Wonder how the BBC views THIS then….? Just WHAT has been covered up by the BBC? Isn’t it time for a Judicial-led Independent Leveson style enquiry? BBC seemed keen on that when it came to the Murdoch empire so am sure they will will agree. Hang on, Patten has ruled it out….
HOW’S ABOUT THAT THEN, BOYS AND GIRLS…?
Bookmark the permalink.
People have been running for the hills for some time…What? Me? Know him? Never? Jimmy Who?
Astonishing. How can Aspel claim not to have met Saville when he did a ‘This is Your Life’ show with him.
How many times was Saville a guest on ‘This is Your Life’ I wonder?
“I don’t regard that as meeting him”. Oh the joys of being a TV star..
After denying meeting him.
“I don’t regard that as meeting him”
Truly… ‘unique’.
BBC, its staff and semantics.
And the Bill Clinton award for ‘I did not mention our Jimmy having sexual relations with that minor because…’ award goes to….
a real “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for…” moment. Great stuff…
Further controversy surrounding the peadophile ring at the BBC during the 80’s – A number of people claim to have witnessed Rod Hull fisting some young bird . . .
Excellent. Gold star for that one.
If Savile had spent his whole carer at ITV not the BBC, you just know they would be all over this like a bloody rash. Especially with him being all the things Al-Beeb hates (white, male, working class, straight, Catholic).
Interesting take on Savilegate:
http://venerablebeads.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/well-well-well-ows-about-that-then.html
Good article, will Peter Tatchell be protesting outside the BBC against child sex abuse? But wait he wants to lower the age of consent to 14.
This story is starting to spin out of control and I’m surprised no one at the Beeb has started their own tame in house enquiry. This is the usual tactic to shut a story down as they can say they can’t say anything while the enquiry is in progress and then months later close down the enquiry while saying lessons have been learned. Instead the Beeb appears to be frozen in fear as more and more sordid detail emerges. The latest over the weekend puts John Peel (a saintly figure for many Beebiods) squarely in the frame.
“This story is starting to spin out of control and I’m surprised no one at the Beeb has started their own tame in house enquiry.”
No sooner said than done
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19867830
‘Jimmy Savile abuse claims: BBC apologises and pledges inquiry
The BBC has apologised and pledged to look into allegations the late Sir Jimmy Savile sexually abused girls while working for the corporation.”
So what happened to change this earlier (rather more typical) BBC response?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19777542
‘In a statement, the corporation said: “The BBC has conducted extensive searches of its files to establish whether there is any record of misconduct or allegations of misconduct by Sir Jimmy Savile during his time at the BBC. No such evidence has been found.”
It added that “it is simply not possible for the corporation to take any further action” following the “absence of evidence of any kind”.’
‘So what happened to change this earlier (rather more typical) BBC response?’
Being confronted, at last, with the unique notion that they too are a power that can be held to account.
At least in the age of the internet.
Interesting U-turn, too. That’s usually good for a few weeks’ coverage. Usually.
I am coming to the end of several month’s limbo as ‘The Trust’ ponders an appeal over an expedited complaints attempt based on my finding too many things the BBC has done wrong so they need to ban me to stop such things interfering with their most trusted narrative enhancing activities.
If, as I suspect, it is the usual internal, FoI-excluding whitewash where they find themselves perfect, I am seriously considering then advising that I will continue to watch broadcast TV but can no longer be expected to fund the licence fee as a matter of conscience, as supporting insitutional abuse and default cover-ups is contrary to all I hold dear about British free speech and democracy.
If my Daily Politics-addicted MP and his boss still support the national disgrace on this basis, then this country is more buggered than even I am coming to credit.
Lovely they are just so predictable aren’t they !
However this tactic only works if you are fast. Now I’m pleased to say to much information has come out and the story isn’t manageable any more. The Beeb doesn’t understand how fast it needs to move in the internet age.
“Why did nobody at the BBC have the moral courage to expose Sir Jimmy’s sins? Whistleblowers everywhere need credence and protection.”
By Dominique Jackson
http://jacksonblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/10/why-did-nobody-at-the-bbc-have-the-moral-courage-to-expose-sir-jimmys-sins-whistleblowers-everywhere.html
‘Why did nobody at the BBC have the moral courage to expose Sir Jimmy’s sins?’
Some kind of institutional ‘ism seems to have been at play for decades.
Now, what is the traditional response of such as the BBC when powers engaged in such things are shown to be not held to account, or are muttering about handling such things internally?
That’s a question I am asking there.
One I don’t feel ‘we’ve asked ourselves and we’ve found we got it about right’ will be so easy to trot out this time.
