Surely inevitable now? Goodness me - the ramifications and consequences of the false allegations industry; as predicted 12 years ago.

This was extremely well dealt by Matthew Wright and co on the Wright Stuff just now, particularly by Marcus Brigstocke I have to say.

Worth a watch when it's up online in a few hours. www.channel5.com/shows/the-wright-stuff

Schofield's 'stunt' was way out of order and unbelievably crass. Fortunately he seems to be coming in for a lot of flack over it. I think a line may have been crossed here.

Having watched Schofield, it seemed that he was rather childish, in handing the paper over to Cameron.

All Schofield had to do was just mention, how names were being thrown around the web. Writing in a piece of paper & asking "Will you be speaking to these names?" Was rather futile, wasn't it?

Though Cameron, kind of could of put his words a bit better. "If we're not careful, it'll turn into a witch hunt on "gay" people". This may have sounded slightly better put had he just said "it'll turn into a witch hunt (false stop)". He enthusiased "gay" in a kind of worried look. Suggesting that gay people get backlash, worse than any other people. I don't think they do. Maybe 20/30 years back, but not today, surely?

JK2006 wrote:
Surely inevitable now? Goodness me - the ramifications and consequences of the false allegations industry; as predicted 12 years ago.

Am I the only one who remembers the "rumours" about Schofield himself? (Always denied, of course - but well circulated on the internet !)

Perhaps Schofield should have remembered that before HE pulled a few names from the internet !!!!

Good item on Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 at the moment too.

Claire Fox just mentioned trawling.

childish is right. But reckless and dangerous and foolish.

He took a punt that it would be 'great TV' and it backfired. He should be given the boot as should his producer and that vacuous dame that sat beside him and should have objected.

boot them out and give their jobs to others.

bh wrote:
Having watched Schofield, it seemed that he was rather childish, in handing the paper over to Cameron.

All Schofield had to do was just mention, how names were being thrown around the web. Writing in a piece of paper & asking "Will you be speaking to these names?" Was rather futile, wasn't it?

Though Cameron, kind of could of put his words a bit better. "If we're not careful, it'll turn into a witch hunt on "gay" people". This may have sounded slightly better put had he just said "it'll turn into a witch hunt (false stop)". He enthusiased "gay" in a kind of worried look. Suggesting that gay people get backlash, worse than any other people. I don't think they do. Maybe 20/30 years back, but not today, surely?

Schofield was trying to shrug off his jumped-up children's TV presenter image by acting the investigative journalist/hard-hitting interviewer, but it back-fired. He may have been put up to it by producers, but it did seem a large error of judgement. Go back to interviewing Panto dames and OAP sex-therapists, Phil

Excellent piece by Richard Smith in the Pink News.

linky: www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/11/09/comment-th...climate-of-hysteria/

On This Morning yesterday, Philip Schofield said that he had complied a list of alleged Tory paedophiles after spending 'three minutes' on the internet.

And this is your actual serious research?

And good journalistic practice?

It’s hardly Pulitzer Prize-winning Watergate-style investigative journalism, is it?

If I post a lie about you on the internet does that make it true?

So Elvis Presley lives on the Moon, and the Queen’s a shape-changing lizard?

Would any of this hold up in a court of law?

Of course not, that’s why we have police investigations and jury trials, not trial by Twitter and sensationalist tabloid TV.

There has been an avalanche of often hysterical tweets in the last 24 hours claiming Cameron’s comments show that he is a secret homophobe who was inferring all gay men were paedophiles.

He didn’t - and it is a sign of a highly depoliticised culture that some rush to cry “homophobia!” where there isn’t any.

Both men made themselves look stupid in my opinion - Schofield has obviously spent so long in the word of Daytime ITV he thinks the way to conduct an interview with the Prime Minister is akin to a slot on Loose Women, with a "very ITV" Daily Mail agenda to appeal to it's mainly female (and ignorant) audience.... though of course with Dave courting this media a little too closely he can maybe forgiven for believing "that's the way to do it". As for the Right Honourable Forehead, there's obviously some "opinion" on this floating around that shiny head but the bumbling response about a witch hunt against gay people won't do his image as an out-of-touch buffoon any good at all.

At least though it looks like opening (semi) sensible debate at long last. One day we might even be able to discuss the difference between "paedophilia" and "sex with a minor".