- X marks the spot part one - 20th December 2024
- Time on your hands… - 19th December 2024
- Order of the British Endgame - 18th December 2024
During 23 years with The BBC, and a 41 year career (when he was trained to use clear and simple language, avoiding jargon), for our Editor, Welshman Phil Parry high profile sackings after huge controversies have always been a mainstay of his journalism, and now comes news that Gary Lineker may be removed as host of its flagship football programme, but he remains shocked at how it highlights that the corporation has been rocked by an incredible number of scandals, with insiders saying the man at the top must take the fall.
What usually happens is the following: after a famous figure has made waves attracting bad headlines for the organisation, bosses wait saying everything is fine then sack him or her later.
More often than not, though, an exception is made if the accusation is extremely serious – in which case the departure is immediate.
The first, COULD be what we are seeing now in relation to Gary Lineker as host of The BBC’s flagship football programme Match of the Day (MotD). Last week journalists broke the story that an internal email purportedly from the broadcaster’s director of sport, Alex Kay-Jelski, featured a statement announcing the former England striker’s departure after 25 years presenting the iconic show.
The BBC refused to disown the draft email, saying nothing had been agreed, and that Mr Lineker was on contract until the end of the season. However, pressed on whether the email was fake, there was a ‘decline to comment’, which is always a bit suspicious.
MailOnline (MO) have published: “The favourites to replace Gary Lineker as Match of the Day host have been revealed after MailOnline broke the story that BBC bosses are plotting his exit. Fresh doubts emerged over his future as presenter after MailOnline saw an email which appeared to suggest chiefs are writing up a statement about his departure.”
Appearing to confirm the MO story (although he was joking in the face of a growing storm of controversy), Mr Lineker said on Saturday night’s MotD on terrestrial television: “It’s my final show (pause) before the international break”.
Yesterday Mr Lineker made front page headlines, with the Mail on Sunday (MoS) declaring: “Why it’s all kicking off between Lineker and BBC”.
Last year he had posted a tweet, attacking the UK Government’s policy towards refugees, yet his supporters proclaimed that this was from his personal account, and carpeting him undermined the concept of free speech. This – as well as what has occurred now – made headlines across the UK.
Mr Lineker has made his views known since too.
In one forum it was stated: “On Wednesday April 10th, the National Education Union hosted the launch of a new film by Show Racism the Red Card (SRtRC) about migration…
“Former England international and Match of the Day presenter, Gary Lineker speaks openly in the film about his feelings on migration and the negative narrative that surrounds it; comments that will doubtlessly result in more ‘he should stick to football’ remarks from government officials and others.”
After Mr Lineker made his initial comment, he was allowed back on air, but this apparent U-turn provoked enormous criticism, and politicians as well as sports stars poked fun at the corporation over it.
Some Tory MPs were furious at the decision to bring Mr Lineker back, saying that it gave him “carte blanche” to state what he liked on social media, despite Mr Davie insisting that he would “abide by the editorial guidelines”.
An ‘independent review’ was to look into the use of social media by staff, although to critics this looked like meaningless twaddle to cover up the fact that managers had messed up.
All of this puts centre stage the controversies that have engulfed The BBC with (mostly) Tim Davie in charge as the Director General (DG). As I was there for 23 years I think I have a right to list them.
We have had Amanda Abbington/Giovanni Pernice on the hit BBC One show Strictly Come Dancing, where an apology had to be made. There has also been the headlines about the One Show and another MotD stalwart, Jermaine Jenas, the Mr Lineker business (which might now finally be coming to a head), the Huw Edwards affair, and the Jimmy Savile scandal (the full extent of which has only emerged relatively recently).
We’ll start this list of shame, with the information about Ms Abbington. The BBC says it has now assessed and “upheld some, but not all” of her complaints about her time on Strictly, after she pulled out of the show last year and claimed later that as well as a “toxic environment”, she had been subject to “inappropriate, mean, nasty bullying”.
In saying sorry, the giant corporation declared: “We have assessed the complaints and we have upheld some, but not all, of the complaints made. We want to apologise to Amanda Abbington and to thank her for coming forward and taking part. We know this would not have been an easy thing to do”. The BBC also proclaimed in the statement that the corporation expected “…very high standards…”, so critics (including me) are entitled to ask why the previous scandals happened in the first place.
Mr Jenas, faced claims as well of ‘inappropriate behaviour’, and was sacked from The BBC over allegedly sending ‘unsolicited’ texts to junior members of staff. Reports have claimed that one female worker received unsolicited communications via text from him – they were supposedly ‘flirty’. Others then came forward according to The Sun. However, the source added there was “no suggestion of illegality” on Mr Jenas’s part.
