The Newsroom

Cliff Richard High Court Case

High court ruling due 18/7 (page 9 onwards) (April 2018)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
FB
Fluffy Bunny Feet
Brekkie posted:
Whataday posted:
In my opinion this is a victory for the establishment. A national disgrace, and a blow to press freedom.

The judgement will help protect those within the establishment that have committed heinous crimes. People already protected by their position of privilege are now even better placed to cover up their disgusting behaviour.

And this opinion bears no relation to Sir Cliff's innocence/guilt, before someone tries to censor me.

100% agree. The press have often abused their "freedom" over the years and I've never been comfortable with innocent people having their names dragged through the press and suffering trial by media but this verdict, along with the general political landscape at the moment, feels like it is paving the way for the police and the state to go unchecked by the media and operate completely in secret.

As much as the coverage Cliff had to endure caused personal suffering it arguably also protected him in the case too.


As I've said before the press are not regulated. They would like nothing more the the BBC and other broadcasters to fail on the slightest issue as it suits their agenda. Don't make the mistake and think they are holier than thou. For whatever reason the BBC in cahoots with SYP (and thier advisors) failed big time on this - from the start.
FB
Fluffy Bunny Feet
BM11 posted:
The PM sort of backs the BBC/Press argument in the case and rules out any 'Cliff's Law' as do prominent journalists working for the Sun and The Times.
This means the BBC probably do have enough backing within the press to go for an appeal but the costs issue might what leads the BBC to decide not to and hope a newspaper faces a similar case and does the whole appeal to the supreme court routine.


Backing from the press? What do you expect? It'll make the 'News of the World' debacle a tea party.
If want to know more read Nick Davis' book 'Hack Attack' - it's not a world I want to be involved with.
FB
Fluffy Bunny Feet
BFGArmy posted:
..
WW Update posted:
BFGArmy posted:
Can't say I have much sympathy for the Beeb here - they were almost gleeful to show the original police raid and the use of the helicopter was ridiculously over-the-top and irresponsible. It was incredibly tacky and the sort of thing we'd rightly attack tabloids over when they do similar. A sorry day for the Beeb - they should be ashamed.


But was the BBC's coverage inaccurate in any way? The police raid did in fact take place -- that's an indisputable fact. Even in libel cases, the truth is an absolute defense. You could argue that the coverage was over-the-top, but that should be an editorial matter, not a legal one.


I wouldn't know the ins and outs from a legal perspective but the coverage in itself was concerning and raises a lot of questions.
The tone was very 'gotcha' and sensationalist and tacky and the use of the helicopter a waste of licence fee funds and completely unjustifiable.

I'm more concerned by that than if the BBC gets some nasty headlines tomorrow - the tabloids would be rught for once to criticise the Beeb (though the old saying of those in glass houses springs to mind). It says a lot when even Guardian readers and Twitter users who are normally pretty pro-Beeb think the BBC are in the wrong here

I'd like to think too that the judge in charge of the case may be more knowledgable on the case, the precedent and implications than TV Forum members.


Some sensible thoughts at last - thankyou.
WH
Whataday Founding member
BFGArmy posted:
I'd like to think too that the judge in charge of the case may be more knowledgable on the case, the precedent and implications than TV Forum members.


I'd like to think so too, but having come across many judges in my line of work, I wouldn't put money on it.
BM
BM11
BBC news making sure they not accused of trying to bury the story as it remains the top story on the website (when it is not on Sky and the tabloids website)
ITV News have the exclusive first interview with Sir Cliff - if he mentions that anyone should resign then it is curtains for them.
I think the BBC is going to make things worse for themselves by appealing rather than letting the government do it through statute. Fran Unsworth making such a public statement is asking for trouble regarding her (and Tony Hall's) future. I don't think the BBC understand how willing the press will be to throw the BBC to the wolves if they think they can get the scalp of major BBC figures
Last edited by BM11 on 18 July 2018 4:07pm - 3 times in total
JO
Jon
BM11 posted:
BBC news making sure they not accused of trying to bury the story as it remains the top story on the website (when it is not on Sky and the tabloids website)
ITV News have the exclusive first interview with Sir Cliff - if he mentions that anyone should resign then it is curtains for them.
I think the BBC is going to make things worse for themselves by appealing rather than letting the government do it through statute. Fran Unsworth making such a public statement is asking for trouble regarding her (and Tony Hall's) future. I don't think the BBC understand how willing the press will be to throw the BBC to the wolves if they think they can get the scalp of major figures.

Do you think it’s possible someone might resign?
Warbler and itsrobert gave kudos
BM
BM11
Jon posted:
BM11 posted:
BBC news making sure they not accused of trying to bury the story as it remains the top story on the website (when it is not on Sky and the tabloids website)
ITV News have the exclusive first interview with Sir Cliff - if he mentions that anyone should resign then it is curtains for them.
I think the BBC is going to make things worse for themselves by appealing rather than letting the government do it through statute. Fran Unsworth making such a public statement is asking for trouble regarding her (and Tony Hall's) future. I don't think the BBC understand how willing the press will be to throw the BBC to the wolves if they think they can get the scalp of major figures.

Do you think it’s possible someone might resign?

Multiple resignations will come.
The BBC editorial head might be another as his defence while possibly a proper and valid view to take is just tone deaf and out of touch.
BR
Brekkie
It's defending the BBC - exactly what the directors of it should be doing.

You clearly don't understand the legal and political arguments around this case and perhaps as such should show more consideration in what you're posting here. Frankly there are more facts on Donald J Trumps Twitter feed.
dosxuk and Custard56 gave kudos
JO
Jon
BM11 posted:
Jon posted:
BM11 posted:
BBC news making sure they not accused of trying to bury the story as it remains the top story on the website (when it is not on Sky and the tabloids website)
ITV News have the exclusive first interview with Sir Cliff - if he mentions that anyone should resign then it is curtains for them.
I think the BBC is going to make things worse for themselves by appealing rather than letting the government do it through statute. Fran Unsworth making such a public statement is asking for trouble regarding her (and Tony Hall's) future. I don't think the BBC understand how willing the press will be to throw the BBC to the wolves if they think they can get the scalp of major figures.

Do you think it’s possible someone might resign?

Multiple resignations will come.
The BBC editorial head might be another as his defence while possibly a proper and valid view to take is just tone deaf and out of touch.

OK. Just wanted to make it clear whether you thought resignations were possible.
BM
BM11
Brekkie posted:
It's defending the BBC - exactly what the directors of it should be doing.

You clearly don't understand the legal and political arguments around this case and perhaps as such should show more consideration in what you're posting here. Frankly there are more facts on Donald J Trumps Twitter feed.

The BBC are a public body- they cant just appeal like a private citizen or public body when it's license fee money and know if a public backlash occurs then it's them that are forced out of their job.
:-(
A former member
The BBC were right to look at this case, the problem was the way it dealt with it. Alas I think the BBC were in the wrong using a helicopter etc and thats where most people are not happy.
BM
BM11
623058 posted:
The BBC were right to look at this case, the problem was the way it dealt with it. Alas I think the BBC were in the wrong using a helicopter etc and thats where most people are not happy.

I am surprised they haven't announced at suspension of using the helicopter until they get new guidelines

Newer posts