BBC suspend unnamed presenter

Only the parents have talked about a crack cocaine habit. My friend’s parents once asked him if he was on drugs because he got poor GCSE results. It’s probably very easy to say there must be something wrong with my son or daughter for them to want to sell pornographic material of themselves online, but if they’d been selling it to 100 people at £350 a pop, the parents wouldn’t have tracked down all their employers. It’s because it’s a well known celebrity that it’s in the news and for no other reason.

 

Ok, so if I found my 17 year old daughter was selling images of herself on Only Fans and using the money for drugs? I’d try to persuade her to stop. I couldn’t round up every person who had bought her pictures though and try and make them culpable.

 

Only according to what you've read via The Sun.

 

And yet look at the traction this story is getting on the bbs. People starving, homeless, can't get health treatment, can't catch a train as you say but the actions of Huw Edwards which appear to not be illegal now make up a thread running for 17 pages.

 

Thank goodness it wasn't Philip Schofield.

 

We’ll see, I’m leaving it now until stuff is checked again.
But let’s be clear, the Sun might be scummy and they might have gone about it totally wrongly, but it isn’t them that have ‘ruined Huw Edwards career’ that’s totally down to him.
Illegal no, immoral ( certainly by his public and media persona) definitely

 

In what ways would a porn mag be better or more moral?

 

Is it immoral to masturbate to gay porn if you're gay? I don't think it is. If anything all he's guilty of is having more money than sense. A porn mag or redtube would have been a lot cheaper.

 

At 20 my kids make their own decisions. I can say my opinion but at the end of the day it's up them. I no longer get a say but just hope my parenting has shown them the right path.

 

Just my view. but you and I know the difference. Extremely immoral. It's not lads picking a magazine up and showing his mates. There are dividing lines and I have em. As do most I assume. Maybe not to the same extent. But that's everything in life I suppose.

 

I don't know the difference or why one is fine and one is extremely immoral - please humour me and explain.

 

Do porn mags even still exist? Isn't what Huw Edwards has done just the more modern, internet savvy equivalent?

 

I asked about this specific incident. If all the facts are true. I may change my view on differing versions.

 

Can I also add if you frequent Reddit there are numerous subreddits where people upload indecent images and videos of themselves just for the thrill of doing it, or as a free advert for their OnlyFans/Twitch/Patreon type channels. In my head paying someone directly for indecent images is better than paying someone who is exploiting young people as many of the red tops used to do with page 3.

 

I don't think there's owt savvy about it. He's outed himself in the most horrid of ways for his family.

 

I don’t think his employer should be brought into it as there is absolutely no justification for allegations about someone’s private life to be shared with their employer unless it involves criminal activity. That’s my opinion.

 

You assume that his family didn't already know. It would be surprising if after years of marriage his wife didn't know - or at least have strong suspicions.

She might even have supported it.

 

Let's be clear, he hasn't outed himself - the Sun has outed him.

 

I think our understanding of the word savvy must be different.

 

Did I say one is fine. I explained my interpretation in the last post.