Boaden and Mitchell step aside
Guest82722
Posts: 10,019 Forum Member
✭✭
I'm not quite sure what that statement means- and neither was Bill Turnbull when he just read it out on breakfast.
Further announcement mid-morning.
Further announcement mid-morning.
0
Comments
"Stepping aside" would normally indicate a temporary change (as opposed to "stepping down").
In BBC-talk it means they've been sacked.Mitchell was due to retire soon anyway. I expect others to follow them walking the plank.
I would have thought that a sacking or resignation would have been described as stepping down, or "left by mutual consent".
Of course, this might be a precursor to a resignation or sacking once "negotiations" have been completed.
Boaden had already ''stepped aside'' as far as anything to do with Savile and was completely out of the chain, she can't ''step aside'' twice or she'll fall off the pavement.
Ken McQuarrie's report on the McAlpine NN was delivered last night so we can expect further developments shortly.
And everyone seems to think that means he won't be back.
This is getting a bit like a dot matrix inicator on the underground.
1 Entwistle 1 min
2 Boaden 2 mins
3 Mitchell 4 mins
Please stay away from the platform edge. Next sacking approaching.
There is a good sacking on all BBC services this morning,
On this occasion it looks as if the big hitters themselves will fall
I would agree there - and perhaps this is how it should be (rather than allowing the foot soldiers and Captains to take the bullets).
Don't forget there's a difference between being sacked and resigning, your rights are not necessarily the same. They can't really touch your pension but it may well affect any sort of pay-off.Don't be too eager to get the sack !
Bit more on this story at
www.bbc.co.uk/ariel
Suggesting their departures actually linked with the Pollard inquiry
"I have learned that lawyers acting for Ms Boaden and Mr Mitchell have informed Mr Davie that they are quite capable of running BBC News, even with the uncertainty created by the Pollard inquiry".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20294794
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20294283
At this stage, and based upon that statement, it's not a sacking, it's not a resignation, and it's not gardening leave either (where the subject is paid but will not return during his/her notice period).
Of course, after the results of the inquiry are known, it could very well be a different matter.
By all accounts Entwistle was the wrong man for the job. That's not necessarily his failure - if you applied for a job you weren't up to, and got it, it would be a failure of the selection process. He's getting the package he negotiated, so again, that's not his failure. And again by all accounts, Entwistle was/is seen within the BBC as an intelligent, creative and decent man, so maybe he deserves to be cut a bit of slack.
She was in the shortlist for the DG job - so missed THAT bullet - and, conveniently lost responsibility for Saville-related items so, apparently, cannot be blamed for the latest Newsnight mess!
Mind you I STILL think she may have have been one of the people who quietly leant on the Newsnight editor to pull the original Saville item at the end of last year!
They already have in the link in post 14
Sorry, but it isn't clear to me. Stepping aside from what as HB was already out of news. And what will they be doing?
On 5 Live earlier it was said that she wasn't 'out of news' until today, she just had no involvement in any BBC News coverage of the Saville scandal.
Quite - that would, in my book, be the commonly-accepted interpretation.