Views on the BBC approach to protecting their media star?

[MyLittleStudPony]

Using whatever had happened here to further ones own nasty little political viewpoint is amazingly cheap; and I suspect will gain no traction.

[Screwdriver]

Given the Beebs history of harbouring sexual predators, I think they've thrown themselves under the bus. Another publicly funded organisation who'll get away with doing as they like whilst turning a blind eye.

No it is more an example of how "fame" can affect people. Both the perpetrator who is known by millions and the victim (let's say) who is in thrall of their fame.

I should (carefully) give you an example or two from my time at the beeb. Actually maybe just the one, the other is more sordid.

I was working in outside broadcast the holy grail for any BBC engineer. Damned difficult to get in because you get to go everywhere behind the scenes. FA cup finals, Snooker, concerts, if it was on telly and outside the studio, outside broadcast were there.

So I was on a rather nice jolly at some concert or other, Earls Court Iiirc or it might have been Wimbledon <whatever>. Lots of bands on and Take That who were HUGE at the time. As I approached the gates, the crowds were incredible. Thousands and thousands of fans outside, screaming at a volume you simply cannot imagine. it was insane.

"Take me in with you", "Let me in", "marry me" (I'm not even kidding) and my favourite, "I'll suck your cock".

Yeah, as tempting an offer as it sounds, the average age of that mob would have been something like 8 to 12 years old..

The world of celebrity is a strange one but these people are still merely humans and the temptations placed in front of them are infinite. You don't naturally associate sex 'n drugs 'n rock 'n roll with news presenters (!) but they inhabit the same rarified atmosphere as all the other celebrities because celebrity (as we now all know) is a thing in and of itself. It does not matter what your are famous for, merely that you are.

[KungFooBob]

It could be worse, he could have jumped the queue to see The Queen lying in state.

[Screwdriver]

As long as what he did he didn't do for more than ten seconds at a time, then he's golden.

For the uninitiated, 66 year old janitor, pulls down a students trousers and grabbed her knickers. Judge ruled it wasn't "groping" because it lasted less than 10 seconds.

This is Italy.

I sincerely hope that ruling does not stand.

[Screwdriver]

New news. Elon Musk may be entering the UK energy market.

I'm in...

[KungFooBob]

New news. Elon Musk may be entering the UK energy market.

I'm in...

He's started an AI company, after saying AI is super dangerous.

[DefTrap]

Given the Beebs history of harbouring sexual predators, I think they've thrown themselves under the bus. Another publicly funded organisation who'll get away with doing as they like whilst turning a blind eye.

Except for this case (assuming we believe there's no evidence to answer), where you've decided the career of the mentally ill Huw Edwards is ok to be martyred, just to further your churlish little cause against the Beeb.

Unless of course he does turn out to be guilty in the end but be honest you couldn't give a shit either way.

[Screwdriver]

New news. Elon Musk may be entering the UK energy market.

I'm in...

He's started an AI company, after saying AI is super dangerous.

Yeah. And??

[demographic]

I always thought it pretty weird the way prisoners seem so cbuffed when they hear someones a paedo, its like they're happy as feck theyve managed to find someone lower down the social strata than themselves.

[irie]

New news. Elon Musk may be entering the UK energy market.

I'm in...

He's started an AI company, after saying AI is super dangerous.

He wouldn't do anything dangerous, now would he?

[irie]

Given the Beebs history of harbouring sexual predators, I think they've thrown themselves under the bus. Another publicly funded organisation who'll get away with doing as they like whilst turning a blind eye.

Except for this case (assuming we believe there's no evidence to answer), where you've decided the career of the mentally ill Huw Edwards is ok to be martyred, just to further your churlish little cause against the Beeb.

Unless of course he does turn out to be guilty in the end but be honest you couldn't give a shit either way.

You've been suckered by the "mental health" wheeze.

[Ant]

Not only that but they're all out to defend the indefensible. There's a bit of a theme here..........

[DefTrap]

You've been suckered by the "mental health" wheeze.

Well if he turns out to be not ill, I'll take "being suckered".
Because the alternative is just being nasty.

[Screwdriver]

Not only that but they're all out to defend the indefensible. There's a bit of a theme here..........

I certainly wouldn't "defend" a sex pest and there is no conceivable "back story" which would excuse such behaviour.

Having said that...

The rarified world of celebrity is not something I would expect anyone to understand without experiencing it. More often than not, I would watch fans on meeting <name that celebrity> stand there and literally scream (typically if they are in a group), become completely tongue tied, all the way to literally fainting. Fame is power.

The other side of the coin is that these people (for that is all they are ) are "known" by millions. In a group of one million humans there might on average 11 murderers, 10,000 schizophrenics and 40,000 rapists. Just as an example for 1. how big a number even just 1 million is and 2. what humanity really looks like when you take a closer look.

So any organisation which employs or creates celebrity, must have very robust methods for dealing with the gigantic volumes of false stories, fake incidents and blatant grifters. Without that filter, any celebrity is just going to get hammered by the merest whiff of scandal whether it's true or not. I mean look at what Trump has been through (and is still going through).

Celebrity is also notoriously fickle. Even if it is proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that <the BBC presenter> was entirely innocent or blameless (unlikely in this case!) their career is over. Fame is cancelled out by infamy, I guess you can call it a double edged sword. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

The BBC simply have to follow strict procedures or every single celebrity on their books will be vilified and worthless as a "talent" in an instant. Do you want to hear the news from someone who sends pictures of his arse to young men? Let alone teenagers. Plus in this case, we still don't know if this reprobate actually committed a crime. Certainly the police don't seem to think so. That is not a defence, it is a statement of fact.

[ZRX61]

Holy crap, that Huw bloke is married to Mick Hucknall

[Dodgy69]

[DefTrap]

. Defending them blindly because it suits your political agenda is as bad as having a go at them blindly because of your political agenda.

Except we're not blind, the police and the protagonists have spoken. Some people are choosing to ignore it because they're fecking Sherlock Holmes, or don't want to "be suckered" or because it suits them to pop at the Beeb. Yeah of course there may be more to be revealed but until we know ...

[v8-powered]

The press in general in this country has a lot to answer for. I agree that the level of noncing etc. is alarmingly high but why should the press be allowed to hound these people - let process take it's course.
Guess that wouldn't sell papers though - speaks more for the people who read the dross I guess?

[Count Steer]

New news. Elon Musk may be entering the UK energy market.

I'm in...

Speaking of rich, famous celebrities and their slavish fans......

[Mr. Dazzle]

I would be pleased to see Musk disrupting the energy market in a good way, but I honestly don't see how he will. Tesla and SpaceX are disruptive 'cause they fill/create a niche which didn't exist before. If he's just doing A.N.Other supplier not sure what he can do.

Twitter has hardly been a roaring success since he (was forced) to take over?