Queen's Speech: Huw Edwards discusses 'remarkable' monarch
When you subscribe we will use the information you provide to send you these newsletters. Sometimes they’ll include recommendations for other related newsletters or services we offer. Our Privacy Notice explains more about how we use your data, and your rights. You can unsubscribe at any time.
BBC News presenter Huw Edwards, 59, has been forced to take down his earlier tweet about the backlash aimed at his team over the ways Martin Bashir arranged his interview with the late Princess Diana in 1995. The journalist took to Twitter today in a now-deleted post to explain that although he feels “sickened” after a report concluded that Bashir had acted inappropriately and seriously breached BBC guidelines to obtain his interview, he felt today’s BBC News team had been unfairly “lectured” over the situation.
The BBC News at Ten host shared his team had been “lectured on probity and trust” by some of the media.
He had penned: “There is no excuse or justification for what happened in 1995.
“We are all sickened by it and the subsequent handling of it.
“For today’s @BBCNews team — 25 years on — to be lectured on probity and trust by certain parts of the media is somewhat vexing. #DysonReport @BBCNewsPR.”
However, Huw took to the social media platform again this afternoon to inform his 128,000 followers that he had “agreed” to delete his post.
He wrote in an update: “I’ve agreed to take down my earlier tweet because it’s encouraged more attacks on @BBCNews colleagues.
“That’s the last thing I want.
“They deserve praise for the work they do. #DysonReport.”
Fans took to the comments section of Huw’s explanation to share their thoughts.
One person wrote: “The frontlines at the Beeb are generally excellent. Seems a lot of the management not quite so. One (very) bad apple should not reflect on the rest of you. And it is laughable hypocrisy to hear the press tearing in to the bbc.”
Another added: “Maybe, but the BBC deserves the criticism it’s having. Why was Bashir allowed to resign/retire a few days ago when he could have been sacked? That’s exactly what the BBC would be reporting if it were another organisation.”
A third person commented: “I think the BBC has owned their s**t pretty well here (may have taken a while) especially compared to how other media outlets handle it when they’re caught out.”
Gayle King’s swipe at Oprah Winfrey: ‘All she had to do was sit there’ [OPINION]
Gardeners’ World’s Monty Don branded uneducated after lawn dispute [COMMENT]
Stacey Solomon red-faced over Joe Swash’s costume for Rex’s birthday [VIDEO]
A fourth agreed: “Iv had quite enough of anyone blaming the BBC for everything. Enough. Mr Bashir isn’t the BBC, he made the error end of. Move on.”(sic)
It comes after the famous interview, during which Princess Diana discussed her marriage with Prince Charles, was investigated by Lord Dyson, the former master of the rolls and head of civil justice.
The investigation was launched after Diana’s brother, Earl Spencer, alleged Bashir showed him fake financial documents relating to his sister’s former private secretary Patrick Jephson, alongside another former royal household member, and told untrue stories about the royal family in order to set up the interview with the princess.
Bashir commissioned fake bank statements and used “deceitful behaviour” in a “serious breach” of the BBC’s guidelines, the report concluded.
Lord Dyson said in the report: “I have also concluded that, without justification, the BBC covered up in its press logs such facts as it had been able to establish about how Mr Bashir secured the interview and failed to mention the issue at all on any news programme and thereby fell short of the high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark.”
In a statement, Bashir said: “This is the second time that I have willingly fully co-operated with an investigation into events more than 25 years ago. I apologised then, and I do so again now, over the fact that I asked for bank statements to be mocked up.
“It was a stupid thing to do and was an action I deeply regret. But I absolutely stand by the evidence I gave a quarter of a century ago, and again more recently.
“I also reiterate that the bank statements had no bearing whatsoever on the personal choice by Princess Diana to take part in the interview. Evidence handed to the inquiry in her own handwriting (and published alongside the report today) unequivocally confirms this, and other compelling evidence presented to Lord Dyson reinforces it.
“In fact, despite his other findings, Lord Dyson himself in any event accepts that the princess would probably have agreed to be interviewed without what he describes as my ‘intervention’.
“It is saddening that this single issue has been allowed to overshadow the princess’ brave decision to tell her story, to courageously talk through the difficulties she faced, and, to help address the silence and stigma that surrounded mental health issues all those years ago. She led the way in addressing so many of these issues and that’s why I will always remain immensely proud of that interview.”
Source: Read Full Article