Licence payers of BBC ..are presenters accountable to British Viewers?

Bea65

Elegran i take your point but with regards to BBC presenters they are in 'your face'

I don’t see what difference that makes. I know him as a news reader and I respect him for that because it’s all I know about him. His private life is none of my business. Anymore than anyone else’s is …

So are shop assistants, doctors, nurses. A News reader, is merely reading news and showing you film of news stories and interviews.

As long as it is legal and they do not do it in the street and frighten the horses, I really do not care what people famous or not do when not 'on show'

So you are more likely to recognise their names and faces if they get into the news. That doesn't make them any worse than someone you have never heard of, who is doing exactly the same things.

Elegran i take your point but with regards to BBC presenters they are in 'your face'

Bea65

But we’re paying their salaries??

We also contribute to paying the salaries of every employee of every online organisation that we pay to subscribe to (which is what we do when we pay our BBC licence fee) and of every business we buy anything from, whether online or in a walk-in shop.

I worked for the Civil Service and I know that some colleagues were having affairs.
It made no difference to their work as far as I was aware; no-one was blackmailed either to my knowledge.

However, bullying and sleaziness towards younger colleagues is something that should be dealt with by management if it is found to happen in any organisation.

No the only entity accountable to the licence payers are the BBC.

Ailidh

I'm 100% in the "private lives are private" camp.

In any given case where criminality or abuse are Proved, Then I will moderate my opinion.

I totally agree Ailidh.

The BBC are now looking into this now. Personally, I don't think the newsreaders and presenters are accountable to us.
Huw Edwards and his family have my sympathy. Until we know for sure the details of his behaviour I wouldn't want to make any judgments.

BlueBelle I watched this early morning news about the colleagues who were made to feel uncomfortable by some of his comments on their appearance in text messages...this is sexual harassment in the workplace...he should be dismissed ...and, as someone who has had a clinical depression x2 ,am angry that perhaps he can 'can hide away' his actions had consequences- he has caused harm to others..

I am another who agrees with Smileless. Huw Edwards was very good at his job and payed the going rate. His private life is his own business.

There is far more to being a news presenter than just reading the news. It is like saying teachers work shorter hours and have longer holidays because they are only in the classroom be tween 9.00am - 3.30pm in term time.

half a million for basically reading out loud

A sweeping statement. I think the job entails a bit more than that.

I'm 100% in the "private lives are private" camp.

In any given case where criminality or abuse are Proved, Then I will moderate my opinion.

We "pay the salary" of everyone we buy a product or a service from e.g. bus drivers, supermarket workers etc. It doesn't mean they are accountable to us for their behaviour and those paid by public funds are no different. Seems to me social media has increased self righteousness and given birth to a new puritanism.

BlueBelle

It isn’t just about criminality though is it It’s about misuse of power/ money/ position
Meanwhile the BBC reported on Wednesday that Edwards also faced claims about inappropriate behaviour towards some junior staff members .
Two current BBC workers and one former member of staff said they had been sent messages that made them feel uncomfortable
* An employee at the corporation told BBC News they received "suggestive" messages from Edwards. BBC News has seen the messages, which refer to the staff member's appearance and were sent this year*
* One said they felt it was an abuse of power by someone very senior in the organisation*
* Speaking to the BBC's Newsnight programme, the workers and former employee spoke of a reluctance among junior staff to complain to managers about the conduct of high-profile colleagues in case it adversely affected their careers
(sounds familiar)

He shouldn’t wriggle out of this behaviour just because he was a good news reader !!

Absolutely 👏👏

Completely agree with your post @ 16.08 Freya.

As you say eaybee there are those who he is answerable too, but not us.

Huw Edwards was probably my favourite news reader. What he did outside of the BBC is his own business but if he was acting inappropriately within the organisation with junior colleagues that is a completely different matter.

His professional work appeared above reproach; broadcasters do more than read the autocue; they prepare their bulletins and their interviews because they are journalists.
Their private life isn't my business, particularly in this case where The Sun instituted a witch hunt on dubious grounds, for whatever reason.
Huw Edwards is answerable to his family and his employer, (even though there appears to be no criminal malpractice), not to me.

Up to the BBC how they proceed, def not up to the British public, thankfully.

It isn’t just about criminality though is it It’s about misuse of power/ money/ position
Meanwhile the BBC reported on Wednesday that Edwards also faced claims about inappropriate behaviour towards some junior staff members .
Two current BBC workers and one former member of staff said they had been sent messages that made them feel uncomfortable
* An employee at the corporation told BBC News they received "suggestive" messages from Edwards. BBC News has seen the messages, which refer to the staff member's appearance and were sent this year*
* One said they felt it was an abuse of power by someone very senior in the organisation*
* Speaking to the BBC's Newsnight programme, the workers and former employee spoke of a reluctance among junior staff to complain to managers about the conduct of high-profile colleagues in case it adversely affected their careers
(sounds familiar)

He shouldn’t wriggle out of this behaviour just because he was a good news reader !!

Freya 👏🏻👏🏻
We pay for many, including NHS, Police, Armed Forces, Civil Service.We rely on those organisations to look into any cases of wrongdoing and then act when needed.Not up to us.

Television celebrities are paid huge amounts, in Huw Edwards case half a million for basically reading out loud, in my opinion, that payment is partly due to you having no private life, everything you do or say will be up for public scrutiny.

It’s when the private life ceases to be private and the news reader becomes the news though isn’t it? We have no idea what people do in private until it becomes public.

Doesn't really matter. As taxpayers we pay thousands of public servants. Does not mean we have a right to monitor their private lives. I agree with others , no laws were broken. He probably is.

He was a great news presenter Smileless, but he was paid by our licence fees and unless the allegations are totally disproved, which seems unlikely as he issued no denial, I trust he won’t be representing the BBC again.