[News] Huw Edwards

[Greg Bobkin]

Nicky Campbell the other morning allowed C@ntin McKenzie to be a guest with his pro Scum agenda.

A key party to the orchestrated lies against the Hillsborough dead, and sustained for years afterwards.

I put him on a par with Bill Archer.

He had another ex-Sun guy – Neil Wallis, former deputy editor – on during the show on Tuesday morning, who was essentially continuing to push his ex-paper's agenda and stick up for the poor fledgling outlet! He was the one I heard claim that The Sun hadn't offered the parents any money...

I get having to have both 'sides' represented, but you have to draw the line somewhere, no?

 

[Nitram]

Their Sun is desperately trying to row back. I do hope the parents are not being used as scapegoats for the series proposed for TalkTv. They seem very naive.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Even if the parents received no money, out of a parents understandable angst about their loved one having a Cocaine habit, they're thrashing around looking to blame and destroy someone else.

Fair comment. Obviously we, as rubberneckers, can't possibly know their motive for going public so maybe I shouldn't be speculating about it. I just can't imagine what they hoped to gain by going public, if it wasn't about money.

It's pretty obvious the Sun didn't perform due diligence before printing the story.

 

[Weststander]

He had another ex-Sun guy – Neil Wallis, former deputy editor – on during the show on Tuesday morning, who was essentially continuing to push his ex-paper's agenda and stick up for the poor fledgling outlet! He was the one I heard claim that The Sun hadn't offered the parents any money...

I get having to have both 'sides' represented, but you have to draw the line somewhere, no?

I heard that too.

All these low lives behind; criminal phone hacking, false allegations, destroying the Milly Dowler investigation, costing military lives in Iraq .... wheeled out.

They don't deserve a platform.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Why would anyone pay tens of thousands for something probably available on the internet for free? Extortion?

 

[Questions]

That is something I hear pretty often though … ‘I only buy it for the sport’

 

[Pevenseagull]

That is something I hear pretty often though … ‘I only buy it for the sport’

my mum used to say she only bought the Mail for the puzzles. .. So I got her some puzzle books and a tablet with Scrabble installed on it.

Never got another phone call about how red wine was good/ bad for you or how evil immigrants are ... and she 's got really good at Scrabble.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

What has actually been proved ? Huw looks absolutely shocking in the latest photo, you can tell a lot about someone's physical or mental health by how they look. The press do not care. Isn't only fans strictly over 18 s ?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

That is something I hear pretty often though … ‘I only buy it for the sport’

My mate said he used to buy it for the tips*, but I reckon he was talking shite(house).

*Might have misheard him...

 

[Questions]

I used to buy the Mirror when I was younger. Then I went to the Guardian and I finished on the i …….Don’t get one now

 

[Questions]

One thing the i did was give you a brief report on page 2/3 and then tell you where the main report was. You could skip bits then.

 

[Crispy Ambulance]

Certainly not.

I would say who but then the person who told me the story's identity might be determinable.

Wouldn’t expect you to H.

My post was a very tenuous Funboy Three link to your previous post!

Wouldn’t have thought the late, great Mr Hall would have got up to those type of shenanigans.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Wouldn’t expect you to H.

My post was a very tenuous Funboy Three link to your previous post!

Wouldn’t have thought the late, great Mr Hall would have got up to those type of shenanigans.

Yes, I realized as I was typing. I smiled.

 

[Live by the sea]

Yeah, I thought we'd moved past the very very very basic entry phrase for fragile masculinity, but clearly wrong. Even in the context of the post, where the poster feels that Edwards has hidden behind his wife and mental health, that the man has been hospitalised it is wild that the poster expects him to just get up and get on with it instead. Regardless of your thoughts on this "situation" surely we've learned by now that mental health is not something you can just "man up" about?

Yeah, I thought we'd moved past the very very very basic entry phrase for fragile masculinity, but clearly wrong. Even in the context of the post, where the poster feels that Edwards has hidden behind his wife and mental health, that the man has been hospitalised it is wild that the poster expects him to just get up and get on with it instead. Regardless of your thoughts on this "situation" surely we've learned by now that mental health is not something you can just "man up" about?

The point I as trying to make , is there is a wide spectrum of mental health issues and how people are effected .

Towards the higher end you have people walking around Times Square muttering to themselves and occasionally shouting if someone walks too near them .

Then you also have someone like Huw Edwards who despite clearly suffering from mental health issues previously is still able to go on national tv , read the news , take instructions from an earpiece , look in the right camera and function at a high level .

All I am saying is that someone like him who can clearly function at a high level despite his issues , should then at the very least be able to put a statement out in his name when this story broke , rather than leaving it to his wife who must be mortified. It’s not like he’s not media savvy is it .

