[Politics] Fiona Bruce. Please let this be the end.

[GJN1]

I have sympathy with Bruce. She must be under a huge amount of pressure to be impartial by her Tory bosses.

Her first reaction to the wife beating fact is ‘I’m not disputing what you are saying’, she then says ‘Stanley Johnson has not commented publicly on that’ which is again, factual and textbook. That is where she should have left it.

But, she then goes way too far by quoting some sort of conjecture and 2nd/3rd/4th hand evidence. That’s a mistake and because of the subject matter, it sounds really bad.

I support Bruce and believe the ‘give all Tory criticism context’ culture currently at the BBC influenced her error. It’s really sad she has had to leave her charity but that’s an area mistakes just can’t happen.

As for Stanley Johnson, if we could charge him for treason for bringing into the world the parasite who sold our Country out for his own personal ambition, we should. Nasty little man.

She could have said what she said and then added 'However, Stanley Johnson's ex-wife said she was beaten repeatedly." Then none of this would have happened.

 

[Acker79]

​

Bruce quickly intervened and repeated their claim. I understood why. She was legally obliged to put out that clarification. I have no regrets about doing what I did and do not harbour any resentment against Bruce, who did what she had to do.​

...​

In a tweet, I clarified what had actually happened: “Please remember I pointed out Stanley Johnson’s wifebeating in response to Ken Clarke who chummily portrayed Johnson as a good chap.” And I asked: “Why are viewers criticising Fiona Bruce and not Clarke? Is it sexism?” It is. Absolutely is. Clarke sailed away into calmer seas.​

 

[Thunder Bolt]

​

Bruce quickly intervened and repeated their claim. I understood why. She was legally obliged to put out that clarification. I have no regrets about doing what I did and do not harbour any resentment against Bruce, who did what she had to do.​

...​

In a tweet, I clarified what had actually happened: “Please remember I pointed out Stanley Johnson’s wifebeating in response to Ken Clarke who chummily portrayed Johnson as a good chap.” And I asked: “Why are viewers criticising Fiona Bruce and not Clarke? Is it sexism?” It is. Absolutely is. Clarke sailed away into calmer seas.​

Men usually stand up for men.
Fiona Bruce is obviously a women but also was an ambassador for Refuge. Many victims saw and heard her and complained to Refuge, not the BBC, but Refuge.
FB still has her job.

 

[nickjhs]

You didn't mean it like that, but sadly, it is victim blaming. The victims even blame themselves many many times because that's how the abuser works. 'You made me do it'.

How the heck is anything I have said victim blaming? I have stated on multiple occasions that Johnson should have been charged. At no point have I made any concessions toward his actions or suggested that she was in any way guilty of causing them, what I have questioned is whether after a supposed one off event he should be described as a domestic abuser, that he perpetrated a violent act upon his wife is not being questioned.

 

[GT49er]

​

Bruce quickly intervened and repeated their claim. I understood why. She was legally obliged to put out that clarification. I have no regrets about doing what I did and do not harbour any resentment against Bruce, who did what she had to do.​

...​

In a tweet, I clarified what had actually happened: “Please remember I pointed out Stanley Johnson’s wifebeating in response to Ken Clarke who chummily portrayed Johnson as a good chap.” And I asked: “Why are viewers criticising Fiona Bruce and not Clarke? Is it sexism?” It is. Absolutely is. Clarke sailed away into calmer seas.​

What a splendid article by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown - and as for this quote that she quotes:

"Suddenly these men, and women, who never talk about society’s most uncomfortable truth of male violence are outraged about domestic violence and have taken to Twitter to demonstrate it… Well done everyone, you have once again burnt the wrong witch"

Such an incontrovertable commentary on modern opinion on t'internet!

 

[rippleman]

Incredibly biased moderator. I stopped watching Question Time after a handful of times seeing her in action

Like you I was always an avid watcher of QT right back to the days of Sir Robin Day and then throughout the Dimbleby era. Like you, I gave up with QT after a few Bruce shows because she was clearly so politically biased. It was her gurning and eye rolling at Diane Abbot that finally turned he off. Even after watching so many shows with Day and Dimbleby I wouldn't have a clue how either of them voted. They were so impartial as moderators. I'm absolutely sure I know where Bruce puts her X on the ballot paper.

Her defence of old man Johnson giving his wife a good slap was shocking beyond belief.