There is no way of knowing if this alleged message sending had been going on for some time or was very recent, but what IS certain is that The BBC was keen to paint a picture of decisiveness. An internal source who backs managers there told The Times: “We investigated him immediately and fired him pretty fast. There are no excuses for anyone in power abusing their positions. He’s a man in power messaging some runner”. Mr Jenas made an extraordinary statement about his sacking on radio with talkSPORT.
Others, though, are less happy. One Welsh former senior executive said to The Eye: “The BBC is attempting to display decisiveness after the Huw Edwards & Savile scandals to help restore its public image. It’s cosmetic. He’s relatively small fry compared to Lineker…”.
Meanwhile it is now clear that Mr Savile had sexually abused HUNDREDS of children and women at the height of his fame.
It is now believed he preyed on around 500 vulnerable victims as young as two years old at institutions including The BBC’s broadcasting studios, 14 hospitals and 20 children’s hospitals across England. Obviously this abuse took place before Mr Davie took over as DG, but the extent of it has only come out recently so he has to take responsibility.
This came in the context of the astonishing Huw Edwards business, which was very much with Mr Davie in position. He was given a six month jail sentence last month, suspended for two years. Edwards had moving images of a child aged between seven and nine, and 41 photographs – seven category A images in levels of criminality, 12 category B pictures, and 22 category C. The category A images – the most serious kind – were mostly of children aged 13 to 15.
Yet Mr Davie thought they had done well. He defended his corporation’s handling of the controversy, when it paid Edwards hundreds of thousands of pounds even though it knew he had been arrested on child pornography charges.
The BBC were also to keep the BAFTAs won for Royal coverage fronted by Edwards, and individual awards he received would ‘remain under review’.
But staff inside the organisation were distressed. One whistleblower said they were “disappointed” not to have heard more about an internal inquiry’s progress, a further critic said that it felt like “things have been swept under the carpet”.
The background is unbelievable. On a different issue, Edwards was suspended in July 2023 after reports in The Sun said he had paid a young person for sexually explicit images. More is now known about his behaviour. Edwards’ admission of what he did made the front page of almost every single UK newspaper.
There has also been consternation about why he was a hero to some in the Welsh nationalist or independence communities. One leading Public Relations (PR) and marketing executive who wished to remain anonymous, told The Eye: “It has always seemed incredible to me, and now this just emphasises it. In the past we have even had Welsh nationalist or independence clients wanting to put Huw Edwards’ face on their products!”.
In one announcement on Twitter/X Edwards highlighted: “The wacky world where Wales was never a nation and Pembrokeshire is the heartland of… Plaid Cymru. Help!”. The picture he attached underneath it, was of protesters carrying Welsh flags aloft with a placard of END LONDON RULE clearly visible near the centre of the photograph.
He was ordered to drop a post of himself in front of a Welsh flag, which he proclaimed (ironically) was a “backdrop for @BBCNews at Ten”, and responded: “Gutted my pro-flag tweet has been cut down in its prime. By order. But it will be back tomorrow – by popular demand. Meanwhile enjoy this magnificent flag – one of my favourites. Hashtag SixNationsRugby Hashtag FRAvWAL” – with a series of emojis included.
His remarks, though, were not met with wild acclaim by the leader of the Welsh Conservatives in the Welsh Parliament/Senedd Cymru (WP/SC) Andrew RT Davies, who has said on Twitter/X that The BBC was: “Employing presenters who openly mock… (Britain)… Ridiculous!”, and linked it to the ‘Gutted’ post.
He has ‘liked’ a tweet declaring that he should be “President of an Independent Cymru”, apparently flying in the face of the rules on impartiality (which Mr Davie has endorsed), and there was also a call on the internet for Edwards to be knighted because of his presentation of a Royal funeral.
He attacked a critique of the break-up of the UK by celebrated historian and journalist Max Hastings. Edwards tweeted that there were “errors”, and after Edwards’ diatribe the website Nation.Cymru (NC) (which is supported by the taxpayer unlike The Eye) published a ‘news’ piece saying: “Huw Edwards slams former Telegraph editor for anti-Welsh language article”, and it has ‘reported’ many ‘stories’ about his exploits. For example, following a remark about Welsh nationalist party Plaid Cymru (Plaid), it ran a ‘story’ that: “Broadcaster Huw Edwards has protested the BBC’s new rules on using social media by unleashing a cascade of Welsh flags”.
The exposure of Edwards caused a huge storm when it emerged that he had been paid between £475,000 and £479,999 in the 2023-24 financial year, making him the broadcaster’s third-highest-paid presenter overall.
