Huw Edwards named as BBC presenter accused of paying teenager for explicit photos
Scroll to see replies
I’m kinda shocked about it being huw he always seemed to be a solid face for the bbc but now that’s been tarnished
Original post by Choreomania
To draw parallel to Saville is at best ignorant, at worst deliberately malicious.
Yes. the Mail are busy playing this card, but from what we've heard and seen so far, it appears to be a gross exaggeration.
I also think there's a strongly anti-Gay element to the coverage. The right wing media are busy with a good old traditional whipping up of homophobia.
Original post by Saracen's Fez
I don't think it's particularly tasteful to speculate on this sort of thing
It's a distasteful thread.
Original post by user123456324
I’m kinda shocked about it being huw he always seemed to be a solid face for the bbc but now that’s been tarnished
Considering he's supposedly (we are being told) been badly depressed for a long time, I'd say it's concerning that he was the main face of the BBC during the Queen's passing (he announced it), at the least it makes one wonder if that was kind to him, to place him under such pressure when he really wasn't well.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Considering he's supposedly (we are being told) been badly depressed for a long time, I'd say it's concerning that he was the main face of the BBC during the Queen's passing (he announced it), at the least it makes one wonder if that was kind to him, to place him under such pressure when he really wasn't well.
He had practiced it for years.
Original post by Quady
It's a distasteful thread.
It's a sorry state of affairs, but it's front-page news and it appears that a sackable, although not criminal, offence has taken place.
It's really not necessary to speculate on the fine details of Huw Edwards's mental health and why he is in hospital.
Original post by Quady
He had practiced it for years.
Yes, it was clear it was all planned, I was just speculating that maybe they should have changed presenter for it. Maybe they were anxious not to fall back on Dimbleby again on age grounds and the public were said to be getting fed up of everything being Dimbleby.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Yes. the Mail are busy playing this card, but from what we've heard and seen so far, it appears to be a gross exaggeration.
I also think there's a strongly anti-Gay element to the coverage. The right wing media are busy with a good old traditional whipping up of homophobia.
I also think there's a strongly anti-Gay element to the coverage. The right wing media are busy with a good old traditional whipping up of homophobia.
Yep, the Sun use to do a lot of gay outing stories.
At the same time it was publishing photos of topless 16 and 17 year olds on page 3 for the titillation of its upstanding morally righteous readers.
Original post by Choreomania
Yep, the Sun use to do a lot of gay outing stories.
At the same time it was publishing photos of topless 16 and 17 year olds on page 3 for the titillation of its upstanding morally righteous readers.
At the same time it was publishing photos of topless 16 and 17 year olds on page 3 for the titillation of its upstanding morally righteous readers.
Yeah, two wrongs make a right.
Original post by Saracen's Fez
It's a sorry state of affairs, but it's front-page news and it appears that a sackable, although not criminal, offence has taken place.
It's really not necessary to speculate on the fine details of Huw Edwards's mental health and why he is in hospital.
It's really not necessary to speculate on the fine details of Huw Edwards's mental health and why he is in hospital.
I wouldn't be suprised if tomorrow's front pages do some speculation.
As for the posters comment, I'd have thought it breeched the community guidelines here, as would quoting/reposting it.
It was Huw Edwards! I knew it (got no inside knowledge, just had a hunch that it was him).
Wanted to say this yesterday because I had a strong suspicious that it was him: "male and high profile" but couldn't.
Wanted to say this yesterday because I had a strong suspicious that it was him: "male and high profile" but couldn't.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Yes. the Mail are busy playing this card, but from what we've heard and seen so far, it appears to be a gross exaggeration.
I also think there's a strongly anti-Gay element to the coverage. The right wing media are busy with a good old traditional whipping up of homophobia.
I also think there's a strongly anti-Gay element to the coverage. The right wing media are busy with a good old traditional whipping up of homophobia.
I don’t necessarily agree that it’s whipping up homophobia however some coverage by certain outlets is certainly staggering.
