.png)
2 months ago
15 ARTICLE AD
EXCLUSIVE: The BBC has been accused by insiders of double standards over Huw Edwards’ salary after it emerged that the British broadcaster’s freelance presenters are not paid if suspended and under police investigation.
Edwards, a news anchor at the peak of his powers until last year, pleaded guilty to child pornography charges on Wednesday and the BBC admitted that it was aware of his arrest as far back as November 2023.
The BBC is facing questions over its decision to keep Edwards on the payroll from November until his resignation in April 2024, during which time he was suspended from presenting duties. Edwards took home £480,000 ($620,000) in the year to the end of March 2024, meaning he was paid more than £200,000 ($255,000) during the five months after the BBC was made aware of his arrest.
The BBC is funded by the license fee, a household levy that means it is in receipt of public money and faces intense scrutiny over star salaries. Edwards also remains entitled to his BBC pension after 40 years of service at the corporation.
In a statement on Wednesday, the BBC said it would have moved to fire Edwards had he been charged while he was still an employee. It added that the risk to Edwards’ wellbeing was also a factor in its decision-making, given he was suffering with mental health issues during his suspension.
The BBC’s patience with Edwards following his arrest does not extend to other presenters, according to a document reviewed by Deadline. The BBC’s terms for freelance on-air talent unambiguously state that the corporation has the right to withhold payment if an individual is suspended and under criminal investigation.
The document states: “If your alleged conduct is also being investigated by the police (“an investigation”) and this contract is (in the BBC’s absolute discretion) suspended rather than terminated, you will not be entitled to the fees that would have been paid during the suspension period, even if no charges are brought.”
The BBC employs around 1,000 on-air freelancers, with notable examples including Gary Lineker. The Match of the Day host is the BBC’s highest-paid presenter, earning £1.35M last year, according to the corporation’s annual report.
Two sources said BBC employee contracts are not as explicit as freelance contracts if a staff member is embroiled in a police investigation. Employees are subject to boilerplate rules on not bringing the BBC into disrepute, per contractual clauses seen by Deadline.
These include employees being expected to “promote and protect the interests of the BBC” at all times and not allowing “private activities” to interfere with work. The clauses also state that the BBC can terminate a contract if a staff member is “guilty of any conduct whether within or outside the course of this employment which in the opinion of the BBC brings you or the BBC into disrepute.” A criminal conviction can also result in termination.
One BBC insider said the double standards over staff and freelancer contracts was evidence of the corporation seeking to “protect those they wish to protect.” Another BBC source was not surprised by the discrepancy, arguing that the broadcaster has “always been more generous to staff than to freelancers.”
A third person said the BBC should have had the courage to sack Edwards after it was informed about his arrest – even if it meant risking legal retaliation. This person said it was likely that “privacy issues” were a factor in deterring the BBC from acting, with the shadow of its legal battle with Cliff Richard still looming in the mind of some executives. Richard won a landmark 2018 High Court case against the BBC over its coverage of a police raid on his home, with a judge ruling that he had a right to privacy.
The BBC declined to comment. A person familiar with BBC contracts said it was “standard practice” for UK employers to have “different benefits and arrangements” for freelancers.
Shock & Anger At BBC
BBC insiders are shellshocked at Edwards’ guilty plea to three counts of being in possession of indecent images of children. Deadline has spoken to several of Edwards’ former colleagues, with sources saying the news “dropped out of the sky” this week and has “sickened” and “saddened” the BBC’s workforce.
Katie Razzall, BBC News’ culture and media editor, told Radio 4’s The Media Show, that it was “difficult to underestimate the significance” of Edwards. She said: “This was a man who held our hand through some of the most important, momentous, landmark times of our nation. It is a spectacular fall from grace for someone who embodied all of the values that the BBC hold dear — trust and responsibility. He was the face of the most trusted news brand in the UK and his guilty plea throws all that into question.”
Shock has turned to anger, however, with growing unrest over the BBC’s handling of Edwards’ case. There is recognition that the matter was complicated by privacy and duty of care issues, but now that Edwards has admitted guilt over child image charges, BBC insiders are demanding the corporation be more transparent.
Several insiders said the BBC should disclose the findings of an internal “fact-finding” investigation into Edwards’ conduct amid allegations he sent “inappropriate” and “suggestive” messages to junior BBC employees, including making comments about their appearance. The investigation is shrouded in mystery with the BBC refusing to comment on who led the work and the outcome of its inquiries.
“Publish the Edwards investigation,” one long-serving employee demanded. “What else are they hiding? Why did it take so long?” Another added that the BBC’s reluctance to engage with questions on the investigation no longer “stands up to scrutiny.”
BBC News show Newsnight was looking into Edwards’ professional conduct in July 2023 and published a handful of allegations about messages some BBC employees deemed inappropriate. Sources said this work effectively ended when BBC managers made the Newsnight team aware that some staff felt uncomfortable being asked questions about their interactions with Edwards. It also coincided with UK press backing away from the story after Edwards’ mental health issues emerged.
It is not known whether those who spoke to Newsnight also gave evidence to the BBC’s fact-finding investigation. Edwards has not commented on any of the allegations. His court hearing on Wednesday was his first public appearance in a year.
The BBC has been at pains to point out that the newsroom is independent of corporate decision-making. BBC News CEO Deborah Turness and her deputy Jonathan Munro have been recused from editorial decisions about Edwards. Journalists have been free to pursue stories about Edwards and the BBC with the same vigor as those at rival news organizations.
This was acknowledged in an all-staff email on Wednesday. BBC director general Tim Davie and Turness wrote: “Some of you may feel shocked and saddened by this news and some of you will have worked closely with Huw Edwards over the years. Many of you will be working on this story, and we want to thank you for your professionalism in carrying on with your jobs in difficult circumstances.”
Davie was due to meet Lisa Nandy, the UK’s new culture secretary, on Thursday to discuss Edwards. He turned down a request to be interviewed on BBC Radio 4’s Today show this morning.