That’s why I used the phrase man up . It’s not a phrase I would use very often as I think it can have negative connotations however in this instance I feel it’s appropriate.

I’m not belittling his mental health issue but I feel he could still have taken more responsibility for handling it better .

 

[Mancgull]

He had another ex-Sun guy – Neil Wallis, former deputy editor – on during the show on Tuesday morning, who was essentially continuing to push his ex-paper's agenda and stick up for the poor fledgling outlet! He was the one I heard claim that The Sun hadn't offered the parents any money...

I get having to have both 'sides' represented, but you have to draw the line somewhere, no?

I think this reflects the BBC’s impartiality. They have to be impartial to retain their credibility as an organisation. Largely, I think they doa very good job of this.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

I think this reflects the BBC’s impartiality. They have to be impartial to retain their credibility as an organisation. Largely, I think they doa very good job of this.

Totally agree with the impartiality factor and I'm the first to praise the BBC at pretty much every opportunity when it comes to that – regardless of what people say or think, they get it right the vast majority of the time. But getting two people who are THAT close to the situation – a bit like Farage and his regular appearances on QT – isn't the best way to go, IMO. You don't always have to have polar opposites to have a debate. Someone a *bit* more objective (possibly on both sides) would sometimes be better.

 

[Acker79]

The point I as trying to make , is there is a wide spectrum of mental health issues and how people are effected .

Towards the higher end you have people walking around Times Square muttering to themselves and occasionally shouting if someone walks too near them .

Then you also have someone like Huw Edwards who despite clearly suffering from mental health issues previously is still able to go on national tv , read the news , take instructions from an earpiece , look in the right camera and function at a high level .

All I am saying is that someone like him who can clearly function at a high level despite his issues , should then at the very least be able to put a statement out in his name when this story broke , rather than leaving it to his wife who must be mortified. It’s not like he’s not media savvy is it .

That’s why I used the phrase man up . It’s not a phrase I would use very often as I think it can have negative connotations however in this instance I feel it’s appropriate.

I’m not belittling his mental health issue but I feel he could still have taken more responsibility for handling it better .

Have you considered that being targeted by a popular national newspaper, presented as buying "sordid images of a child" and the comparisons to jimmy saville that immediately followed these reports, being suspended, possibly having his marriage severely damaged, if not completely ruined, being responsible for his children having to deal with these same claims, and the fear and paranoia of all the possible outcomes (from losing his job, being abandoned by friends and family to being attacked by a posse of locals) might just possibly have triggered an episode, or exacerbated underlying issues?

 

[Eeyore]

I heard that too.

All these low lives behind; criminal phone hacking, false allegations, destroying the Milly Dowler investigation, costing military lives in Iraq .... wheeled out.

They don't deserve a platform.

There is no difference between the The Sun newspaper and criminals of the worst kind. Both have ruined people's lives for immoral reasons.

 

[Beanstalk]

Have you considered that being targeted by a popular national newspaper, presented as buying "sordid images of a child" and the comparisons to jimmy saville that immediately followed these reports, being suspended, possibly having his marriage severely damaged, if not completely ruined, being responsible for his children having to deal with these same claims, and the fear and paranoia of all the possible outcomes (from losing his job, being abandoned by friends and family to being attacked by a posse of locals) might just possibly have triggered an episode, or exacerbated underlying issues leaving?

This, and more importantly, widely known and spoken about underlying issues. He's spoken at length about suffering from severe depression over the past twenty years. Imagine thinking "man up" is appropriate here (if it ever is).

 

[Greg Bobkin]

The point I as trying to make , is there is a wide spectrum of mental health issues and how people are effected .

Towards the higher end you have people walking around Times Square muttering to themselves and occasionally shouting if someone walks too near them .

Then you also have someone like Huw Edwards who despite clearly suffering from mental health issues previously is still able to go on national tv , read the news , take instructions from an earpiece , look in the right camera and function at a high level .

All I am saying is that someone like him who can clearly function at a high level despite his issues , should then at the very least be able to put a statement out in his name when this story broke , rather than leaving it to his wife who must be mortified. It’s not like he’s not media savvy is it .

That’s why I used the phrase man up . It’s not a phrase I would use very often as I think it can have negative connotations however in this instance I feel it’s appropriate.

I’m not belittling his mental health issue but I feel he could still have taken more responsibility for handling it better .

Should he? Why? You've just contradicted yourself, or assumed you know the specific nature of his MH issues...

You kinda ARE 'belittling his mental health issue', I'm afraid.

And *affected*