I think a lot of people are getting confused of what is meant by bringing a company into “disrepute”.
by reporting on a story with sources, the sun would absolutely NOT be bringing anyone into disrepute. The sun hasn’t committed any offences against the BBC or Huw by reporting an account from a family. They didn’t even name Huw in the story. The “disrepute” thing would be an agreement between an employer and their employee. The sun has no such contract with the BBC and doesn’t owe them any sort of protection or conduct. What they are obligated to do though, is report within their own guidelines and operate within the law. They didn’t name Huw, or provide details which could reasonably be assumed to be him. So they haven’t committed any offence on that basis.
as for Huw - the issue with bringing the BBC into disrepute is layered.
in the first instance, there is a code of ethics that journalists adhere and subscribe to. This isn’t a flimsy ideological thing, it’s something supported by the Council of Europe and which any respectable journalist will be aware of. In a nutshell though, the code of ethics is about impartiality and integrity. Because journalists cannot effectively report the truth if they themselves are bias and aren’t inherently honest.
Huw was for all intents and purposes living a double life… but sexuality is deeply personal. And his right to a private life is protected by law. And he has the right to live a life free from concerns of persecution and so on. So I think there’s a fair argument that Huw’s sex life didn’t impede on his integrity in this instance. This is of course assuming no illegal activity has taken place and this ignores any discomfort around the young person being vulnerable and much younger than Huw. These rights to personal life and so on, aren’t absolute though.
and… that isn’t the only thing Huw bas been accused of
to date, there have been allegations of 1. Breaking lockdown and 2. Abuses of power/inappropriateness at work.
if number 1 happened (and I believe it’s likely it did) he absolutely did not behave with integrity. What’s worst, he was actively reporting on lockdown whilst himself allegedly breaking the rules. And 2. Inappropriate behaviour in a work setting is inherently lacking in integrity.
So let’s look at it from the BBC angle.
the BBC isn’t any run of the mill employer. It’s a public institution, with a royal charter and agreement with government. It is funded by the public.
in a nutshell, this charter gives the BBC permission to operate on the basis of some rules. Among these rules is the insistence that the BBC use the “highest calibre” of journalists and that they protect the welfare of staff.
if hypothetically, Huw has shown himself to be lacking in integrity by breaking lockdown and being inappropriate to junior members of staff - is he still being a journalist of the highest calibre? And would the BBC be fulfilling their legal obligation to protect their staff if they continued to employ him?
he almost certainly has a “disrepute” clause in any employment contract, which is an open ended term. It’s not hard to google and find copies of terms of contract for employees of the BBC. But perhaps more specifically is the BBC code of conduct, which is explicit
“Trust is the foundation of the BBC”
there are multiple issues at hand here. If Huws actions contravene the rules as set out in the BBC chatter, then surely that brings the BBC into disrepute, at a minimum?
And what about the guidance and rules the BBC sets for itself and expects its employees to adhere to. If Huw has broken lockdown - then at a minimum he has gone against the guidelines set out by the BBC which he agreed to adhere to? In essence, breaking his own contract.
The guidelines also mentioning protecting the vulnerable. By procuring sex work from a young, vulnerable person - has Huw gone against those guidelines?
The BBC are in a difficult position for sure. No doubt Huw is well regarded by many seniors. No doubt his contributions are very much valued. He’s part and parcel of the bbc brand and if they drop him now, it’ll reflect as badly on them anyway.
but a lot of very uncomfortable allegations have come out against Huw, and I just don’t think anyone - employee or not - can ignore that. At face value at the moment, it really does seem like he has fallen very, very short of the standard expected of him.
the BBC have an ongoing investigation for which I hope Huw will be well enough soon to cooperate with. But I do have a sinking feeling that there haven’t been any outright denials on the lockdown breaking or inappropriate behaviour because… it’s the truth.
