Fiona Bruce ‘to step back’ from her role at Refuge

There would be no defamation case, that is a red herring.

I have never liked FB (exacerbated by the ancestry programme where she made it very clear that the village her ancestors came from wasn’t quite to her liking) and I too wonder what the appeal is. This colours my opinion of this latest incident. I think she would have been advised (badly) on how she was to handle this situation but her true colours shone through in how she did it.She is far from impartial on QT and should step down from that.

In fact FB’s comment was pure hearsay.

I’m left wing Iam64 what’s your point?
Wrong poster name I guess.

Whitewavemark2

In fact FB’s comment was pure hearsay.

The giving the context bit was OK. She would have been fine if she hadn't added the bit about SJ's friends saying it was a one off.

It's the dreaded 'balance' thing, isn't it? 'Some people say the earth is round but some people say it;'s flat'

Grantanow

She may have spoken in haste because she was endeavouring to put the matter in context and SJ was not present to give his side. Refuge has lost a valuable friend due to overreaction.

What "other side " can there be when a man breaks his wife's nose?

As far as I can see Bruce was quoting the 'friends' of SJ, not making an assessment of her own. I don't think she should be criticized for that when putting the matter in context as required by the BBC. This another hue and cry by the media and virtue signallers.

Is FB the problem or is QT? Article by Zoe Grunewald
www.newstatesman.com

Worth reading

That looks interesting ronib, but behind a paywall

I did not have a paywall?

Hi

I am on the fence as if you listen to commentary you can go either way. No slap, punch etc should be trivialised. But is this like the Gary Lineker another way to deflect from what is happening with all the strikes NHS etc. Its taking the pressure of the Government and placing it on the bbc.... even with that conflict. bbc need to sort out what their policies are and if staff or consultants sign up to them then they should abide by them.

Fiona Bruce did not say that. She said the Stanley Johnson hadn't commented on his wife's statement that he broke her nose and that his friends had commented that it was a one off event.

From how I understood it, what she did was to quote a "quote"
regarding SJ's alleged wife-beating. Journalists do this all the time - if you say its pouring with rain , they will say that the weather forecasters indicate that it is not actually raining all over the country. To clarify the situation.
I don't believe she was belittling anything.

Here is the clip. The discussion in this part of the show is about Boris Johnson nominating his father for a knighthood.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr0f1DK4UCQ

Actually, to be fair to her, she was quoting from the book written by Tom Bower. Mrs Johnson's broken nose, which required her to be hospitalised, may have been a 'one-off' (meaning that Mr Johnson didn't do it again) but it was domestic abuse and inexcusable. Perhaps she didn't have time on the programme to say this, but she should have, especially as she was an ambassador for Refuge which does an extraordinary job helping women who have suffered domestic abuse.

DaisyAnne

Germanshepherdsmum

I believe she had no option but to make the comment she did in the circumstances, to head off a possible defamation case. Presenters often have to interject like this when someone makes a comment to the effect that something that has been rumoured and speculated on is a proven fact. And before anyone leaps on me, I know exactly what has been said about SJ. I have no reason to doubt his wife’s claim but it rests purely on what was told to journalists. I dislike Stanley Johnson and Fiona Bruce, but she had a professional duty to perform. It’s a shame that she is stepping down from Refuge after many years of good work for them.

I must admit I saw it like that too. But I will be interested to see how others interpreted it.

To add some more information "Bruce said: "Last week on Question Time, I was required to legally contextualise a question about Stanley Johnson.

"Those words have been taken as an expression of my own opinions which they are absolutely not, and as a minimising of domestic abuse, which I would never do."

I think she was between a rock and a hard place. These days it is so easy to pillory someone, it's the charity that has lost out and the keyboard warriors won again

Too true.

I heard Fiona Bruce's comment when watching QT and was shocked - turned to DH and said sarcastically "so that's all right then". Her words "a one off" seemed to trivialise what SJ had done and I agree with other posters that she should have worded her necessary intervention better. If she had said "allegedly" rather than "friends of his have said" it might have distanced her more from the debate. I always associate "allegedly" with Ian Hislop and HIGNFY. He has it down to a fine art but with rules and sensitivities changing everyone will have to watch their words even more carefully.

westendgirl

So she should. Her comment was inexcusable.

Her comment was not inexcusable it was made to comply with BBC rules on fairness. Total overreaction by Refuge shutting down women journalists.

Fleurpepper

Sha said Stanley only broke his wife's nose once- that it was a 'one off' - on Question Time- in a way that sounded like 'it's not too bad then, just the once'.

She did not, she reported what some people have said. Read the piece properly.

Bridie22

She didn't trivialise it, read the report.

This!

I don't think she has done anything wrong. I speak as someone who, as a child, regularly saw their mother beaten and bloodied.

Thanks Callistemon21 - I had, of course, read that statement from the BBC.

I thought you had read somewhere that she was reading the BBC line on this. That's why I asked where you got it from.

You then explained that it had been reported that she was repeating what she had been told to do by the legal department.

I've obviously misunderstood what you meant by this. You were referring to the BBC statement. I can see that now.
Apologies.

It struck me that her words had been scripted and were not her own. Her Producer would have had the final say.

Bridie22

She didn't trivialise it, read the report.

Exactly! People are too quick to jump on the bandwagon.