So when he acted like a **** he got called one? Ok.
The fact a second person has come forward is a bit worrying, for the presenter anyway
Where are all the people yesterday downvoting me and defending him because they took the crack addled onlyfans boys testimony at face value?
Man in his 20s threatens to reveal who he is. Presenter responds angrily. Not sure what the issue is there. He was being a cunt and he responded aggressively. Pretty normal reaction
Reading this story does seem to be that they talked online (presumably on Grindr) the presenter revealed his identity and then the guy he was talking to essentially threatened to out him. At that stage the presenter sent threatening messages.
Obviously sending threatening messages isn’t great but the context does feel important.
More details need to come out about this and the extent of it all, but I’ll throw my initial thoughts in regardless.
On the surface this feels very tepid to me, they spoke on a dating app and they felt threatened when asked if they could meet up? If someone messaged me on Grindr I’m not interested in, I just ignore or block and move on. If this is just a one off conversation with a stranger on an app then it feels a bit of a pile on.
Obviously I could be way off and this is actually bigger than initially expected, but without further details this is just adding more fuel to the the already pretty big fire.
It’s always a little odd when the BBC reports on the BBC.
This is such a weird story. Just when it seems like it’s all going one way, something new comes up which totally changes everything.
I’m really hoping nobody involved does anything stupid, it must feel awful to be at the centre of something like this.
So a 20-something guy threatened to publicly out whoever this is after flirting on Grindr and got cussed out for it? ‘Young person’ seems particularly emotionally manipulative language for the headline in this, it’s not some teenager it’s an adult man?
We all know who it is now… why won’t the BBC say?
How does the second person know that the BBC presenter that he has had dealing with, is the same person that the other young person has had dealings with.
It maybe that both young persons know each other, or that there are two BBC presenters
So glad I left this sub, so many people trying to comment defending him sending abusive messages and threatening a young person. Very weird that people do not think it is creepy and are trying to basically blame the young lad, it does not say that he tried to out him at all. It just said he said he was going to come forward and he received threats. We don’t know what was said yet, but it is confirmed they were from the presenter’s phone number.
The fact you guys are running to assume this is a case of false allegations when large sums of money, power and legal action are involved is absurd. No-one seems to understand that people with vulnerability like a mental health issue (addiction) are not going to be very honest most likely if they feel they are at threat of money and legal attention in the public domain. The family sticking to their guard says a lot.
Maybe it’s about time the British public stopped trying to assume that everyone is lying about sexual abuse, and instead just accept that what the young men are claiming is disgusting and that a full investigation in detail and mental health support should be involved here.
There will be several more coming out of the woodwork. The presenter in question surely has many years worth of acquaintances who will want a piece of the pie.
Why can’t they just tell us? Are they waiting until a trial is held and he is proven innocent or guilty? If so, why isn’t that the case for all potential criminals?
As soon as I read this morning that a dating app was involved, I knew it was just a matter of time until more people came forward with similar stories
Not being funny but if you’re going to meet someone in Grindr you don’t then threaten to out them, that’s wrong. Threats aren’t the answer but that young person isn’t exactly a good person either
This is a difficult one. Threatening is bad but if someone threatens to out you when you are not publicly out is also very bad. Two wrongs don’t make a right but I suspect there is an aspect of context that is lacking here.
How do they know it’s the same presenter if it hasn’t been confirmed yet and they have no connection to the other complainant?
They have gone through the bottom of the barrel and continue to scrape.
What a load of shite.
You were an adult. You were on a dating site with another adult. You made veiled threats about blackmail and they were angry. What makes you the victim here?
People are the worst.
When are we gonna be allowed to say the name of HE who must not be named.
“A young person has told BBC News they felt threatened by the BBC presenter at the centre of a row over payment for sexually explicit photos”
How does the person making the complaint know who the accused is, and how does BBC news know?
The complaint should be dealt with by HR and board management. Whatever names are circulating, BBC news should not be in a position of knowledge to connect the two complaints.
The whole charade stinks.
Let’s just imagine for a second that all of this turns out to be perfectly within the law, and legal.
Why would a working television presenter, let alone a national public figure funded by the licence fee, in 2023, want to put their entire career on the line by (allegedly) exchanging messages and photos with someone they do not in any way personally know?
This reminds me of the 2003 incident with Leslie Grantham, going onto video call with an undercover journalist, having no idea who the Woman was, and well, aside from the sexual undertone, it was the dialogue on the call, discussing work and fellow actors that caused more, if not the most damage to his position in BBC’s Eastenders.
The Grantham incident was 20 years ago. It just amazes me that this could still be possible all of this time later, with an equally as iconic figure on the BBC.
“Man threatened to out closeted BBC presenter” is probably a more accurate headline.
Are there any presenters who are normally on BBC that have been not seen on TV in the past few days ?
Old man wanting bum fun with young lads. Using money and power, discussing behaviour. Safe to say who it is will resign in due course.
At this point, the presenter should be named so that they can defend themselves.
What we’re seeing now is the allegations dominating the narrative. When the presenter *is* eventually named, they will have to counter all of the narrative that has been crafted by the allegations. That hill will continue to get steeper the longer it goes with no counter-narrative.
At this stage, it may be better for the presenter to come forward and offer their side of the story. From a PR perspective, you have to accept the reality that you will be named eventually and decide that the best risk mitigation strategy is to make sure your narrative is out there before people’s understanding of the situation crystallizes.
