Huw Edwards named as BBC presenter!

[Amuseaboosh]

I'm actually shocked.

The BBC themselves confirmed he sent threatening messages to a young person., not the child of the parents who complained but another person

Yes I saw that, Iwantcakeeveryday, but do we know what these "threatening messages" are supposed to have said, and did they concern a sexually inappropriate action or something else?

As suggested, it may be best to wait until all evidence has been properly tried instead of making assumptions - not to somehow defend him, but simply in the interests of proper justice

Unless of course he does a Martin Bashir with "Ooooo I'm ill", and then you really will hear me shout, considering he's been just fine to carry on working so far

Not an act of great dignity but an act following great PR professional advice.

The BBC themselves confirmed he sent threatening messages to a young person.

A 'young person', so not a child?
If they are an adult what does it matter how old they were?

did they concern a sexually inappropriate action or something else?

Was it work performance matters?

eg; "If you run the autocue at that speed again I'm going to have words with your manager !"

We have had Ministers aides complaining they were 'bullied'. What a namby-pamby lot some workers are.

It can be both.

Ah... are you saying theres nothing to concern anyone about a person who is 18/19/20 being paid by powerful public figure for sexual photos? Or for that person to threaten them repeatedly?
He is in a prominent role with a public broadcaster. Apparently now former colleagues also got sent inappropriate things.

Yes we should allow The BBC to do their investigation but this became a story when they didn't;t deal with it in the first place, and now it seems publishing the first incidence has led to other people speaking up and it could be more widespread. If it transpires he was sending inappropriate messages to colleagues then the original story in the sun has served a purpose as it may not have come out otherwise.

I do take the point though that now its going to be hard to do the investigation fairly. It will be interesting to see what the BBc says about how they could have handled it differently and dealt with it discreetly first

He's just another disgusting, predatory, successful, old man targeting younger people as he knows they will be too scared by his power, too flattered by the attention from someone so successful or too desperate to complain after having £ thrown at them.

As for those questioning others feeling able to complain now his character has been called into question, wasn't that exactly what #MeToo was about? Having the courage to say it's happened to me too, he did it to me too. How dare people call it jumping on the bandwagon.

As for the suffering from depression, perhaps that was due to not being able to live the life he wanted to as he felt he had to maintain a veneer of respectability to continue being adored as a national treasure by his many admirers or maybe it was the terror of knowing one day his skeletons would be aired for all to see.

Exactly. What a way to take that away from women. Just because they like the BBC and / or presenter

MeToo worked for a reason

@Iwantcakeeveryday Ah... are you saying theres nothing to concern anyone about a person who is 18/19/20 being paid by powerful public figure for sexual photos? Or for that person to threaten them repeatedly?

I never said that at all, so please don't misquote me.

I said that we have no proof of what you allege.

Maybe we should take the sensible course of action (or rather non-action) until full investigations have been carried out, before we swear-in a lynching posse.

Oh please don't make light of lynching by misusing it here. The BBC have seen some of the messages he sent at least one person. The Sun say they have a lot more un published. He has;t been fired or suspended, nobody has hurt him. If people weren't rushing to excuse and minimise this there wouldn't be so much conversation like this about it.

This. The disinclinations to stick to the facts here is astounding. It makes me very fearful for anyone facing trial by jury.

nowhere has she said this is the cause or excuse or whatever ÷

She said her husband was "suffering from serious mental health issues" and is now "receiving in-patient hospital care where he will stay for the foreseeable future" as she asked for privacy for her family.

That is a statement of fact and not an excuse.

Where has the Onlyfans thing come from? Could you quote your source? I see no mention of Onlyfans in the news reports.

I do take the point though that now its going to be hard to do the investigation fairly. It will be interesting to see what the BBc says about how they could have handled it differently and dealt with it discreetly first

Yup.

The BBC have bolloxed this up big time.

