Dan Wootton trending on Twitter...

[LookItsMeAgain]

I was wondering why this name has been popping up on my "Trending for you"on Twitter over the past while

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/07/17/gb-news-star-dan-wootton-unmasked-in-cash-for-sexual-images-catfishing-scandal/

Wow is all I can say.

Just wow!

@vera99 this is fucking poetry. Well done.

Thanks ! But I got the order wrong - he should have the "woke fest" Wicker Man immolation first (obviously without the animals and birds I love those) and then we have a pile of ashes but no grave... needs some work !

I'm listening to his so called news programme from YT - he's majoring on Harry and Meghan now who as far as I know are keeping a low profile. But god I do feel grubby - time for shower. Coming up Jim Davidson on being cancelled by woke theatres (really !).

Plus I've outed my alter ego Martin Brannigan !! oops...

Have Bylines released part 2 yet?

Don’t be ridiculous- Byline is a well known scurrilous gossip rag with an anti mainstream press agenda. The journalist who wrote this article is a convicted phone hacker with well documented drug and alcohol addiction issues.

Frankly anything less reputable it would be hard to find!

err no ...

https://www.celebitchy.com/826620/dan_wootton_responds_to_bylines_report_as_his_employers_look_into_the_allegations/

Oh no, vera, you're not, are you? You're not quoting Celebitchy? 😂😂😂 That shining bastion of truth and accuracy. 🤣

You've obviously never actually read a single copy of Byline Times and appear to be confusing it with The Sun.

On the contrary I am extremely familiar both with the publication and with some of the very unsavoury individuals behind it.

The reputable and independent publications about media related issues are Hold the Front Page, U.K. Press Gazette and for the audiovisual industry Broadcast. They can be critical of the press but they are balanced and fair and have no agenda to promote.

Byline was initially funded by Hacked Off which tells you all you need to know.

I’d even rank Street of Shame in Private Eye above Byline in terms of credibility

On the contrary I am extremely familiar both with the publication and with some of the very unsavoury individuals behind it.

Then you should know, as I do since I have had a subscription, that it normally publishes quite serious articles about politics, not gossip and one reporter (Dan Evans) does not equal "very unsavoury individuals behind it". Just because you disagree with the politics of Jukes and Colgrave for example doesn't make them unsavoury.

Byline was initially funded by Hacked Off which tells you all you need to know.

They don't like hacking and want Leveson 2? Sounds good.

I don't think we need to argue that it is palpably "worse" than Byline Times an august website and YT channel I have long watched and read. I have a hunch that BT has paused Part 2 not as a result of a deluge of new information but as a result of a legal barrage coming down like a ton of bricks on their poor heads. Definitely a David and Goliath confrontation in which there can only I suspect one winner.

Thanks for the heads up they've done an analysis of HE vs DW.

Commenting on the discrepancy in coverage, Hacked Off CEO Nathan Sparkes said,

“Almost a fortnight ago, a poorly substantiated story in The Sun which referred to lawful interactions between two consenting adults, including a man who reads the news, sent the British press into meltdown.

“This week far more serious and better substantiated allegations were made, about a man who has made a career out of scrutinising the lifestyle decisions of those in the public eye, and they have been met with almost total silence.

“Indeed our research shows that in the first 24 hours after the story broke, there appears to have been almost a media blackout across the nationals, with independent publisher Byline Times joined only by The Guardian in reporting on allegations of wrongdoing against a man within the newspaper industry.

“This is further evidence that the British national press cannot be trusted to report on allegations of wrongdoing and scandal within its own industry”.

https://hackinginquiry.org/breaking-media-blackout-on-wootton-allegations-research-shows-edwards-story-generated-twenty-four-articles-in-the-press-in-first-24hrs-after-breaking-wootton-story-generated-zero/

If they've handed in all the evidence as they've said, then even if they don't print anything more at the moment, the police or CPS will ultimately decide what can be printed, not any newspaper.

Serves Byline right. If they were so sure of their facts they should have stuck it all out last night instead of playing games. They must have known this would happen.

Not just one reporter. How about Graham Johnson another prolific contributor also a convicted phone hacker and alleged to have procured perjury in the recent litigation brought by Baroness Laurence against Associated Newspapers - the witness he paid to give evidence has publicly recanted.

Aw, come on. Hacked off's whole purpose of being is to support those taking cases against the newspapers. Someone from there is involved in an advisory capacity, no doubt paid, in the current case against the Mirror.
They've no axe to grind against the Beeb.

They're hardly going to give an unbiased reading of the situation.

Forget these faffers. We need to see the evidence that Byline has. Because the more these lot yak, the more despondent I'm getting that there's nothing of substance.

"Alleged". So innocent until proven guilty, like you think Wooton is? A whistle-blower, apparently a poacher turned gamekeeper. Perhaps you don't think people can change, I do.

He's also not one of the reporters named on this story.

I still find it laughable that you're saying it's "less reputable " than the tabloid rags DW worked for over the years.

I find your defence of Byline bonkers! Guys like Evans and Johnson will never be able to work for any of the mainstream media again. They were swept away as part of the clean up post Leveson and rightly so as they are criminals. That clean up is the only reason why they are working for Byline and writing the kinds of articles they do as they are literally unemployable as journalists in any other regard.

If you want to buy their schtick that’s entirely up to you but don’t kid yourself that these are journalists with any integrity or moral code, or that the stuff they peddle is likely to be more believable than what you read in mainstream media or see on new broadcasters of record such as BBC and ITN

*news not new

You should all really fucking stop. You have no idea what you are putting this man through.

Yes, I imagine he’s scrolling through Mumsnet, bursting into tears at all the horrid women banging on about karma and hypocrisy and tastes of own medicine.

It might do him good, give a bit more care to what he says about other people in his Mail columns. In nursing we call it “being on the other side of the blanket” - being a patient can make someone into a much better nurse.

Care to enlighten us?😆

Maybe now he has an insight into what he has put countless others through without so much as a second thought.