Forums Forums National News Why is the BBC Under Fire?

According to reports and interviews with his friends, the Victim is male. One friend even suggested it would not have gone this far if it was with a young girl, not sure what difference that would make anyway. Regardless of what he has done, everyone I have seen interviewed on this matter all agree the BBC could have warned him or at least mentioned it to him 7 weeks ago. If the BBC dealt with it sooner it may not have got to the Sun.

They will have a Code of Conduct and will investigate under their set of rules and make a decision.

Warned him of what?

Do you not think that would be interfering with a Police investigation about a potentially criminal matter?

No code of conduct can override the law.

No code of conduct can protect you if you commit defamation, slander or libel when you act on hearsay.

It has now got ridiculous ..... I received a letter with a kiss on the end and it has ruined my life.

Can you not recognise when the media are having a field day against a company that can't protect itself and manipulating people into a certain mindset. This only happens against companies that can't protect themselves such as the BBC, RSPCA and various other charities. What about the thousands of genuine offenders that worked for high street chains or other large media companies, you don't see the media playing silly-beggers with them because they would end up in court.

I wouldn't have warned him of anything, but the people I seen being interviewed were making the point it may have saved him from being admitted to hospital in the apparent state he is in now.

Apparently, it has just come to light, the BBC were investigating him before this particular episode involving the parents.

7 months ago a Police Force said at that point there was no criminality and again recently but there are Moral standards even though the BBC are slow to act on them.

Would you have if back on the telly?

2 months not 7

Yes, I've just seen the full timeline.

It was a private matter between two individuals, if there is nothing illegal and both parties agree how can there be any moral issues and how dare the media plaster it everywhere?

Why are the BBC under fire? It is absolutely nothing to do with the BBC other than if they suspect there may have been leaks from the BBC about this confidential matter then they need to report it to the Police and the the Information Commissioners Office (data protect act).

People have different likes, fetishes and kinks, they are private matters, their privacy should be respected.

The media have acted appallingly in this case, it is a complete breach of privacy and nothing at all to do with public interest. We need the Levenson 2 enquiry to go ahead.

The "moral" case that the money paid was used to fund the other party's drug problem doesn't hold any weight. Every drug user has sources of income, the sources cannot be held responsible as we the public fund much of them.

The "victim" might be in breach of tax legislation as they were clearly receiving money for services. If they were not paying tax, revealing that may be in the public interest however the sources of that income (Huw in this case) is not in the public interest.

And to answer your question, I have seen nothing that indicates he is unsuitable to do his job.

I don't see him coming back from this and it has nothing to do with legalities, when was it the media had any scruples and they are unlikely to have any in the future. The BBC have been no different, Cliff Richard springs to mind and no doubt a few others who had no case to answer.
The latest allegation is being inappropriate with young BBC staff members, so we will see where that goes.

You say it has nothing to do with the public interest, the public will make their own mind up on that one.

I meant Public Interest in the legal term where it specifically overrides the expectation of privacy, yes the public are fascinated in anything with an X in it, we never leave the sniggering playground stage.

He's been wanting to retire for the last few years but the BBC just kept throwing more money at him. Its a difficult decision to walk away from a half million salary.

I hope he recovers his health and enjoys life, i wouldn't be surprised to see him back on some outdoor ramble type more relaxed program at some point, he is a natural presenter and obviously took pride in his abilities.

I also hope he also sues the media or brings about some change, he was known to be a very vulnerable person and the media were relentless, although they didn't name him, there have been successful cases where pointed comments were made about a person without actually naming them.