Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Phillip Schofield Media Farce

38 replies

Moonopoly · 28/05/2023 07:14

To think this whole Phillip Schofield series of events shows how ridiculous the media is. All of this information was in the public domain for years. He first ‘admits’ the affair and today there are ‘new revelations’ but we all knew this was coming. I also knew when I clicked on it that the Daily Fail this morning that they would have some additional Sunday sensational reveal of the story. They are now also reporting ITV bosses may have ‘known’ before yesterday.
When him leaving was BBC headline news it was clear more was coming out.

It’s like a ridiculous soap story (I’m not talking about what actually happened) but the medias playing out of it. Obviously we already knew the papers are like this but social media now means we see all behind the scenes and know a lot of what previously would genuinely be shocking and we would believe the newspapers ‘had just found out’
What else do they know and are choosing not to tell us…yet?!

OP posts:
Boardname · 28/05/2023 07:16

Oh there will be loads they know but won't publish for various reasons, social media has really thrown a spanner in the works for the media thankfully. Still don't think we will ever get a truly impartial and honest media though.

Weallgottachangesometime · 28/05/2023 07:20

Oh yea of course there has been knowlege of this for a long time. They probably like letting small nuggets out at a time so they have ‘new’ material for click bait each day.

Wasn't there talk of there possibly being an injunction on what could be reported?

Real journalism is rare now. Why aren’t they out chasing proper stories about politicians, big business etc??? Instead it’s celebrity crap!!

TypicalCoach · 28/05/2023 07:27

Lol on naming the Daily Fail whilst admitting to reading it.

Well maybe miss media genius if you did your research you would see the evil Daily Fail released an article about this nearly 2 weeks ago hinting at it but Phillip Schofield filed a complaintthrough his lawyers callingithe story a lie and threatening to sue.
The Daily Fail then got in touch with the other party who stated it was true likely eith evidence, which left Phillip Schofield with no other option but reveal the truth and apologise to the Daily Fail.
There are things called libel laws in the UK that's why ither media outlets didn't out him sooner.

LakeTiticaca · 28/05/2023 07:58

Strange how so many MNers claim to hate the Daily mail yet still read it/ post links to it
I for one love Reading the Daily Mail, its the biggest UK newspaper so it must be doing something right.
I also love a bit of salacious gossip, the schofield business for instance.
People in th public eye who have a squeaky clean image and behave horribly behind the scenes deserve everything they get IMHO

DustyLee123 · 28/05/2023 08:02

Of course they know more, and PS will know they know more, it’s all damage limitation. And of course the DM will be following legal advice as to what they can say, it’s best to push PS to say it himself rather than be sued for liable.
He really is a disgusting man who lied from the start, remember the hair dye.

Begonne · 28/05/2023 08:07

If it’s not ok for people working alongside PS to turn a blind eye because they are profiting in some way from association, why do we not hold newspaper editors to a similar standard?

Why is it ok for editors to store up dirty secrets, waiting for the perfect moment to launch their story and take in the profits.

Where is their responsibility in this?

Tinkerbyebye · 28/05/2023 08:35

It may have been in the public domain but PS lied. It may have been said that MM was of age, but he wasn’t when a man in his late 40s started following him. He was, in my opinion groomed.

PS has lied all the way, forced to admit he was gay, otherwise he would in my opinion, continue lying to family and friends to this day.

it’s a safeguarding issue, and that’s where ITV and others failed. Ruth L made a complaint because of her concerns and was sacked, that’s wrong, ITV learnt nothing about the Jimmy andRolf situations.

PS abused his position and continued to lie, and to apologise to a paper like the DM means they have loads on him that absolutely is the truth.

Its right that this is now out in the open, as the truth

Original poster
Moonopoly · 28/05/2023 09:01

@TypicalCoach not sure why you think I’m a media genius but thanks - nice compliment to have

OP posts:
Original poster
Moonopoly · 28/05/2023 09:04

I agree it’s right it’s now out but why have they waited so long to ‘make him admit it’ that’s my point. They push the agenda they chose and that’s much clearer to see when we have social media that it was prior to social media. That’s the point I’m making. Years ago we wouldn’t have ‘known’ in the same way unless the media told us as there wasn’t anyway for people to connect information.
ps where did I say I didn’t read the Daily Mail?!

OP posts:
Justyouwait · 28/05/2023 09:08

It certainly takes attention away from the fact that the nhs has been sharing our personal medical data with Facebook, which is perhaps the story we should all be more concerned about right now.

