up on the age (beyond that it is illegal at 17 obviously)

Like say it was "BBC presenter accused of paying mentally unwell vulnerable single mother, 25 for sexual images that enabled her to fall victim to a serious crack addiction"

Does he somehow seem any better? Does she seem any less vulnerable and less at risk of being exploited by famous rich older men who have money to throw at their sexual gratification? Does it damage a life any less simply bc it's "legal" ?!

the mother said, how does this kid afford one of the most expensive law firms there is to represent them, or even know who they are and what they specialise in.
A twenty year old is not a kid. And like everyone else they can research law firms
Also as a lawyer said this morning on the news the law firm may not be charging. But the truth is noone knows and speculation and people saying they know the truth when they don't doesn't help anyone and certainly not the young person at the heart of this.

This demonstrates very well how some people will pick and choose what they want to believe, and will repeat those parts as if they are fact (and so be outraged about what they themselves have chosen to believe).

At the moment there is nothing more than a set of allegations from person A and person B that relate to activities by person C and person D - one of whom (the alleged voting) has described them as rubbish, the other has made no official comment.

That is literally all there is at the moment, everything else is speculation.

Absolutely agree. And whilst it’s incredibly distasteful and an uncomfortable marketplace, it’s not got the direct risk of meeting and becoming physically intimate with a complete stranger, which is what addicts have been forced to do since the dawn of time. Those that choose or feel they have no alternative but to use this form of funding at least maintain some element of control, which they wouldn’t down a dark alley or in the back of a car.

Common sense and facts will never stop the lynch mob.

🤣 yes, best stick to the morally-minded Sky then (you do know who owns Sky, don’t you? And you do realise the connection to the Sun? And you can complete the jigsaw puzzle around the licence fee- today being the day the BBC releases its Annual Report so will be under more media scrutiny today?

of course you do, why else would you be posting such a ridiculous comment if you aren’t being paid to do so

I would have thought being a crack addict and prostituting yourself might, if not ruin your life severely impact your well-being. But maybe you're right the youth should feel empowered by their choices, give up being a victim and and move on with a sense of optimism...............😳

I suppose it depends on circumstances. If they get lots of false/malicious allegations then not getting a reply to an email would make me think this was someone who wasn't actually serious and I'd press on with other complaints where people replied to me.

I'm not sure what they mean by "didn't connect" was it ringing and not answered or not a real phone number?

What I can get past in this is the parents going to The Sun.

How could they do this to their child?

This is the very last place to go if they were concerned for their child's welfare. Could they have truly been this misguided.

@NoraBattysCurlers desperate parents may not always think straight .

Probably because Jeremy Kyle is no longer on air…

Exactly. What this young man needs to hear right now is ‘Okay that wasn’t a very sensible thing to do, but don’t panic, you can move on from this and there’s no reason you can’t get your whole life back on track’. Not ‘OMG YOUR LIFE IS RUINED’. No wonder teens suffer with their mental health surrounded by such alarmists and red button pushers.

As for the presenter it’s very likely his wife and inner circle know by now. That’s punishment enough as far as I’m concerned. Up to the BBC whether they let him go but I would urge them to consider the precedent.

Well no. Becoming a drug addict has every chance of ruining someone’s life.

Shouldn’t they be targeting the people who supply the drugs?