Topic: | Re:Re:Have the BBC no shame? | |
Posted by: | David Darlow | |
Date/Time: | 12/01/15 13:39:00 |
No, I think it is quite specific. The BBC reporter can hardly be blamed. The fact that the police were about to raid the home of Sir Cliff Richard after allegations of a sex offence was obviously a big story, and one he/she should pursue. Angling to film the police raid was what an enterprising reporter should do. The criticism attaches mainly to the police. Agreeing to let the BBC film the raid was totally wrong, conniving at (cheap) publicity. The Chief Constable claims that he had no option, that the BBC were going to run the story anyway. But so what? There's a world of difference between a BBC newsreader telling afterwards of a property search, and TV pictures from a helicopter of police swarming over the house. Even worse was the decision to search the singer's home whilst knowing that he was abroad and unable to respond to the allegations. It was monstrous behaviour. As for how the police would have investigated a non-celebrity, they would not have searched that person's empty house without questioning him first about the allegations - and only then seeking a warrant if suspicions remained. And they certainly would not have struck a deal with television to film their search. The clear message now, whatever is said, is that Cliff Richard WAS guilty of an offence, but that the evidence has not yet been found. He will remain forever tainted by this publicity stunt. And I think it is really stupid of the BBC editor in question to put this shabby affair up for an award. |