I wonder if Ch4 saw the backlash against the BBC, who still chose to air Would I Lie To You with David Walliams, after he was dropped by his publisher....
I wonder how much it affected their ratings....
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I wonder how much it affected their ratings....
That's interesting and as it should be. I didn't really follow the HE case tbh, it's only cos I listen to Radio 2 all day every day that I have an interest in this I suppose. As you say, anything could be going on fall all we know.
I think, the difference is that SM was a presenter of theirs, and a member of their staff. These others aren't. If yoiu (generic, not you in particular) want these men erased it has to be from everywhere, not just from the BBC.
I don't have an issue listening to music from the past but these people shouldn't be platformed now (IMO) which I think is different.
If they're going to remove Scott from the Top of the Pops it's unfair on those of us who'd like to see the performances; just snip his bits out FFS.
I didn’t see that actually as I didn’t really follow the David Walliams stuff closely.
I think maybe these organisations are finally realising that they need to tighten up on stuff like this and using criminal charges as the only point they should act is no longer acceptable, and is also a reputational risk.
For once it feels like the potential harm to victims is being centred rather than the men’s careers. In recent years I’ve been quite curious why society are more worried about a man being falsely accused than they are about disbelieving victims. Especially when false accusations are incredibly low, and how challenging it is to secure convictions for sex offences, especially historical ones.
There is no option that these organisations can take that doesn’t harm somebody though.
Now they've cancelled the episode of Celebrity Bake Off for cancer that he was on.
Scott was the main driving force in getting Sam picked for Eurovision. He was a massive supporter of his music. Something tells me Scott's pals are very much supporting him in private but would never admit it publicly.
I wonder if it's the guy who has stories about Roy Orbison in clingfilm. That blew my mind when I learned about him years ago. Looks like his stuff is still online as well.
Jimmy Page of Led Zepplin dated 13 year old Lori, it’s documented, photographed and witnessed as fact. Lori has told a few different versions of losing her virginity to Bowie at 13 or 15, some versions are easily disproved.
Yet Bowie is always wheeled out as a “gotcha- he’s a pdf”.
Yet Bowie is always wheeled out as a “gotcha- he’s a pdf”.
Mary Whitehouse dat u?
Much-maligned Mary was spot on about quite a few things, particularly porn.
I don't know her stance on cling film but I suspect she would prefer a beeswax wrap.
I don't know her stance on cling film but I suspect she would prefer a beeswax wrap.
That statue adorning broadcasting house they had to encase in perspex as the sculptor SA his daughters and someone threw a hammer at it a few years ago IIRC. Apparently it cost half a million of licence fee payers money to fix and put in plastic.
What’s that font a pdf invented, was it gill sans?
yes it was
eta it’s the same fucker in the BBC statue!!!!
Save the Children stops using font designed by paedophile artist
The charity’s new Oswald and Lato font will be rolled out this year
His daughters and his dog.
WTF is wrong with some people
I reckon there will be a gentlemens agreement between the main channels (bbc\itv\c4) RE allegations relating to people who work across channels.
They will have had a word with C4 about the allegations. Probably told them everything they know.
The dates specified 1997-2000 and the ages specified 13-16 to me infers it was 13 when this starts. That would mean born in 1984 - and 41\2 now.
They will have had a word with C4 about the allegations. Probably told them everything they know.
The dates specified 1997-2000 and the ages specified 13-16 to me infers it was 13 when this starts. That would mean born in 1984 - and 41\2 now.
Bridge Update:
Or does 13-16 mean they don't know the age but know it was a teenager under 16? Because there's only 3 ages that person could be!
I don't honestly think we will hear any more about this.
I don't honestly think we will hear any more about this.
It’s the ages bracket the police use I believe, from what I know to do with charges it’s under 12, 13-16 and then 16-18 if you’re deemed to be in a position of trust. Because it affects the investigation, the charges and the sentencing at court
i think we will, there’s no way it’s not brought up again when Scott tires to get some work or he’s on the telly again, for all we know the victim may be witting something to put out, and will explain it all
We really don’t know and it’s all guesswork. 13-16 is legal categorisation that’s the area of law that’s been breached. It could be it happened through out that period, it could be the accuser is unsure of the dates of certain things, it could be they turned 16 some point, the start, the end?
the law at the time was 18. I don’t know how that would affect a prosecution today.
Also it’s going to cover sex offences which a child cannot consent to, so snogging and worse is going to be a problem. It’s not going to be a clear cut “graped on X date at X location” if there was some kind of relationship it will be patchy, different phases, different goings on.
I think we will hear but a year or two from now.
If they were over 16 and there was no indication of a lack of consent then I would be pretty sure the CPS would say that it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute.
- Status