There had been pressing NATO conferences concerning the battle in Ukraine, raging floods from India to Vermont, and a report warmth wave throughout America. But this week the BBC wound up airing wall-to-wall protection of a special story: itself.
The affirmation that Huw Edwards, a distinguished BBC anchor, was the unnamed particular person on the coronary heart of allegations of sexual misconduct ended days of breathless hypothesis that consumed Britain’s public broadcaster. Yet it left a lingering sense of unease concerning the function of the British news media — and its much more intrusive cousin, social media — within the unmasking of a public determine.
Mr. Edwards, his spouse mentioned on Wednesday, has been hospitalized with a psychological breakdown aggravated by a tabloid newspaper report that he paid tens of hundreds of kilos to a teen for sexually express photographs. The police mentioned they discovered no proof that Mr. Edwards had dedicated a criminal offense, elevating questions on why the BBC devoted hours of airtime, or the papers acres of newsprint, to what turned out to be the personal lifetime of one of many broadcaster’s stars.
The allegations had been salacious, to make certain — catnip for the British press — and the BBC was attempting to point out journalistic integrity by not shying away from embarrassing news a couple of member of its personal workers.
But the bigger motive for the saturation protection, media executives, editors and analysts mentioned, is that Mr. Edwards is not any odd news anchor, and the BBC is not any odd media outlet.
“It’s always in the center of the storm because of its power,” mentioned Howard Stringer, a former president of CBS who served on the BBC’s board. “The BBC, like the monarchy, is a symbol of continuity in a polarized society.”
Mr. Edwards, 61, occupied a lofty perch on this singular establishment, not not like that of Walter Cronkite, the CBS anchor who was as soon as the face and voice of historical past for tens of millions of Americans. Gray-haired and grave, he broke the news of the loss of life of Queen Elizabeth II final September after which led the BBC’s protection of the coronation of King Charles III in May. An anchor on the flagship “BBC News at Ten” program, he’s the broadcaster’s go-to journalist for history-in-the-making.
“You can’t think of anyone else in British journalism at the moment who captured that sense of stability,” mentioned Mr. Stringer, who, like Mr. Edwards, was born in Wales.
The BBC’s distinctive standing, he mentioned, and the truth that it’s financed by a obligatory license price imposed on most British households, makes it a ripe goal for politicians and rivals. Even earlier than this episode, the BBC lurched from disaster to disaster over the conduct and statements of a few of its most distinguished figures. It has usually discovered itself within the political cross hairs, focused from each the suitable and left.
The drama involving Mr. Edwards started final Friday, when The Sun, a tabloid owned by Rupert Murdoch, reported that an unnamed BBC workers member had paid {the teenager} greater than £35,000, or nearly $45,000, for express pictures over a interval of a number of years that started when the particular person was 17.
Under British regulation, the age of consent is 16, however it’s a crime to take, make, share or possess indecent photographs of anybody underneath 18.
After initially saying it was wanting into whether or not a criminal offense had been dedicated, the London police mentioned on Wednesday that there was no proof to recommend Mr. Edwards had completed so. The Sun responded by saying it will publish no additional allegations. Instead, it mentioned it will flip over its file on Mr. Edwards to the BBC, which is conducting its personal investigation into the matter.
But critics mentioned the harm had been completed. While the paper didn’t title Mr. Edwards, his id rapidly grew to become an open secret in our on-line world. And whereas The Sun’s editors say they by no means accused the workers member of a criminal offense, the paper printed a narrative underneath the headline, “Top BBC star who ‘paid child for sex pictures’ could be charged by cops and face years in prison, expert says.”
In addition to the allegations concerning the sexually express photographs, the BBC itself reported on Tuesday {that a} second younger particular person had come ahead claiming that the male workers member — now recognized as Mr. Edwards — had despatched offended and abusive messages to the particular person through a courting app.
Mr. Edwards’s spouse, Vicky Flind, mentioned he would deal with the scenario when he regained his well being. But given the sordid nature of the allegations, it’s laborious to think about a situation by which he returns to an anchor chair on the BBC, the place he started as a news trainee in 1984. In a press release on behalf of Mr. Edwards, his spouse mentioned he could be receiving inpatient care “for the foreseeable future.”
“What we had was a kangaroo court, which destroyed someone who did not commit a crime,” mentioned Claire Enders, a London-based media analyst. “The BBC got drawn into the feeding frenzy. It got drawn into a trap set by The Sun.”
The BBC, to make certain, sophisticated its personal scenario. The broadcaster waited seven weeks after the mom of {the teenager} lodged her preliminary grievance with its viewers providers division to confront Mr. Edwards concerning the allegations or to escalate the matter to the highest ranges of the BBC.
Only after The Sun contacted the broadcaster on July 6 with further allegations from the mom did the BBC’s director-general, Tim Davie, get entangled. Mr. Davie later admitted that the episode confirmed the necessity to re-examine how complaints are “red flagged through the organization.” In this case, he famous that the primary grievance, whereas severe, “did not include an allegation of criminality.”
Once the BBC acted, critics mentioned it went overboard in its protection. The allegations led each newscast and had been performed on the high of the BBC’s web site, which additionally ran an exhaustive dwell briefing. Correspondents referred repeatedly to the unnamed “presenter,” despite the fact that his id was so well-known within the newsroom that at one level, a bunch mistakenly mentioned “Huw” as an alternative of “who.”
The story eclipsed the NATO summit assembly in Vilnius, Lithuania, the place Prime Minister Rishi Sunak delivered a speech about Britain’s army assist for Ukraine. Mr. Sunak bought extra protection for his remark, on the best way to Vilnius, when he known as the stories of funds by the presenter “shocking and concerning.”
“The BBC lost its sense of proportion,” mentioned Alan Rusbridger, a former editor of The Guardian. “It gets into this mind-set where it feels it must make up for sluggishness in handling issues by showing a clean pair of hands in covering them.”
The stress is especially intense due to the legacy of Jimmy Savile, the comic and BBC host who was uncovered as a serial intercourse predator after his loss of life in 2011. The BBC was accused of masking up allegations in opposition to Mr. Savile; the fallout from that scandal price certainly one of Mr. Davie’s predecessors his job.
Yet historical past additionally performed an element within the BBC’s refusal to call Mr. Edwards. In 2018, the British singer, Cliff Richard, received a privateness case in opposition to the broadcaster after it aired photos of a police raid on his dwelling after he confronted a sexual assault allegation. Mr. Richard was by no means arrested or charged, and the BBC ended up paying him a 2 million pound ($2.6 million) settlement.
At the center of each such story is the query of tips on how to steadiness a person’s proper to privateness with the general public’s curiosity in understanding the reality. In the age of Twitter and Facebook, nevertheless, that has change into an more and more moot train. Mr. Edwards’s title was trending on Twitter inside a day of The Sun’s report.
“This is a particularly problematic case,” Mr. Rusbridger mentioned. “He’s a very well known journalist, and he works in a gossipy industry, so it was inevitable that his name would come out. You drop enough hints and let Twitter do the rest.”
Source: www.nytimes.com