Anti Tory comments and you get taken off screen. Pro Tory sentiment and its a case of "would you like another cushion?". And the BBC is left wing? Don't make me laugh.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Well if true he is a domestic abuser. My comments have been based on what Bruce said and the possible reasons for her saying them. I will qualify this by saying that because someone writes a book or for that matter says something does not make it accurate by default.

after a supposed one off event

Come on. Domestic violence a one-off event ? I mean good to give people the benefit of the doubt and all that - but we all know enough about domestic violence to know it is rarely (if ever) a one-off. Listen to the victim - not the friends of the abuser.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

​

Bruce quickly intervened and repeated their claim. I understood why. She was legally obliged to put out that clarification. I have no regrets about doing what I did and do not harbour any resentment against Bruce, who did what she had to do.​

...​

In a tweet, I clarified what had actually happened: “Please remember I pointed out Stanley Johnson’s wifebeating in response to Ken Clarke who chummily portrayed Johnson as a good chap.” And I asked: “Why are viewers criticising Fiona Bruce and not Clarke? Is it sexism?” It is. Absolutely is. Clarke sailed away into calmer seas.​

Not sure about that – not in my case, anyway. Personally, I only saw a clip on Twitter, in which Ken Clarke didn't say a word. So yes, the context was skewed, maybe, but that's probably why people aren't having a pop at him. Plus this all came about amidst a big 'impartiality at the BBC' thing. A tory fella (or woman) is never (typically) going to be impartial (in public, anyway) about a fellow tory. Different for BBC's Bruce.

 

[LamieRobertson]

What a splendid article by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown - and as for this quote that she quotes:

"Suddenly these men, and women, who never talk about society’s most uncomfortable truth of male violence are outraged about domestic violence and have taken to Twitter to demonstrate it… Well done everyone, you have once again burnt the wrong witch"

Such a incontrovertable commentary on modern opinion on t'internet!

Yep…and yet some will still want their pound of flesh and keep banging on …sigh

 

[Thunder Bolt]

What a splendid article by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown - and as for this quote that she quotes:

"Suddenly these men, and women, who never talk about society’s most uncomfortable truth of male violence are outraged about domestic violence and have taken to Twitter to demonstrate it… Well done everyone, you have once again burnt the wrong witch"

Such an incontrovertable commentary on modern opinion on t'internet!

Which witch should be burnt?

It was domestic abuse victims whom complained to Refuge about the comments. Yes, people did complain to the BBC, but Fiona Bruce has not been suspended, and the BBC covered it by saying she had a legal responsibility to reply.

Ok, now move on, as I said the victims complained to Refuge, and now Bruce has stepped back as an ambassador for the charity, because so many actual victims were upset by the comment. Is that getting burnt?

Refuge statement on Fiona Bruce ambassador role – Refuge

refuge.org.uk

 

[nickjhs]

Listen to the victim - not the friends of the abuser.

No I will listen to all involved, which is as it should be. Prior to the Me Too phenomena the wealthy and powerful perpetrators were either never accused and if they were the accounts were ignored, which was entirely wrong, since then the position has been reversed to a point where it has become guilty until proven innocent with devastating effect upon the accused. This is also wrong. Two high profile cases have shown how wrong this is, Jeffrey Rush has had his career destroyed by allegations even though he won his defamation case and then we have Depp vs Heard where it finally comes out that in all likely hood it was the accuser who was the perpetrator. If Tim Bowers account is accurate then Johnson is undoubtably guilty of domestic abuse, if the friends of the couple are correct then it is open to interpretation. All I have been trying to do is give an explanation for Bruce's rather clumsy handling of it.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

No I will listen to all involved, which is as it should be. Prior to the Me Too phenomena the wealthy and powerful perpetrators were either never accused and if they were the accounts were ignored, which was entirely wrong, since then the position has been reversed to a point where it has become guilty until proven innocent with devastating effect upon the accused. This is also wrong. Two high profile cases have shown how wrong this is, Jeffrey Rush has had his career destroyed by allegations even though he won his defamation case and then we have Depp vs Heard where it finally comes out that in all likely hood it was the accuser who was the perpetrator. If Tim Bowers account is accurate then Johnson is undoubtably guilty of domestic abuse, if the friends of the couple are correct then it is open to interpretation. All I have been trying to do is give an explanation for Bruce's rather clumsy handling of it.

The 'friends' referred to by Bruce are Johnson's lawyers Carter Ruck. Lawyers gives it a whole different feel to friends don't you think. You can find the details in Private Eye.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice