The difficult questions arising from the Huw Edwards story

It really has been a ghastly week. There is absolutely nothing good which can currently be taken from the Huw Edwards affair.

There are important questions for The Sun to answer.

There are important questions for the BBC corporately to answer.

And Huw Edwards must account for himself once he is better and give his version of events.

There are personal tragedies – in no particular order: for Huw Edwards, for the young people at the centre of the claims, for Huw Edwards’ family. It should be remembered and emphasised that the police investigations have found no evidence of criminality.

But there are so many complex questions which people will be asking.

If no illegal behaviour has taken place, why should someone’s private life be made public knowledge?

It is not as if Huw Edwards invited the cameras into his family life and sold the public a false image of domestic bliss.

But any accusation of inappropriate workplace behaviour towards younger colleagues (while far less serious than the activities alleged in the first newspaper story) must also be taken seriously – regardless of who the individual is.

It is not unreasonable for some to ask if the BBC’s own news coverage inadvertently fuelled the frenzy.

But can you imagine the accusations of a cover-up if this story – and the awful situation on social media – had been ignored while it was being covered extensively elsewhere?

There must be ways found to protect completely innocent parties from this kind of terrible speculation. But how do you do this if people are posting lies anonymously?

It is all so complex. Beware of anyone offering more than their opinion on these issues. There is no simple solution to an unprecedented problem.

And what of BBC News?

It is incredibly hard for them to report on such a story when it concerns a colleague.

And is there any way back for Huw Edwards once he is better and if nothing happens to re-ignite this story?

It seems terrible to think of a career being destroyed if there has been no illegality. Let he who is without sin.

These are the kind of questions which will be discussed.

There are no simple answers. I merely pose questions and hopefully there can be calm and reasonable discussions after the dust settles.

As a general point of principle, we need to be very careful about any attacks on well-known figures in any walk of life unless they are found to have broken the law or actively deceived the public.

But all those in positions of power or trust should be aware of how that power (even unintentionally) can be misused even without illegality.

It is all so terrible for all concerned. There are no winners here.

Acknowledgements