TL;DR
- Sir Robbie Gibb highlighted a difference of opinion regarding the delayed response from the board, emphasising that the implications of edits mattered more than mere acknowledgment of mistakes.
- He argued that if edits gave a misleading impression, especially in relation to the Proud Boys, it represented a breach of editorial policy.
- Gibb denied any prior knowledge about the leak of Michael Prescott’s memo, stating he was not involved in discussions about the response delay.
Board member Robbie Gibb reacts to coup claims – adding he’s been ‘weaponised’ during Trump crisis | UK News
Sir Robbie Gibb questioned about response delay – and if he was aware memo would leak
Sir Robbie Gibb is now asked for his view on what took the board so long to publish a response.
He says there was “definitely a difference of opinion”.
It came down to “whether, from my perspective, the point I was making, there was a serious error and simply having an identifiable edit and apologising for that would not be enough, because what mattered was what the meaning was”.
Some would argue a white flash depicting the edit would have been fine, “and you apologise for not having a white flash”, he continues.
However, Gibb says that his view, “and I think the editorial policy view… is that if the meaning of the new constructed white-flash edit followed by the Proud Boys gave the impression that it was a call to arms, it was a breach of editorial policy”.
He was not involved in discussions around the delay, he says.
Later, he is asked if he was aware that Michael Prescott’s memo was going to leak. “Absolutely not, of course not,” he replies.
