How is Huw Edwards different to Philip Schofield

[user6482952]

Heard this question raised on LBC this morning and was wondering the same thing.

How are the two any different? Both older men engaged with younger men, both cheating on their wives, and both claiming mental health issues post revelation.

sorry, meant MH

I mean this I don't think HE is denying anything I mean his name wasn't plucked out of the air he must have made himself known!

He was I’m talking in a Guardian newspaper interview a couple of years ago about how he was engaging with younger people via Instagram. He laughed re how he could prove to his employers he was still able to communicate with young people.

That’s backfired …

I completely disagree with this. He’s the BBC’s top presenter - if anything he’s a bigger name than Schofield.

I know but if the YP was selling pictures generally, how would they (or their parents) know who the buyer was to make the allegations?

Huw Edwards is not in any sense a personality, and no one has engaged with him. He is just a face that reads a script. No one feels they have any sort of relationship or engagement with him not even a media relationship. He isn't really a "household" name"

He read the BBC news, he commentated on the Queen's funeral, Trooping the Colour, the Coronation and was widely regarded as a worthy successor to David Dimbleby (you'v heard of him, right?) as the BBC's voice on events of national importance. Not in any sense a personality??

HE was spending his money on an only fans service that was not illegal. If the young person was 17 that was only fans not checking their users. We may believe that HE is sleazy for purchasing a service from only fans but it is legal and he is entitled to a private life. The police have said that no crime was committed and the young person says that no impropriety took place. If this is the case then The Sun should not have pursued this. It is none of our business.

but he is just a face that reads, that is all, he doesn't do anything, or be anything, you could easily get CGI to do exactly the same - in fact, no one would know the difference.

He is a "big name" in the sense that he has read out his name to most of us for many years, but he is not a personality, or "talent" in any way

Why did she stay in the marriage long enough for everything to blow up? If someone posted on MN about a husband exhibiting the same behaviour as Huw, the replies would be unanimously LTB. A secret life like that does not appear overnight and wives are not stupid and oblivious to what their lifelong partner gets up to.

This is not misogyny or blaming women for a man's actions. But clearly, if you are married to a colossal, sleazy prick who sends nudes to teenagers then you need to take accountability on whether or not to stay in the marriage. That would be a deal breaker to many women but she chose to stay and issue a supportive, family friendly statement on his behalf.

come on, nobody even noticed he had been "taken off air"!!! he is a nobody - he is just a body that sits in a chair and reads a script.

I mean in media terms he is a nobody - obviously he is a human being just as important as any other human being, but he has no media talent, or personality, or anything

I am assuming as I have no idea that they had a private arrangement.and The parents found out. They are also accusing h im of feeding their child's drug habit and made a complaint to the bbc in May which is more than likely why they resorted to going to the papers, its all just sordid I don't know what the outcome the parents were after.

Why did she stay in the marriage long enough for everything to blow up? If someone posted on MN about a husband exhibiting the same behaviour as Huw, the replies would be unanimously LTB

I was reading threads yesterday and thinking just that. Husband messages teenagers and pays them money that gets spent on drugs? He's a sleazy bastard, OP, LTB. But a husband who is famous and a favourite of millions because he's on TV gets a free pass for his behaviour because 'he's done nothing illegal.' The hypocrisy was off the scale.

Literally thousands of people did notice though.

He was pulled form appearing on the one show and it was all over twitter

That would be a deal breaker to many women but she chose to stay and issue a supportive, family friendly statement on his behalf

For the moment, anyway. Imagine the reaction if she said DH is getting treatment for a mental breakdown and I'm leaving him because of all this. The press would turn on her as well.

Probably she has just as much to process as he does.

Philip used his power and Huw found him online and met him when he was 17 that is the age of consent for 2 adults, isn't it?????????

That. Exactly.

Schofield's chap worked with him and, probably, owed his place in the company to Schofield's mentoring and/or influence.

Edwards was, it seems though I'm not sure the full facts are known, buying pron through a site like Only Fans.

A power gradient like that in Employment is on a different scale to a commercial transaction, albeit one which is, of its nature, exploitative.

No-body is saying she isn't or can't!

She made a statement. Saying HE had a documented history of mental illness, worsened by the current events and he's in hospital and will answer to the allegations when well enough. That was it

The side making assumptions that means she's a disgusting human handmaid claiming her husbands alledged nefarious activities are her and him playing the mental health card and suggesting she doesn't care about abuse, is covering up for him or whatever is just as invalid as you claiming she isn't having a mental breakdown or expected not to.

You're all making shit up and projecting your own views and opinions.

WE DONT KNOW.

I used to find all his bowing and scraping to the Royals a bit sycophant to be honest.
Newsreaders have a different fan base to most people in the media though , look at how people love Trevor McDonald.
I remember the likes of Kenneth baker ( I'm old) saying people would send them presents or knitted jumpers ( one of the bbc ones used to wear knitted jumpers , so people would send them in)
It is bizarre , but they become the face of the bbc from reading the news / being a journalist

*You're all making shit up and projecting your own views and opinions.

WE DONT KNOW*

As are you. Had you bothered to read properly you'd have seen that I sympathise with her - she's been broadsided with all this but yet again, woman is supposed to act as emotional support animal for a man who's upended their life.

She didn't have to say anything the BBC were keeping quiet until she opened her mouth.

Some keyboard warrior on the daily Mail comments board blamed his wife because women go through the menopause ffs
It's unbelievable the stuff people write
She'll receive hate because she's a woman
It's a wicked state of affairs

I don’t think there’s a huge difference. Both engaged sexually with teenagers when they themselves were in their 50s/60s and married which is just sleazy and morally corrupt. Schofield had a position of power over the young man he had a sexual relationship with so that’s the only major difference. No idea if Huw had sex with any of the men he contacted but even if he asked for sexual pics of the young men when they were 18/19, it’s still fucking creepy. What on Earth would a man in his 60s see in a teenager? I’m 30 and I have no desire to look at teenagers in that way…

Don't care if he’s mentally ill either tbh, it isn’t a get out of jail free card.

She did because innocent presenters were being accused and abused as a result.

And by keeping quiet they made it worse. But blame the woman. We'll be hearing next she drove him to it.