27 comments
So when he acted like a **** he got called one? Ok.
The fact a second person has come forward is a bit worrying, for the presenter anyway
Where are all the people yesterday downvoting me and defending him because they took the crack addled onlyfans boys testimony at face value?
Man in his 20s threatens to reveal who he is. Presenter responds angrily. Not sure what the issue is there. He was being a cunt and he responded aggressively. Pretty normal reaction
Reading this story does seem to be that they talked online (presumably on Grindr) the presenter revealed his identity and then the guy he was talking to essentially threatened to out him. At that stage the presenter sent threatening messages.
Obviously sending threatening messages isn’t great but the context does feel important.
More details need to come out about this and the extent of it all, but I’ll throw my initial thoughts in regardless.
On the surface this feels very tepid to me, they spoke on a dating app and they felt threatened when asked if they could meet up? If someone messaged me on Grindr I’m not interested in, I just ignore or block and move on. If this is just a one off conversation with a stranger on an app then it feels a bit of a pile on.
Obviously I could be way off and this is actually bigger than initially expected, but without further details this is just adding more fuel to the the already pretty big fire.
It’s always a little odd when the BBC reports on the BBC.
This is such a weird story. Just when it seems like it’s all going one way, something new comes up which totally changes everything.
I’m really hoping nobody involved does anything stupid, it must feel awful to be at the centre of something like this.
So a 20-something guy threatened to publicly out whoever this is after flirting on Grindr and got cussed out for it? ‘Young person’ seems particularly emotionally manipulative language for the headline in this, it’s not some teenager it’s an adult man?
We all know who it is now… why won’t the BBC say?
How does the second person know that the BBC presenter that he has had dealing with, is the same person that the other young person has had dealings with.
It maybe that both young persons know each other, or that there are two BBC presenters
So glad I left this sub, so many people trying to comment defending him sending abusive messages and threatening a young person. Very weird that people do not think it is creepy and are trying to basically blame the young lad, it does not say that he tried to out him at all. It just said he said he was going to come forward and he received threats. We don’t know what was said yet, but it is confirmed they were from the presenter’s phone number.
The fact you guys are running to assume this is a case of false allegations when large sums of money, power and legal action are involved is absurd. No-one seems to understand that people with vulnerability like a mental health issue (addiction) are not going to be very honest most likely if they feel they are at threat of money and legal attention in the public domain. The family sticking to their guard says a lot.
Maybe it’s about time the British public stopped trying to assume that everyone is lying about sexual abuse, and instead just accept that what the young men are claiming is disgusting and that a full investigation in detail and mental health support should be involved here.
There will be several more coming out of the woodwork. The presenter in question surely has many years worth of acquaintances who will want a piece of the pie.
Why can’t they just tell us? Are they waiting until a trial is held and he is proven innocent or guilty? If so, why isn’t that the case for all potential criminals?
As soon as I read this morning that a dating app was involved, I knew it was just a matter of time until more people came forward with similar stories
Not being funny but if you’re going to meet someone in Grindr you don’t then threaten to out them, that’s wrong. Threats aren’t the answer but that young person isn’t exactly a good person either
This is a difficult one. Threatening is bad but if someone threatens to out you when you are not publicly out is also very bad. Two wrongs don’t make a right but I suspect there is an aspect of context that is lacking here.
How do they know it’s the same presenter if it hasn’t been confirmed yet and they have no connection to the other complainant?
They have gone through the bottom of the barrel and continue to scrape.
What a load of shite.
You were an adult. You were on a dating site with another adult. You made veiled threats about blackmail and they were angry. What makes you the victim here?
People are the worst.
When are we gonna be allowed to say the name of HE who must not be named.
“A young person has told BBC News they felt threatened by the BBC presenter at the centre of a row over payment for sexually explicit photos”
How does the person making the complaint know who the accused is, and how does BBC news know?
The complaint should be dealt with by HR and board management. Whatever names are circulating, BBC news should not be in a position of knowledge to connect the two complaints.
The whole charade stinks.
Let’s just imagine for a second that all of this turns out to be perfectly within the law, and legal.
Why would a working television presenter, let alone a national public figure funded by the licence fee, in 2023, want to put their entire career on the line by (allegedly) exchanging messages and photos with someone they do not in any way personally know?
This reminds me of the 2003 incident with Leslie Grantham, going onto video call with an undercover journalist, having no idea who the Woman was, and well, aside from the sexual undertone, it was the dialogue on the call, discussing work and fellow actors that caused more, if not the most damage to his position in BBC’s Eastenders.
The Grantham incident was 20 years ago. It just amazes me that this could still be possible all of this time later, with an equally as iconic figure on the BBC.
“Man threatened to out closeted BBC presenter” is probably a more accurate headline.
Are there any presenters who are normally on BBC that have been not seen on TV in the past few days ?
Old man wanting bum fun with young lads. Using money and power, discussing behaviour. Safe to say who it is will resign in due course.
At this point, the presenter should be named so that they can defend themselves.
What we’re seeing now is the allegations dominating the narrative. When the presenter *is* eventually named, they will have to counter all of the narrative that has been crafted by the allegations. That hill will continue to get steeper the longer it goes with no counter-narrative.
At this stage, it may be better for the presenter to come forward and offer their side of the story. From a PR perspective, you have to accept the reality that you will be named eventually and decide that the best risk mitigation strategy is to make sure your narrative is out there before people’s understanding of the situation crystallizes.