He was merely ASKED to give some of it back, but as of this week hadn’t done so. In a letter to staff the BBC Chair Samir Shah said that Edwards had “behaved in bad faith” (surely an under-statement!), saying that the corporation believed he had taken his salary despite knowing he was to plead guilty to the offences.
Mr Davie told the House of Lords (HoL) Communications and Digital Committee (CDC) lamely: “The money should be returned and we made the request…we do expect to make progress and get an answer. We’ve made the formal request and I can’t go into too much detail but discussions are under way”.
Edwards, formerly The BBC’s most high-profile newsreader, continued to earn his salary for FIVE months after he was arrested on three counts of making indecent images of children, during which time he was paid more than £200,000.
He had allegedly given £35,000 to a teenager in exchange for the sexually explicit images, and when he was finally ‘outed’ by his wife a news item about it stated: “Vicky Flind, the wife of news reader Huw Edwards, has named him as the BBC presenter facing allegations over payments for sexually explicit images in a statement issued on his behalf”.
Harmful claims then emerged about Edwards’ actions generally at the BBC, with it being claimed that he had sent ‘menacing’ texts to one individual, and further allegations emerged following the original ones made in The Sun (the paper said it had a dossier of his activities, but has chosen not to publish).
He was also accused of sending inappropriate messages to BBC employees (there are perhaps echoes here of what Mr Jenas is alleged to have done!). According to Newsnight, one current staff member claimed they were contacted on social media by him, and the messages left them feeling uncomfortable as well as awkward. The messages were reportedly suggestive in nature, appeared to be flirtatious, and referred to the appearance of Mr Edwards’ colleague. “There is a power dynamic that makes this inappropriate”, the staff member said. Another BBC employee alleged that Mr Edwards had also sent them a private message on social media which commented, too, on their appearance and gave them a “cold shudder”.
During the days in which Edwards went unnamed as the presenter at the centre of the scandal, the publicist and strategist Mark Berkowski told Times Radio: “We’ve got a situation where it’s an ongoing car crash and the BBC is so glacial about how they’re dealing with this, because this is a 21st century problem”,
David Keighley, the former BBC news producer and director of News-watch, spoke of “reputational damage” to the man’s colleagues.
Journalists who covered the extraordinary incident, have apparently emphasised criticism that The BBC effectively clammed up about it. For instance, one Sky News journalist said at the time: “The fact all of us broadcasters have asked, have put in requests again and again to speak to the director general, and the fact that he has only given an interview to his own people is not a good look for the BBC”.
Yet senior executives seemingly took a different view.
During a pre-arranged HoL committee hearing about a week afterwards, Mr Davie, said: “We have been in touch with the complainant”, and that due to the “history of this industry… we should all be concerned and appropriately diligent around the abuse of people in powerful positions”.
As the Edwards issue came hard on the heels of the controversy about Mr Lineker, Mr Davie’s position now looks increasingly untenable.
In that hearing he sat alongside the then acting chairwoman, Dame Elan Closs Stephens (who, like Edwards, is from Wales). She and Mr Davie were forced to answer important questions about the corporation’s attitude during the affair, following suggestions that it did not properly investigate the original complaint.
Dame Elan told peers that despite “huge pressure” to name Edwards, the corporation “had a duty to act with some calm and rationality in the face of lack of rationality and lack of calm”.
She was BBC chair for almost all of the period in question, and clearly she remains untarnished as one of the ‘great and good’ – she has been appointed to the Hay Festival.
Don’t forget the astonishing Jay Blades episode either – again when Mr Davie was at the helm.
The Repair Shop star was accused of illegal acts in relation to his estranged wife, with the allegations including physical and emotional abuse, according to court documents. He appeared at Kidderminster Magistrates’ Court and was bailed until another court appearance.
West Mercia Police (WMP) said he was charged after they were called to an address earlier in the year, following an Instagram post by Lisa Zbozen. A repeat of David & Jay’s Touring Toolshed was removed and The BBC will not show any programmes in which he features.
Of course they won’t have to remove old versions of MotD with Mr Lineker presenting it, even if executives ‘declined to comment’ about whether an internal email was fake which appeared to put a question mark over his future…
The memories of Phil’s astounding, decades long award-winning career in journalism (including his many years at the BBC) as he was gripped by the rare neurological disabling condition Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia (HSP), have been released in a major book ‘A Good Story’. Order it now.
Tomorrow – information that Lucy Letby has instructed a new lawyer to take her controversial case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), has highlighted renewed questions about police actions, and the high-profile role of Wales.
