So, The Sun is retreating with its tail between its legs.

Huw’s identity was obviously an open secret in the BBC for weeks before the Sun article and was being investigated, by at least one journalist.
It seems to me there are a lot of BBC staff have got an agenda of one kind or another, which does not fit well with its role as a “national broadcaster”. If a similar scandal occurred amongst the ITV or other news media, it would have merited zero attention.

Well, it seems that Victoria Derbyshire, and that department at the BBC, were carrying out an investigation into Edward, prior to the Sun's articles:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/huw-edwards-bbc-presenter-wife-sex-scandal-b2375177.html

Don’t watch news or read papers so do not know what’s going on !!! After 70 years on earth I know that tittle-tattle is just that!!

Printing these scurrilous stories gets the Sun a lot of free publicity, it was a gift, the BBC plastered our screens for several day with full page adverts for the Sun’s story, which turns out to be rubbish.

The BBC could just have referred to a story in a “national newspaper” but the BBC journalists just could not resist dramatizing it all, egg on lots of faces.

Did the Sun pay the young persons parents for their story?

Totally agree!!!

Can I just make an odd/irrelevant contribution? This is a first. I agree with tickingbird. I hope this is a News of The World moment for The Sun.

It’s impossible not to see its involvement here as part of Murdoch’s desire to destroy the BBC

The fact they ignored the denial from the young man of any illegal activity is shocking

Mollietwoknees

I wouldn’t use it as toilet paper even if I was desperate. Vile, disgusting poisonous rag. The Sun hacks must be so proud of their journalism … It should be shut down . Meanwhile Johnson continues to evade scrutiny to the Covid Enquiry over his WhatsApp messages and it’s not given any media coverage . It’s a High Court Order so why aren’t the police hauling him in ?

Because he's Boris and got Brexit done, albeit badly? 🙄

I don't know - his groupie rags are more interested in pictures of his latest wife knocking out the latest baby.

Don't ask me....🙄

I wouldn’t use it as toilet paper even if I was desperate. Vile, disgusting poisonous rag. The Sun hacks must be so proud of their journalism … It should be shut down . Meanwhile Johnson continues to evade scrutiny to the Covid Enquiry over his WhatsApp messages and it’s not given any media coverage . It’s a High Court Order so why aren’t the police hauling him in ?

No, nor in the Daily Mail, Express etc.

They are more interested in this, or royal fluff stories - easier to bury bad government news.. 🙄

This whole episode has been an unnecessary and sordid titillation. It wouldn't have been 'reported' by the Sun if the allegations had been made about a solicitor, civil servant or bus driver. Murdoch is a loathsome old man, frustrated because he cannot control broadcasting in the UK. I got rid of Sky years ago, and anyone bleating on about defunding the BBC needs to be aware of who and what is waiting in the wings to take over.

Now, has anyone seen any reports in the Murdoch owned press of Johnson not handing over his 'phone? His possible contempt of court? Osborne's email and it's sordid contents?

Kamiso

Gillycats

Couldn’t agree more WW. This rag needs to go now.

Yes, great idea! Ban every news outlet that isn’t in total agreement with the extremists. Can’t remember ever having read the Sun apart from a few weeks many years ago when I collected tokens to visit Alton Towers. The only way we could have afforded to go.

Putin and Hitler both agreed fully with your viewpoints! That must really inspire you. So sad that the old mantra of “live and let live” seems to have been totally abandoned by certain people.

There's a difference between wanting something 'banned' and wishing it would just die a natural death.

big louis apparently the parents first port of call was South Wales Police who told them there was no case to answer. This was before the approached The Sun.

Well, no, and as the young person is now an adult, they should have done.

But, as I said earlier, I think a lot of this was about giving the BBC a kicking, and distracting from the speculation about the EMail saga with George Osborne's wedding.

DiamondLily

The Sun has made a statement:

"Statement in full from The Sun on Huw Edwards

Following the naming of Huw Edwards in relation to a BBC presenter facing allegations over payments for sexually explicit images, here is the statement in full from The Sun newspaper:

“The allegations published by The Sun were always very serious. Further serious allegations have emerged in the past few days.

“It is right that the BBC’s Corporate Investigations Team continues to investigate these thoroughly and deals with them in the way that they think is appropriate.

“The Sun will cooperate with the BBC’s internal investigation process.