Namechangedforthis25 · 28/05/2023 09:08

How do we know that Ruth complained about it - to who at itv?

ODFODeary · 28/05/2023 09:10

It was well documented at the time @Namechangedforthis25
At least someone at itv had scruples

YukoandHiro · 28/05/2023 09:11

You're not being unreasonable but you do realise it's all for legal reasons, right?

Despite what everyone thinks newspapers can't just print everything they know. Takes a LOT of legal work and evidence gathered and public interest defence to be able to publish a story like this.

So when it comes often it does feel like old news to those who have been following the less regulated gossip chat boards.

UndercoverCop · 28/05/2023 09:12

There's a super injunction expiring imminently, that's why it's taken until now from when the rumours first started and why they're dripping now, the full exposé will come in June, Phillip evidently is the litigious sort

Wombastic · 28/05/2023 09:12

Yanbu. I’ve seen the same information said in 50 different ways and it’s getting tedious. Clearly they chose not to report on this for years and now they are. So were the media also complicit in protecting ps? Where does it end?

cocoloco117 · 28/05/2023 09:13

Yes the media is ridiculous, but you, PPs (and me I guess) are happy to admit to lapping it up like sheep at a salt lick, so why should the media stop the farce when it’s so successful. If you really want change stop bleating about it, just don’t engage with it.

Original poster
Moonopoly · 28/05/2023 09:26

@cocoloco117 wasn’t aware that debate was bleating but okay

OP posts:
SophiaElizabethGrace · 28/05/2023 09:28

UndercoverCop · 28/05/2023 09:12

There's a super injunction expiring imminently, that's why it's taken until now from when the rumours first started and why they're dripping now, the full exposé will come in June, Phillip evidently is the litigious sort

There's never been a super injunction.

PosseGalore · 28/05/2023 09:37

i can't wait for the young man he had the affair with to tell his story. I really hope he does and when he does I hope he names names, including all the ITV execs who knew about the relationship and condoned it. If Phillip goes down they all go down.

ForeverFailing · 28/05/2023 09:38

I love reading the daily mail as I love a bit of celebrity gossip but the whole PS thing is becoming boring. It appears that the affair started when the man was of legal age so I don’t see the issue at present. Yes he cheated on his partner but so do lots of people. The man has lost his job and close friends due to this and I do think they need to just leave him be.

Namechanger355 · 28/05/2023 09:39

Well because there are libel laws which usually mean all stories need to be verified by at least a few different sources

social media isn’t regulated at all and doesn’t need to be verified - I could literally say something random and untrue now and it could go viral

Iyiyiiii · 28/05/2023 09:44

ForeverFailing · 28/05/2023 09:38

I love reading the daily mail as I love a bit of celebrity gossip but the whole PS thing is becoming boring. It appears that the affair started when the man was of legal age so I don’t see the issue at present. Yes he cheated on his partner but so do lots of people. The man has lost his job and close friends due to this and I do think they need to just leave him be.

Right, so it would have been OK if there was a friendship from the age of 10, and an alleged photo on a bed with this person at the age of 15, and it would be ok to get them a job, and then have a relationship with them when they were apprx 42 years younger....

Obviously this is only speculation from what has been reported to date... but I'm just checking if the above is OK??

ImAvingOops · 28/05/2023 09:45

The press can't print without proof. And that's as it should be. You can't have situations where they print some explosive story, that turns out to be untrue snd then they print a tiny retraction saying 'my bad'. And that's the likely scenario if the press could run free with unproven allegations.
But I do think the country was collectively gaslit with all the 'he's so brave in coming out as gay' bs, when this appears to have been an open secret amongst those who worked in tv. The media couldn't have outed him but equally they shouldn't have run with the narrative of how brave PS was, especially if they were sitting in this story.

ForeverFailing · 28/05/2023 09:48

Iyiyiiii · 28/05/2023 09:44

Right, so it would have been OK if there was a friendship from the age of 10, and an alleged photo on a bed with this person at the age of 15, and it would be ok to get them a job, and then have a relationship with them when they were apprx 42 years younger....

Obviously this is only speculation from what has been reported to date... but I'm just checking if the above is OK??

Show quote history

As you accurately noted it’s alleged. So on the basis of what we know he has done nothing wrong legally.

knittingaddict · 28/05/2023 09:52

On the basis of what is known he has done lots of things that are clearly wrong. They may not be illegal, but they are morally wrong.

I do wonder why some people are supporting PS. Is it the man himself or the principle that they are defending?