Avoidance

Team Sharp is still battling to save their man from defenestration at the BBC. So far, they've argued their case through the Telegraph, and I'm not sure whether or not they'd regard today's story in The Times as a 'win', against the newspaper group that started Richard Sharp's current difficulties.  

The headline, "BBC chairman has backing of two executives in battle to avoid sack", is underwhelming. This is not a boardroom battle, but if it was, the board has twelve members, and nine, if this story is right, are uncommitted. We reported Director of Content Charlotte Moore's mild support for her chairman as unwisely expressed at the Broadcasting Press Guild last week. Today, CEO of News, Deborah Turness will have to decide what to do about someone close to her. 

For it is 'a source close to the news chief' who tells the The Times “Deborah is a fan and thinks he should stay on”.  If this source is authorised, it's a mistake by Debs. She can't be part of the story, and she will lose (more ?) respect from her hacks, and the wider journalistic community.  

Let's remember that Mr Sharp's appointment was not based on exceptional merit. The papers announced he was No 10's preferred candidate before any interview process. The 'rigorous' selection procedure also produced at least three others who were 'suitable', and, hey-ho, Boris Johnson and Oliver Dowden chose the former Tory donor who had been on ski-ing holidays when Boris was his employer as Mayor of London.  

If this was some old-school boardroom battle with a takeover at stake, you might understand the tactics of Mr Sharp's PR adviser Andrew Garfield, a former finance hack. But there are no proper shareholders at the BBC, just impotent licence-fee payers. They are most likely divided into those who can see a clear case of the installation of a chum, and those who don't care. There'll be no placards on the BH Piazza "Sharp must stay..."