How dare people call it jumping on the bandwagon? Because women are always to blame. The victims' parents have done something wrong; the wife didn't fulfil her 'duty'; SM is orchestrating witch hunts; soon men won't even feel able to talk to female strangers in public. Blame anyone and anything, throw the shit in all other directions, but gods forbid we place the blame on the men responsible.

The aftermath of #MeToo - aside from the recent full-on assault on women's hard-earned, still meagre rights - is the most demoralizing thing I've ever experienced in my life as a woman. It wasn't the hideous frequency of the assaults against women that necessarily unseated me: that sadly came as no surprise. It was the responses to those who did dare to talk - the instant counter-attempts to mock, discredit, and demonize those who bravely spoke, sometimes after decades of silence - that was so depressing and upsetting.

Because male sexual violence against women makes men look bad.

Because 'what about his mental health?'

Because men can in no way be perpetrators - a myth persisting in the face of all evidence and statistics to the contrary - and society is far more comfortable with the lie that all women are disingenuous, false accusers.

Feminism, despite valiant efforts over the past century in particular, made meagre process from the 1970s and since around 2020-15 has gone back about 50 years. The only good thing I can say for British justice in these cases is that there is no statute of limitations. Long may this continue to be true.

Read any thread about the protection of the perpetrators at the expense of the victims - including this latest BBC debacle - and weep. It never changes.

And the Rupert Murdoch empire, the Sun and its various editors over the years are disgusting, predatory beings.

Or does anyone really believe they're upstanding arbiters of morality who are shining a light on darkness?

The Sun exists to destroy certain people while hiding vile Tory behaviour

They will 'learn lessons', wait for the mud to dry, brush it off, and hope it all goes away. Exactly as they've done so many times in the past. And the public are apparently content to let it happen.

It's past my understanding.

OnlyFans is NOT relevant to Huw Edwards thing. But it’s a service where people sell their nude/scantily clad photos and videos to other people. Publicly advertised on billboards, no less.
what happened here is same type of transaction (maybe Huw should’ve actually gone through OnlyFans instead)

All this leads yet more credence to the argument that the BBC shouldn't be publicly funded.

And The Sun’s achieved its objective. How unutterably depressing that nobody can see it.

There is no suggestion of coercion here. Police said there is no case.

finding out something in May is not “months”, it could be end of May so barely six weeks.

re salary- what does the salary have to do with anything? Are you complaining about actors and footballers too? It’s irrelevant

Oh, yes. They certainly do come under the large, sleazy umbrella of The Establishment. They'll also use any opportunity that comes their way to throw shit at the BBC.

That still doesn't excuse the rugsweeping of powerful male predators which colours the whole establishment. And if these amoral ne'er do wells are seemingly the only people throwing sunlight on where and when this happens, this alone tells us something's badly wrong somewhere.

How has such a rotten state of a society come about? Whatever your thoughts on that particular question, and whatever your views on The Sun - mine are the same as yours as it happens - what it should tell us is that the free press is one liberty we cannot afford to lose.

Indeed. And whatever The Sun's dubious stance on that particular issue, and their attempts to discredit their old enemy, it shouldn't.

The irony: we are criminals if we don't pay our TV licence, and the people we pay to watch (cf. Savile, Harris et al) are a festering hotbed of salacious criminality the likes of which even The Sun couldn't dream up if it tried.

It's an antediluvian, ridiculous way of funding a broadcaster. Let them take their chances in the free market alongside everyone else.

Absolutely. Well said

I know the sort of background that Huw Edwards comes from and if he has felt unable to be true to himself all his life and felt he had to seem normal by getting married and having children then that is desperately sad andit’s now wonder he has suffered from serious depression all his life.

I couldn't agree more, but good luck with that when governments find a paid mouthpiece all too handy, especially when it's others doing the paying

The worry about the BBC brushing this aside is all too real - after all they've got form - but it doesn't change the point that sticking to the facts is important