“We will provide the BBC team with a confidential and redacted dossier containing serious and wide-ranging allegations which we have received, including some from BBC personnel.

“The Sun has no plans to publish further allegations.

“We must also re-emphasise that The Sun at no point in our original story alleged criminality and also took the decision neither to name Mr Edwards nor the young person involved in the allegations.

“Suggestions about possible criminality were first made at a later date by other media outlets, including the BBC.

“From the outset, we have reported a story about two very concerned and frustrated parents who made a complaint to the BBC about the behaviour of a presenter and payments from him that fuelled the drug habit of a young person.

“We reported that the parents had already been to the police who said that they couldn’t help.

“The parents then made a complaint to the BBC which was not acted upon.

“It is now for the BBC to properly investigate.”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bbc-huw-edwards-wife-statement-allegations-latest-b2374409.html

So they aren’t denying that they acted without the young person’s permission, or that they were asked to pull the story the night before publication because according to the young person what they had been told by his mother wasn’t true. It’s more what they haven’t said than what they have.

Gillycats

Couldn’t agree more WW. This rag needs to go now.

Yes, great idea! Ban every news outlet that isn’t in total agreement with the extremists. Can’t remember ever having read the Sun apart from a few weeks many years ago when I collected tokens to visit Alton Towers. The only way we could have afforded to go.

Putin and Hitler both agreed fully with your viewpoints! That must really inspire you. So sad that the old mantra of “live and let live” seems to have been totally abandoned by certain people.

Every one has to have a private life that is respected. There was no criminal activity. Aggrieved parents who knew that there was no criminal activity told the Sun a story about their son. His solicitors say there is no criminal activity. The Sun should never have taken up the parent's grievance. They made a direct attack on celebrities that thanks to social media was dreadful for all. Hopefully Huw Edwards will return to his job. The Sun is looking to gain power over people hopefully it has failed dismally.

The Sun has made a statement:

"Statement in full from The Sun on Huw Edwards

Following the naming of Huw Edwards in relation to a BBC presenter facing allegations over payments for sexually explicit images, here is the statement in full from The Sun newspaper:

“The allegations published by The Sun were always very serious. Further serious allegations have emerged in the past few days.

“It is right that the BBC’s Corporate Investigations Team continues to investigate these thoroughly and deals with them in the way that they think is appropriate.

“The Sun will cooperate with the BBC’s internal investigation process.

“We will provide the BBC team with a confidential and redacted dossier containing serious and wide-ranging allegations which we have received, including some from BBC personnel.

“The Sun has no plans to publish further allegations.

“We must also re-emphasise that The Sun at no point in our original story alleged criminality and also took the decision neither to name Mr Edwards nor the young person involved in the allegations.

“Suggestions about possible criminality were first made at a later date by other media outlets, including the BBC.

“From the outset, we have reported a story about two very concerned and frustrated parents who made a complaint to the BBC about the behaviour of a presenter and payments from him that fuelled the drug habit of a young person.

“We reported that the parents had already been to the police who said that they couldn’t help.

“The parents then made a complaint to the BBC which was not acted upon.

“It is now for the BBC to properly investigate.”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bbc-huw-edwards-wife-statement-allegations-latest-b2374409.html

I hope that Murdoch and the others who have brought such disrepute to journalism are sued into media oblivion.

I totally hope this rebounds on the Sun.

Remember its original page?

Cagsy

I just don’t understand why anyone buys that rag, Scouser don’t buy the S*N

I said to DH at the time that I was puzzled as to why Liverpool didn’t vote for Brexit and that’s when he pointed out that people there don’t read The Sun. Murdoch wields a frightening amount of power.

Can't believe some of the messages on here.

I just don’t understand why anyone buys that rag, Scouser don’t buy the S*N

Does anyone know if Huw Edwards ever spoke out against either Murdock or The Sun? I remember that he had a rant about something, not too long ago. Have asked this question on another line as well, as it might explain the force with which this story was punted and pursued.

The sun can't be sued for libel as it didn't name the person!

The Sun might also have had libel in mind when it published its splash. If it had identified the presenter then it would have been open to them to sue the paper in a libel action that could well result in hundreds of thousands in damages and costs.
and

Anonymising the piece prevents such a case because among the three things a claimant in libel must show is that they have been adequately identified by the publication.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/bbc-presenter-identity-explicit-images-b2373365.html