To wonder why Huw Edwards is being treated a lot more sympathetically than Phillip Schofield was ?

[Barnybrown]

That’s it really - the tone of the media coverage re Huw seems much more sympathetic than the coverage Phillip received and discussion generally just seems much more sympathetic of Huw than Phillip, I can’t quite understand why?

There's already been this thread. Consensus was that schofield groomed the young man he had a relationship with, and then used his influence to get him a job, then got him removed from the job when the relationship ended. He also knew of his brothers paedophilia and kept quiet. Huw allegedly paid an adult for pictures. Also as of yet it is still only allegations against Edwards.

Because he's in hospital for mental health issues which likely means he's on suicide watch. I guess the gutter press need to now be careful?

No idea, especially if the allegations of threats/aggressive behaviour are borne out, there are aggravating factors to the Schofield situation but that doesn't mean Huw's behaviour is ok. He was still in a position of fame/power/financial control. Yes he is struggling with his mental health, so do many people they still don't behave the way he allegedly has. It all reeks of Caroline Flackism to me #bekind

I think it's because Huw has a documented history of MH issues

Anyone know if the allegations (from 4 different people I gather), are from young men or young woman or both?

Just asking because DH assumed men and I assumed woman! It doesn't matter either way I guess. Although personally I'd be more upset with my husband cavorting with a young man behind my back, than with a young woman. Probably because it would mean he'd lied twice - once re: the acts he was engaged in and secondly about his sexuality.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4848074-how-is-huw-edwards-different-to-philip-schofield

@NameChange245 one of the guys who sold his story about Huw is definitely male. I knew because of some contacts in the media I have. Don’t know about the others.

Exactly this.
There is no evidence of HE being involved with anyone underage and paying for grubby photos is not in the same league as PS's online messaging, using influence to get jobs and a physical relationship

Because people are shallow... Huw comes across respectable whereas Philip is smarmy. It's easier to forgive someone who seems nice it's harder to forgive someone who gives you the creeps.
It's all to do with their persona and nothing to do with their actual character.

I'm not judging either of their characters because I don't know them.

i think that we are all out of puff from schofield and sadly getting used to these sort of things .

I agree.
Both in position of power, both had encounters with adults.
I don’t see much difference.
i think Schofield should have had himself admitted to hospital. Seems to do the trick.

Deja by.

I think because PS met the boy as a child/teen and allegedly groomed him into a physical relationship. Lied about it. The covering for his paedophile brother probably didn't help.

HE paid an adult for photographs.

I think lots of people probably pay money for photos of semi-naked/naked adults (onlyfans, porn, page three, mens mags etc) so there's a bit of a 'he who is without sin' vibe going on. The number of people who groom teenagers into physical relationships and cover up their brothers paedophilia is far fewer.

Because a massive % of the male population are also paying for Only fans photos and porn etc. HE doing what literally millions of other men are doing everyday across the world.

Assuming that all the allegations against both are out in public then PS went far further in grooming an underage child, using his position to get them a job and having a physical relationship with them. And then lied about it. HE seems to have sent flirtatious messages to younger more junior colleagues (still adults), bought pictures from a young adult and broken lock down rules - all very sleazy but really not in the same league.

As far as media reporting is concerned I think that there is a bit of a backlash from BBC colleagues (who are journos) and other non Murdoch press who are understandably appalled at the way the Sun splashed the story with minimal evidence which they hadn't seen themselves, alleging that HE had paid an underage teen for pictures (which is a crime) when it appears that he hadn't. Decent journos don't publish on such flimsy evidence. Many now feel that HE has been triggered into a catastrophic mental health crisis by what appear to be unsustainable/untrue allegations of criminality. GIven the number of UK men on Only Fans it is statistically likely that a number of those working in the SUn newsroom are guilty of the same behaviour. In these circumstances it is likely that the Sun chose to use someone with a known history of severe mental illness as poorly researched collateral in their ongoing campaign against the BBC whom Murdoch considers to be "eating his lunch".

None of that in any condones what HE did.

Homophobia.

As well as all the stuff already included in this thread, and I do think the situations are quite different, there have been countless rumours about PS' vile treatment of colleagues. So maybe people more willing to stick the knife in.

I think there's definitely some cognitive dissonance too. It's hard to accept that someone who you like and seems so respectable might have acted in an inappropriate way.

I don't think it's homophobia. I had assumed from what I'd seen that at least some of the people HE had been involved with were men, and the media have been pretty careful not to mention it.

How does that work? Both have allegedly done stuff involving other men so how can any difference between homophobia?

Probably because he didn't jump a queue and also people have been gunning for Phillip for years, whereas Huw was seen as that nice newsreader

The accusations are different. Just because they are both in the media doesn't make their situations the same.

Neither deserve any sympathy whatsoever. Personally I think Huw Edwards comes off as creepier because of his five children. There's something really sick and disturbing about daddy getting his sexual jollies from teens/young adults of a similar age to them

Ridiculous. If its a teenage girl the rhetoric will be she's using her looks etc. She's manipulative. Misogyny is just as bad as homophobia.

Sorry, who is the teenage girl you are referring to?
The question is why are Schofield and Edwards being treated differently. There’s no teen girl in that question.

I think half the country lost respect for PS the minute he sat on the This Morning sofa looking pathetic whilst Holly read his statement about being gay. Then the interview he gave looking similarly pathetic with his vape cemented it. Plus the fact that he's a groomer and his brothers a paedophile. And some of the claims against Huw seem a bit scurrilous.