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?

Smarmy, smug, arrogant, charismatic creepy, oily characteristics come to mind. He isn't an easy sleazy type to spot. Makes the world seem an unsafe place to some extent.

Also, all the posts giving more and more information about the 'presenter' are just calling out for the thread to be deleted. Just report them and ignore them.

Unfortunately there is quite an active smear campaign going on against a specific other presenter which has got some traction (my bloody MIL sent me a link last night).

For his sake, and the other innocent people who've been dragged through the mud, the actual person accused should release a statement.

I don't think he will, though, because I think he's emerging as an extraordinarily unpleasant character.

Bringing it down to a basic level, why do some high profile men (and it appears to be always men) risk blowing apart their whole world - and that of their wives and families - for a sordid bit of titillation, be it heterosexual or homosexual? Whilst I’m not condoning affairs, I can understand physical human attraction and the potential temptation and thrill of a clandestine relationship but I don’t get the need to get involved with sleazy, squalid, exploitative and meaningless sexual thrills. Is it arrogance that makes them think they can get away with it or is their sex drive so high it can’t be fulfilled within a normal, loving relationship?

Assuming this BBC presenter lived as a straight man and over the years realised he was maybe bi or gay, why continue living a ‘fake’ life deceiving those around you and just be honest? So many high profile people come out now it’s no longer a big deal at all. If it’s who I think it is, there might have been a bit of chatter for a few days, but he could have slipped back into his role with barely a ripple. Now, there no chance he will survive this furore however it pans out - and he will possibly loose everything.

I can't quite believe that people who have spoken out against this are being called 'puritans' and 'morality police', or that there are so many people desperate to cast horrific aspersions on the young men and their families. I'd like to think they are all being paid to do so, but sadly I don't think that is the case.

@Superfood oh ok thank you, I didn't realise.

Whether what he’s done is illegal or not, his position is now untenable. A lot of what we have heard with his reactions and communications with the victim is very unpleasant, and a lot of what keeps people on our screens is how liked they are by the public. People will switch off in their thousands. I reckon, due to his age, he will be offered early retirement. But is a shame someone so highly respected previously has to end his very long career like this. What was he thinking? Did he really think this would never have come to anyones attention? His family must be absolutely horrified.

@JohnPrescottsPyjamas if you've grown up in an environment where you've learnt that your own (homo)sexuality is deviant and sordid then you're most likely to go under the radar with sex workers to scratch that itch.

There are theories about repressed sexuality suggesting that your attraction gets 'stuck' so repressed individuals are most likely to pursue those of the age when they felt sexual urges most strongly ie teenagers. Or, another theory would be that youth = beauty in our society.

It's rather sad to think that if this individual had felt comfortable enough to be open about his sexuality he might not have ended up on this position.

Very good points well made. Thank you.

I wish people would stop using the words "story old as time" as all I can think about is Beauty and the Beast. 😂😂😂 You know the one:
"Tale as old as timeTrue as it can beBarely even friendsThen somebody bendsUnexpectedly"

Very interesting points.

I do currently, and I think there's potentially very good grounds for dismissal on the basis of bringing the organisation into disrepute. It doesn't have to be a 'crime' to trigger dismissal but it has to be considered gross misconduct. There's a way to go with the investigation though.

Only the men though.

A few prominent women have come out in later in life yet I've never heard of any 'scratching the itch' with sex workers or sending teen girls photos of their bottom or paying large sums of money for nudes of teen girls.

Yes, it's almost as if being a gross, threatening, manipulative, predatory, abusive pervert is to do with being male, and nothing at all to do with which sex you target with your predatory behaviour.

As Jimmy Savile demonstrated quite well.

And at first glance far less bad than Prince Andrew that gets to dress up at state occasions and seems to think he's done nothing wrong.

If he hasn't done anything illegal he may have grounds for unfair dismissal if they do that.

If he's a contractor (I think many of the main personalities are) then they could simply no renew the contract.

You don’t have to have done something illegal in order to bring your employer into disrepute.

Why would the BBC wish to settle if he has sent threatening messages which might put him in breach of contract and therefore gross misconduct?

For the BBC itself (even if it's another part of the BBC) to say within its capacity as a journalistic organisation that the message was threatening it must have passed a lawyer.

To think it hasn't is insane from two points of view - one it would undermine the BBCs journalistic integrity and two it would leave it vulnerable to get sued by the presenter.

On top of that the BBC can't really have the optics of giving licence payers money to someone doing this in a settlement. Not at this point. It will look like a cover up.

So the BBC will be hoping for a resignation with dignity (well what's left of it).

Even if he's lawyered up, what does he hope to achieve? He's not going to save his career is he? His career was built on a certain 'suitable persona' reputation. Now he will just be followed by jokes.

The fact here he's not going to get away from is that he's a married man on a dating app. So even if there is no illegality, his reputation has gone to shit and he isn't going to be able to deny how he met these two people.

The BBC can't have a man in his job. It just doesn't work. And the same goes for rivals. He will have to look for alternative roles regardless. And he can't blame the BBC for that.

Let's face it there will be someone turning in their grave. And that idea/imagery is exceptionally damaging to the organisation.

I suspect the devil will be in his contract over his conduct and bringing the organisation into disrepute. If the contracts are what they should be, he has a real problem that lawyers are unlikely to be able to be able to fix.

The lawyers can only fight off more serious allegations - ones suggested of a more sexual nature.

A name that’s been banded about has been published as an exclusive on a news website, I’ve seen it but don’t want to link and it’s not one that I recognise, not one of the main outlets

So many interesting points

Do you think the BBC have to act decisively as the presenter is 'hanging on' as even though due process is occuring the potential length of time for a suspension coupled with the fact a generous salary is being paid will sully the organisation?

I don't think 'retirement' will wash as that would suggest a large pension and pay off which although allowed may annoy the licence fee payer.

It may be embarrassing as how do his former colleagues and the press euologise his career?

It's a mess

I've never heard that before and doubt she ever said it

I dont know if this person is guilty or not. Will wait for investigations to conclude. But to answer you first puzzling: Because many more men get away with it than get caught. And if caught they can more easily rehabilitate their image than women. So for them, its not as high a risk as we think

There's also more stigma to men being homosexual as it was never illegal for women only for men. Its now becoming more open but in the psst even when made legal many would find it difficult to avoid the stigma of being gay.

Excellent points @RedToothBrush I was thinking settlement as an immediate solution and to avoid further delay but I agree with everything you have said