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?

Oh I care about that- think it’s gross behaviour but honestly if we sacked every man or woman who behaved terribly but not illegally we would have around 80% of the population sitting on benefits and unemployable for buying sexy snaps or watching porn. It’s ridiculous, if you want a nun or a monk reading the news, move to the Vatican.

I just don’t care in terms of him reading the news to me or interview questions to some celebrity. I don’t agree my viewpoint normalises any of this behaviour because it is already fully normalised in our laws. Legal=normalised.

@StefanosHill I am not. Most news reports allude to the fact that the young person is male. Huw is not openly gay though, he presents himself as a married family man and committed Christian. Philip is openly (since his this morning interview at least) gay.

Phillip has admitted to a sexual relationship with a colleague he had known since he was a child, got him a job, then got him moved on when he had had enough. Plus turning a blind eye to his brother's crimes and years of complaints about bullying.

Whereas Huw was falsely accused by the Sun of illegally obtaining explicit photos of a child. The rest of the accusations seem to amount to very little, none have been shown to be true, and meanwhile he is in a mental health crisis.

Er ‘Mumsnet’ isn’t one entity speaking in unison on anything. Stop using it to back up your position because you certainly aren’t speaking on my behalf.

PS met the boy when he was a young child. He then brought him into the workplace.

I imagine therefore while both are ethically dubious PS behaviour is understandably seen as even dodgier.

Also PS did the whole big " coming out " theatrical thing when it was a fairly open secret on social media why he was really coming out. So the fakeness probably annoyed a lot of people

Thinking about the absolute vitriol aimed at Holly Willoughby and the totally pathetic statement she had to make on her return - I wonder if Huw had a female Co-host if she’s be getting the blame as well? Seems to be the thing people do when a man cocks up - blame the nearest woman.

I agree and that’s another sign of purity spiralling—->scapegoats.
Holly is an innocent bystander in all this, so deserves none of what has been directed towards her.

I think a lot of people just want more evidence before judging.

Right now we've got a lot of judgment based on not a lot of evidence.

Or even any at all.

I have to agree. And no, I'm not an MRA or whatever I'll be accused of being, but after the initial claims of The Sun who are now frantically back-peddling and saying they didn't mean to imply what they clearly implied.

And the fact they spent a week desperately trying to come up with further allegations but didn't find much so have now said they'll leave it alone and not publish further claims..

There's not much left other than the suggestion he made some junior staff at the BBC feel uncomfortable. Which is not okay but is for his employers to investigate and deal with.

So I'll wait for the outcome of that investigation.

Whatever the outcome his career is ruined and his mental health is shot. No wonder he’s angry, I’d be incandescent.

The Sun can and will argue that the initial story was in the public interest. Which it could be argued it may be. Except they knew the headline 'married TV presenter buys explicit photos from consenting adult' would raise a lot of curiosity but add in 17 year old and crack addiction and it would cause a huge furore.

They knew that. It worked. The other allegations they came up in the following week weren't particularly scandalous and they know this, so have now backtracked and said they won't publish anything else. This is The Sun, if they really had anything significant to say, they would be publishing it.

The BBC junior staff allegations should have been reported to the BBC which they now have been and should be investigated like any other employer investigation.

Then it's the responsibility of the employers to investigate and act accordingly.

If Huw Edwards is found guilty of misconduct then he should be dealt with accordingly. When that happens.

Not all the speculation, assumptions, misinformation and condemnation which is happening without any real processes having been concluded.

The other allegations they came up in the following week weren't particularly scandalous and they know this, so have now backtracked and said they won't publish anything else. This is The Sun, if they really had anything significant to say, they would be publishing it.

And like the absolute scum they are, somehow managing to insinuate that there is more but that they are restraining themselves out of the goodness of their hearts.

Tbh it was the Sun printing the parents story- and probably other outlets would have been more careful to verify and be accurate over what they were insinuating but I still think I would do the same and go to anyone who'd listen to make it stop if I were that parent after police and bbc were not getting involved

Rumours the parents have agreed to a televised interview- I think that'll sway people one way or the other, they'll either seem really uncredible with ulterior motives or very believable desperate people trying everything to get their child off crack. The alleged victim though I would imagine probably is trying to stop that happening rn otherwise they'll lose all privacy

Because the media is full of straight white men also paying for things they shouldn't.

Plus he's played a mental health card and the media are now terrified of questioning his behaviour.

As if I didn't already think The Sun were an asshole publishing group which exploits virtually everyone, as they back-tracked on their initial story. They did an interview with the parents involved which sounded like something written by Rita Skeeter and suggested they only published the false (according to the alleged victim) story because they wanted to save lives..

Because Huw has got Andy Coulson (former NOTW editor who did bird for phone hacking) doing his crisis PR since last Wednesday, whereas Philip tried to do his own and didn't bring in an external expert.

What's your definition of 'playing the mental health card'?

Even if someone had no history of mental illness do you not think it possible that them being accused of being a child sex abuser by a national newspaper (who have now retracted that claim) and millions of social media posts speculating about their life, sexuallity, marriage and them being a nonce could not cause some anxiety, depression or suicidal thoughts?

I mean, even if it was all true I think that being exposed could cause some significant mental health symptoms no?

Mental illness symptoms don't just exist if the anxiety, depression or suicidality occur in completely innocent people 😕

You’ve summed it up there

Well clearly it's not homophobia. I do think the fact the PS was generally unliked for his arrogant attitude to everyone in the show for many years didn't help. But it was clearly said when the story broke that he was being supported by his daughters who were effectively on suicide watch.

I think we just have to wait and see re HE. I don't like people who sexually harass younger people at work - whether they are straight or gay - and I think employers should take very firm action when it's discovered. From these stories it seems like too many media companies including GB News take a blind eye approach to their senior employees and that needs to stop.

It was a statement of fact. He's got a history of mental illness, funnily enough made worse by being exposed/accused of various allegations. Suspended from work, marriage, job, reputation,finances and the future threatened.

WHO wouldn't be struggling with their MH? Whether they had a history of mental illness or not?

There was nothing in Huws wife's statement to say he was suggesting his alleged actions were attributable to mental illness, just that he's in hospital and will answer allegations when he's well enough.

So let's wait for that.

MN as a forum has frequent posts about how being accused of something at work and suspended is causing/exacerbating mental health problems.

I mean, that makes sense? But somehow that doesn't here?

Huw could be an absolute asshole and/ or predator, we'll see, but the idea that someone's entire life collapsing around them causing or exacerbating MH issues is a PR move or a lie is just ridiculous to me.

the idea that someone's entire life collapsing around them causing or exacerbating MH issues is a PR move or a lie is just ridiculous to me.

And to me. I really hate inclination on the part of some people to default to thinking the worst of others.

I don't know whose post yr responding to here but it ain't mine carebear :-)

No it was yours:

potniatheron · Today 13:22

"Because Huw has got Andy Coulson (former NOTW editor who did bird for phone hacking) doing his crisis PR since last Wednesday, whereas Philip tried to do his own and didn't bring in an external expert"

Are you now suggesting you didn't suggest the statement was crisis PR? You clearly did.