The mail labelling a perfectly innocent conversation as ‘creepy’ on Instagram for example. Although maybe that’s got more to do with the no hoper reporting that as creepy in the first place.
Original post by Talkative Toad
It was Huw Edwards! I knew it (got no inside knowledge, just had a hunch that it was him).
Wanted to say this yesterday because I had a strong suspicious that it was him: "male and high profile" but couldn't.
Wanted to say this yesterday because I had a strong suspicious that it was him: "male and high profile" but couldn't.
There's a picture of his bottom circulating social media
Original post by Barbu
There's a picture of his bottom circulating social media
, ah I didn't even know based on that, it was other factors that made me think: "yep, it's him".Shame as he was a good presenter but end of the line for him now I think unless the charges are false.
No more yet in the main media on the allegations the Sun are still running that he broke Covid rules during lockdown to meet one young man (described in the Sun as a 'youngster') and the other alleged 17-yr old boy who received messages. Interesting that the Sun are repeating these at the same time as the police are saying there is nothing to charge on, as the first of those as we all know is definitely an offence if true.
Original post by Quady
I wouldn't be suprised if tomorrow's front pages do some speculation.
As for the posters comment, I'd have thought it breeched the community guidelines here, as would quoting/reposting it.
As for the posters comment, I'd have thought it breeched the community guidelines here, as would quoting/reposting it.
Usual comment – please report anything you believe is rule-breaking to allow the mod team to investigate
Original post by Talkative Toad
It was Huw Edwards! I knew it (got no inside knowledge, just had a hunch that it was him).
Wanted to say this yesterday because I had a strong suspicious that it was him: "male and high profile" but couldn't.
Wanted to say this yesterday because I had a strong suspicious that it was him: "male and high profile" but couldn't.
I think once the Mail ran the front page (I think yesterday but maybe this morning? It's been a long week
) stating that 1 in 6 people knew who it was, there was really only one candidate who had received that much speculation and they were essentially confirming that it was him.Original post by Saracen's Fez
I think once the Mail ran the front page (I think yesterday but maybe this morning? It's been a long week ) stating that 1 in 6 people knew who it was, there was really only one candidate who had received that much speculation and they were essentially confirming that it was him.
) stating that 1 in 6 people knew who it was, there was really only one candidate who had received that much speculation and they were essentially confirming that it was him.I haven't read the mail but yeah would have commented yesterday that it's probably him here, just made sense to me that it was him.
I'm wondering whether he's actually done the stuff or not despite the fact that the police has concluded that was no criminality.
Original post by user123456324
I’m kinda shocked about it being huw he always seemed to be a solid face for the bbc but now that’s been tarnished
I'm not surprised that it's him but he was a good presenter, I kind of liked him.
Original post by Choreomania
The police have concluded no criminal offence has taken place.
To draw parallel to Saville is at best ignorant, at worst deliberately malicious.
To draw parallel to Saville is at best ignorant, at worst deliberately malicious.
The police concluded there was not enough evidence of the alledge grooming. Not the same.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- What’s going to happen next to Huw Edwards?
- Why is there freedom of the press?
- Survey Question
- OMAM
- Is UK Models legit or a scam
- Illustration & Animation Masters at Cardiff Met
- Schools told not to teach about gender identity
- someone please read my GCSE speech
- London Modelling agencies scam?
- Oliver James Online Models SoHo Fashion Studio has anyone else been scammed here
- Name a boy's name which starts with the last letter of the above name
- How to ask friends to pay me back?
- Identity Management - Modelling Platform Scam or Genuine?
- Who was your teenage crush?
- is broadway studios legit?
- Please Grade my essay - English Lit GCSE
- The Traitors
- My tier list of colleges that accept undergraduates of the University of Cambridge
- How to teach presentation skills?
- Sending own nudes obsession
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 weeks ago
Rachel Reeves did the right thing in ending winter fuel paymentsLast reply 1 month ago
Should the UK introduce a mandatory working gap year for 18-year olds?Last reply 1 month ago
Russell Group universities are actually very good. We should stop dismissing them.
