at that moment, with the identity of the presenter against whom allegations had been made still not revealed, the corporation was in something of a crisis, as its director general, tim davie, discussed in a radio interview with sarah montague. you are balancing serious allegations, duty of care, privacy issues, and legitimate public interest. and how do you navigate that, fairly, calmly, and do due diligence? it is a very difficult and complex situation. tuesday was the fourth day in a row that tv news bulletins and the bbc news website had led on the story. not only was the presenter�*s name not in the public arena, but few other facts were available either. the precise nature of the complaint, the presenter�*s response, or what bbc management knew, when. given that paucity of information, some viewers like chris unger couldn't understand the priority given to the case, "to have day

after day of this item leading news bulletins is excessive". "the situation is obviously of great concern to the bbc, but, surely, as he cannot be named untilfurther investigations are undertaken, this should be given less prominence than other news about the economy, the effects of climate change, and the war in ukraine". and david robinson suggested, "report the facts when they are available and stop adding to the frenzy around who it is". who it was, was revealed on wednesday's news at six as culture editor katie razzael described. katie razzell described. this will come as a huge shock to viewers. we've had a statement within the last few minutes from vicki flint, who is the wife of huw edwards, who named him as the bbc presenter facing allegations and said about her husband that, "he was suffering from serious mental health issues and is now receiving in—patient hospital care". later that evening, other bbc news outlets aired

new allegations about huw edwards, and the continued coverage that evening prompted two viewers to send us their thoughts. you covered him for 18 minutes before i turned off, and he has just asked for privacy. and it was through his wife who said he's in hospital care. he's obviously at a really low point to even have to receive that kind of care. and no matter how open you are with your mental health, you do not, at your lowest point, want to be nationally covered for hours on end about the state of your mental health. it seems that whenever the bbc covers the situation involving either the corporation or one of its own there's a tendency to go into overdrive, often with speculative journalism. matters that should be addressed internally or aired on the news. on wednesday night, the metropolitan police stated there was no criminal case

to answer, and his wife had also made a statement and asked for privacy. but the bbc news coverage on this story was nonstop. huw edwards and his family must feel hounded by the very corporation that employs him, and by some of his colleagues. by thursday, the story had dropped out of the bbc�*s headlines and some compliments were coming in for the coverage such as this from matthew brown, "in what must have been an awful week for all at bbc news, i want to praise the news team for the way they have reported on the huw edwards story". "it must have been extremely difficult to report on their colleague, but they have demonstrated their commitment and dedication to transparency, even when reporting on itself". and rachel gunn was one of a number of viewers expressing their sympathy for huw edwards. after everything that's happened and he's ended up in hospital, i just feel so sorry for him. i'm very sad about the whole situation. i'm a real believer of people's

private lives, and i do really think that he does have a private life and that we didn't really need to know all of this about him. he's a brilliant presenter. so i just wanted to say that. i hope huw is... ..soon going to be a better, and my best wishes to him and his family. last week, the 75th anniversary of the national health service was marked by a good deal of media coverage and some celebratory events, including a special ceremony at westminster abbey, exemplifying how for some the nhs is treated as something of a religion. the bbc�*s health editor hugh pym provided this analysis on the news at six. events were held around the uk to mark the 75th anniversary, including that service at westminster abbey with political and health leaders and nhs staff.

but it comes at a time of intense debate about the future of the health service, with increasing strain on the front line and mounting frustration for patients. the bbc�*s contribution to the anniversary included a special edition of newsnight, which included a range of views on the nhs and culminated in a choir singing happy birthday. singing. but that decision was greeted with ridicule in some quarters, with the former bbc presenter andrew neil tweeting, "bbc newsnight goes full on pyongyang with the nhs. "who at broadcasting house really thought this a good idea"? journalist george eaton added, "britons currently have the worst access to health care in europe". "the nhs and the government need journalistic scrutiny, not quasi religious indulgence". but james dollman couldn't see a problem, "our greatest achievement and most precious possession". "why shouldn't we celebrate it"?

for their part, newsnight told us, "the programme included full analysis of the challenges faced by the nss and a range of contributions, including from some who believe in a greater role for the private sector in health care". "despite reporting on these challenges, the programme also highlighted the residual overall high levels of public support for the nhs from the british public, and in that context included a short sequence with a local children's choir to mark the anniversary of its founding". more generally, some viewers have told us of their concern that the bbc seems reluctant to report on the faults and problems in the nhs. here's the doctor and author rachel clarke. "where is your news coverage, bbc news"? "yourjob is to report major stories and the nhs is imploding here, now, with devastating consequences". scott miller though, complained of too much negativity. "bbc coverage is typical, with grim warnings from unnamed think tanks that the nhs cannot survive without radical change".

