RedRooster Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 26 minutes ago, mim731 said: People are wildly speculating about this, but I'd have money on this being less about a sex pest and more about a different scandal. HS2 perhaps. Obviously it could well be, but I doubt the BBC wants to be exposing anyone who may have worked for them in some capacity and all the rumoured/open secret names have had big shows on BBC at some point. Unless they're chasing a news presenter from a different network, it would seem an odd tact for Panorama to take. The lack of subject matter could also just mean it's something they are awaiting legal clearance on. Too many people jumping to conclusions off the back of the Russell Brand doc. While I totally agree that it could be about something entirely different (I may be wrong, but I'm not even sure it's unusual for Panorama not to reveal their subject matter in advance - it presumably would put them at risk of blowing their own story, and tipping off a rival) - but BBC news operates in a weird way, in that they absolutely would expose people who work with - or have worked for them - previously. They had even been looking into Huw Edwards - someone they actually worked alongside - before that story broke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 And Panorama famously prepared an episode on Jimmy Saville that was cancelled by the execs as they'd made a couple of Xmas Special Tributes to Saville and wanted to still run them. Panorama has essentially carte blanche nowadays (as a result of above) so they absolutely could expose a BBC presenter. Â Feels like that might be the case, although I'm hoping it'll be more Brand stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members mim731 Posted September 27, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted September 27, 2023 1 minute ago, RedRooster said: While I totally agree that it could be about something entirely different (I may be wrong, but I'm not even sure it's unusual for Panorama not to reveal their subject matter in advance - it presumably would put them at risk of blowing their own story, and tipping off a rival) - but BBC news operates in a weird way, in that they absolutely would expose people who work with - or have worked for them - previously. They had even been looking into Huw Edwards - someone they actually worked alongside - before that story broke. The Huw Edwards thing was from a disciplinary perspective, not a story expose. As a former BBC employee, I can tell you that in my experience they would not do that unless it was for making sure they were covered against allegations and/or legal reprisals. Also, you are correct that Panorama doesn't always reveal it's story up front, again it's about legal clearance. Sometimes shows get bumped back a week or so when there is a need to do so if legal haven't cleared the doc. BBC's legal clearance requirements are very rigorous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Factotum Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 Panorama did a big expose on the BBC and Bashir a few years ago. Even the fact he was still employed by them. They absolutely would go after someone within the institution if it's something big. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRooster Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 1 hour ago, mim731 said: The Huw Edwards thing was from a disciplinary perspective, not a story expose. It was apparently for a story, for Victoria Derbyshire's show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members mim731 Posted September 27, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted September 27, 2023 (edited) 30 minutes ago, RedRooster said: It was apparently for a story, for Victoria Derbyshire's show. That's fair, and I can only speak from my own personal experience, but I'd be surprised if that was anything official. "The senior BBC source said: “It would be wrong to characterise anything before the Sun story was published as an ‘investigation’ - as a general point, in any newsroom, it’s perfectly normal for journalists to receive leads on stories, and take their own very initial soundings on these leads, some of which go on to go through the wider BBC editorial process, and some of which don’t." I cannot imagine it would have been greenlit internally while he was actively on air. 1 hour ago, Factotum said: Panorama did a big expose on the BBC and Bashir a few years ago. Even the fact he was still employed by them. They absolutely would go after someone within the institution if it's something big. From what I understand, that was (in part) an attempt to show the corporation had not acted in bad faith, only Bashir. Also, Bashir's re-employment was not a popular move internally to say the least, at that time. Plus, it also wasn't about historical alleged sex-pesting within the company, which for the exact reasons you'd imagine the BBC wants to move away from shining a light on. I left the company a few years ago, so maybe things have changed, but given the glacial speed of cultural shifts internally, I'd be pretty surprised to see them investigate someone high profile associated with the BBC in documentary form, if it might further tarnish the reputation of the corporation on that front, especially for potential sex offences. EDIT - Should say I can only speculate based on my own experience, but things may be different now. Edited September 27, 2023 by mim731 Clarification Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Healys Chutney Spoon Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 GBeebies seem to be behaving like twonks at the pub  https://news.sky.com/story/dan-wootton-suspended-by-gb-news-after-laurence-fox-row-12970988  Factually incorrect on so many levels.....I mean I'd go against Fox's assertion/insinuation that noone would...  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted September 27, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted September 27, 2023 Truly, why anyone thinks that Laurence Fox has anything meaningful to say about privilege, other than about how great it is to have it, is beyond me. The idiot is a member of a centuries-old performing arts dynasty, who benefits from all the connections and reputation that being a Fox gets him in the industry. That he first drew people into his bullshit by ranting about how white male privilege is a myth is fucking laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 Just now, Carbomb said: Truly, why anyone thinks that Laurence Fox has anything meaningful to say about privilege, other than about how great it is to have it, is beyond me. The idiot is a member of a centuries-old performing arts dynasty, who benefits from all the connections and reputation that being a Fox gets him in the industry. That he first drew people into his bullshit by ranting about how white male privilege is a myth is fucking laughable. But he’s preaching to the converted. As you say, the one thing white right wing men crave more than anything is victimhood. If even a so called privileged rich white heterosexual man like Fox can be cancelled by the powers that be, anyone can. That’s their thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Guy Posted September 27, 2023 Share Posted September 27, 2023 Just a thought but whilst Dan Wootton belongs in this thread can we keep Laurence Fox in the All Tories are Cunts thread. Or start a Laurence Fox is the cuntiest cunt thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted September 27, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted September 27, 2023 2 hours ago, Just Some Guy said: Just a thought but whilst Dan Wootton belongs in this thread can we keep Laurence Fox in the All Tories are Cunts thread. Or start a Laurence Fox is the cuntiest cunt thread. Because he’s not a Tory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butch2000 Posted September 28, 2023 Share Posted September 28, 2023 They’re pretty Tory, like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathrey Posted September 28, 2023 Share Posted September 28, 2023 But are not actually in the Tory party or vocally given their support to them. I get the impression the Tories aren't to the right enough for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted September 28, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted September 28, 2023 He literally has his own political party in reclaim uk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Guy Posted September 28, 2023 Share Posted September 28, 2023 The Conservative Party may be nicknamed The Tories, but tory has a wider meaning. A tory is someone who campaigns for the continuation of existing hierarchical structures. For example in a society set up for the most part to favour straight, white, rich men, a tory would loudly shout that straight, white, rich men are the only people that matter. I thus repeat that Laurence Fox is a tory. Or the cuntiest cunt. Or both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tory&action=edit§ion=0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.