The BBC's Royal Correspondent Jonny Dymond is probably not going to get a Christmas card from Prince Andrew and his family after his Broadcasting House review of that Newsnight perfomance:
Jonny Dymond: Well, he got the message out. You know, he got the denial, the acknowledgement of having made a mistake vis a vis seeing Epstein, he sowed a bit of doubt about the photo. But, I thought, at nearly every turn that was undercut by the tone. It was a sort of mix of 'Je ne regrette rien' and 'Do you know who I am?'. The lack of regret over the friendship was breathtaking, I think, for most people. The question of whether he'd testify if he was asked to, he said, 'Well, I'd take legal advice and if they told me I would have to, if push came to shove, I would'. And then there was this horrible tone-deaf description of how this predator, Jeffrey Epstein, behaved:Prince Andrew: Do I regret the fact that he has quite obviously conducted himself in a manner unbecoming? Yes.Emily Maitlis: 'Unbecoming'? He was a sex offender.Prince Andrew: Yep. I'm sorry. I'm being polite. In the sense that he was a sex offender.I mean, who's he being polite to? The dead friend? I mean, 'manner unbecoming'! It was horrible. So much of it felt as if he simply could not apologise, and I think if he had gone in with a different tone the messages that he got out would have been that much more successful. But it was, as I say...it was undercut, I thought, by this tone of having nothing to apologise for.
Emily is up for an Emmy for this. Or a Nobel. One of the two.ReplyDelete
All of the BBC knew he was a wrong 'un.
And have said so.
Like last time.
Jeffrey Epstein’s address book un-redacted. Some interesting contacts.ReplyDelete
Bit rich coming from an organisation that has never apologised for enabling Jimmy Savile's offences. Andrew's defence seems to rest on the slightly dodgy premise that since a Falklands' War trauma he doesn't sweat...a claim that is not standing up very well so far.ReplyDelete
It was striking that Broadcasting House spent so long on this topic - at least 15 minutes (till around 20+ mins past, taking out a few minutes for the news and programme intro.)ReplyDelete
Dymond is all emotive - it was 'horrible' (twice) - but a bit light on being informative, factual or analytical. Anyway what did he expect? He did the interview to put his side, not to apologise for what he says he didn't do! People can make up their own minds and Dymond can't speak for them or for most people.
Dymond isn’t a fan of the monarchy. It’s a pre-requisite for BBC royal correspondent.Delete
Noone asked Hilary how Bill was bearing up when they interviwed her about her gutsy bookReplyDelete