meanwhile, sam datta was a satisfied customer last week. "great to see all the bbc live coverage of the amazing things the nhs does on its 75th birthday". well, let's speak to the health editorfor bbc news, hugh pym. thank you for coming to the newswatch studio. the birthday cake, the singing, some viewers feel that that on the news a quasi—religious status for the nhs isn't right when there are really serious problems, and you should be examining them more. is that a fair criticism? well, that piece you used a clip from, which i did on the day. yes, we did start with the westminster abbey service. i should say it had 1500 nhs staff there, as well as all the main political parties, and there was royal representation as well. so it was quite an important moment to at least note. but i did say, pretty quickly, it comes at a time of intense strain on the service and services under real pressure. so i suppose you need to combine both thoughts. it is a moment 75th anniversary

and there is still quite a lot of pride in the service founded in 1948, providing free at the point of use health care, making a massive difference to people's lives. reflecting on that, but certainly looking to the future with all the huge challenges that there are right now. equally, there are other viewers, you won't be surprised to hear, who feel the bbc is far too negative about the nhs. how would you answer them? well, i think the comments we've heard are we're not being critical enough or we're being too critical, and i think we need to reflect on those. but it shows there are differing views. there were two reports from think tanks in the run up to the anniversary and on the day itself, the main health think tanks which broadly concluded that and these think tanks are very much for the idea of an nhs. that it was in a critical situation, services were under extreme pressure, it was underperforming on outcomes like heart attacks and strokes, but that there was rock solid support for it.

so what do we do from here? so i suppose we're just noting comment out there, and we hear a lot from staff on the front line how frustrated they are, how difficult they're finding things with trying to look at positive long term solutions and the debates that are going on at the moment. it feels like the nhs has been a political football certainly for the last 30 years of my entire journalistic career. it's always been. and i wonder if from your point of view, things feel particularly contentious now about the nhs and how it's politically treated? i think what's getting more and more difficult is to reflect differing sides of the debate. there are some people who feel very strongly this model is not working. we need something different. we've seen these huge queues in a&e and we've seen these long waiting lists. we've seen not very good outcomes for certain health conditions, including cancer, compared to other countries. we need to change this. with another side of the debate, well, what do we want to do? let's look at some of the positive things that the nhs is doing again

in the week that we had the anniversary or within days of it we reported a really positive initiative involving paramedics and hospital staff in north east london, working together with consultants, talking from the hospital on a phone or video link to the paramedics about keeping people out of hospital. and we were ready to report that as some initiative on the grassroots level, which is being done to try and improve things. hugh pym, thank you so much. thank you. thank you for all your comments this week. if you want to share your opinions about what you see or hear on bbc news, on tv, radio, online and social media email newswatch at bbc.co.uk or you can find us on twitter at newswatch bbc. you can call us on 03700106676 and do have a look at previous interviews on our website, bbc.co.uk slash newswatch. that's all from us. now we're off air for a few weeks,

but we will be back at the very start of september with a slightly different looking studio and asking bbc bosses to come on and respond to your questions. until then, goodbye. this time next week, the women's world cup will be well under way. measures are taken place at ten venues across australia matches are taken place at ten venues across australia and new zealand, and the tournament is set to be the biggest yet. 32 teams are taking part, including the reigning champions the united states, and the european champions, england. they will be taking on the likes of china, portugal and haiti. i caught up with mani djazmi who presents the bbc world football at the women's world cup podcast. he's in australia gearing up for the start of the tournament. excitement within the australian part of the tournament is very, very high.

but this is being co—hosted with new zealand. new zealand, i think the mood is far more muted. they haven't won any of their last 11 games in, new zealand, and, in fact, they've never won a game at the world cup. and so their ambitions are pretty modest. just the win would be historic for them. ticket sales are pretty slow in new zealand, i understand, but here in australia there isn't anyone who i don't think to think that they will win the world cup, and that includes members of the squad who normally are pretty guarded footballers and coaches. they say, "you know, we'll do our best and take each game as it comes". but the coach, tony gustafsson, says, "we've got two good players in every position ready to go", and they have just won a few hours ago against france in melbourne in front of a record crowd

they won 1—0. but that record will be broken next thursday when they play their opening game against the republic of ireland here in sydney at the olympic stadium, when there will be more than 80,000 people watching them. logistically, this is an enormous task. it takes place over four weeks in ten different locations. yes, that's right. but this is parfor the course, really. the men's world cup, the last one but one last one was in qatar, which is tiny, but the one the two before that were russia. and the next men's world cup is going to be in over three countries in north america. countries in north america. so this is logistically difficult, so this is logistically difficult, but not anything that but not anything that fifa hasn't done before. fifa hasn't done before. what has happened for the first time is that the teams have a base camp. they've never had that before. they've never had that before. they've always had to travel from game to game, city to city. but now they have a base camp but now they have a base camp to which they return. to which they return. the accommodation that the accommodation that they have is right next they have is right next

to where they're training. so they'll go and play their game, so they'll go and play their game, come back and back to home, really, home from home come back and back to home, where their comforts are. well, they don't have to pack. well, they don't have to pack. they can return to their messy hotel or new zealand. they can return to their messy hotel bedroom if they like. bedroom if they like. and the idea is that it's such and the idea is that it's such a large, sprawling area a large, sprawling area as australia or new zealand, as australia or new zealand, they have a bit of they have a bit of stability in their lives. stability in their lives. also, i'm intrigued to know also, i'm intrigued to know whether the spectators whether the spectators are predominantly or more are predominantly or more predominantly women predominantly women than they otherwise would be, than they otherwise would be, for example, in a men's world cup. for example, in a men's world cup. and why that might be the case? 0bviously, because women are playing, but if the atmosphere is different. well, we won't know until it starts, but i imagine that there will be more women than men. you have to remember, of course, that football is not by any means

the first sport in australia