Karma’s a bitch, ain’t she?
It’s all very well talking about having the moral courage to report Savile, but what about after 15 year old Claire McAlpine committed suicide? No courage required to do the right thing then, surely? And what did happen? According to press reports, the police, without interviewing any of the DJs mentioned in Claire’s diary, came to the conclusion that Claire was a fantasist. Any ideas about how they came to that conclusion, BBC?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/07/sandi-toksvig-i-was-groped-on-air
Another pointless homepage article from another rabid right wing rag.
Jim must be incandescent so much at how he is going to have to keep coming here to say there is no point in coming here. Guessing he avoids haunting CiF as there is a point to going there. Follow that logic if you will.
I also note that the BBC will now be heeding calls for an inquiry. If one of their special, internal ones that any using the complaints know so well and trust so much.
Can’t imagine what might have moved them from their ‘nothing to see here, no one complained, no one knew anything’ stances to this point.
It’s like they had been held to account and the spotlight was on them long enough they could not duck it any longer.
No wonder the Newsnight FaceBook page has disappeared in irrelevance as they avoid engaging as long as possible in hope it will all blow over.
Sandi Toksvig – I was groped on air
Who could stoop so low?
If there was an independent inquiry into the ‘alleged’ BBC cover up she would make a good witness. Her presence would guarantee lots of media and public interest which would put the BBC in the spotlight. So lets not be nasty to someone who could yet do some worthwhile damage to the corportation we all despise.
There was a rumour abroad that some Dutch lad had stuck his finger in the dyke…
Sade Tosswig, an alleged ‘comedian’ groped by a celebrity, I nearly vomited my cornflakes at the thought, when I heard that on the Today programme.
The only thing that could have attempted that would be a blind Womble who was looking for a nice warm place to sleep!
This is another example of the BBC trying to spin their way out of the Savile revelations. By place attention of groping of female staff to draw attention away from the rape rooms of Television Centre.
The irony about the Beeb on this issue is that they have never failed to dine out on the Catholic Church abuse issue. They have consistently used that issue to label all Christians. Yet they have behaved exactly as the RC church is alleged to have done, by covering up abuse. More here: http://amodernlibertarian.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-irony-of-bbcs-cover-up-of.html
Please drop by I need a few sensible people to add to my blogroll! Good work as ever biased bbc!
Now we know why all those Radio 1 DJs were fired during the 90s. Well done Matthew Bannister!
Does Michael Aspel have Alzheimers?
One of the creepier aspects of this hoo-hah is the way Esther Rantzen has waded into this cesspit and asserted that “we’re all guilty”. Rantzen making a bid for personal publicity from others’ misery is not new but the media are taking her “distress” at face value.
Frankly, Esther is the botoxed face of self-indulgent moral panic. Whatever Sir Jimmy got up to – and it’s pretty obvious his dealings with underaged girls were particularly rancid and probably criminal – we are now seeing a witch-hunt concerning practices among the poperati in the 60s and 70s which, like it or not, were by and large accepted (if not acceptable) then as one of the appurtenancies of fame (or notoriety).
I’m not defending those practices but I can remember (with envy of the beneficiaries) the mobs of nubile girls outside stage doors at pop concerts and TV studios waiting to be picked up by their heroes (if they – the girls – were lucky). Viewing that from the “moral” heights of 2012 is all very well but I can tell you the most you got, even from my parents’ generation, was a mild tut-tutting rather than severe condemnation. It was ever thus: the same behaviour was exhibited in the 20s and 30s in respect of “matinee idols”.
Of course, the BBC is at its hypocritical best still trying (as showed so unconvincingly on Today this morning) to claim that the suppression of the Newsnight exposé of Savile was merely an “editorial” decision and that any investigation of other matters is best left until the police finish their possible inquiries (ie about 2016 when we’ll all have forgotten what this was all about).
What we don’t need is politicians (and Esther) climbing onto the moral bandwagon demanding “independent” inquiries and whatnot. IMHO this is all a distraction from two matters: first (and certainly) the continuing and blatant general bias at the BBC which always protects its own – be they individuals or its own political prejudices – and second (possibly) from the coverage of the current and AFAIAA ongoing victimisation of young girls by a clique distinguished by a particular religious belief.
Rantzen was pathetic in that documentary. I did enjoy the way she kept saying, out loud, “it’s not your fault, it’s not fault, you’ve done nothing wrong”, explaining what they say at ‘Childline’ to the poor kids, but she was really directing it at herself in that moment…
‘“we’re all guilty”.”
I have tended to notice the gilded ones in media get very all-inclusive when the poo hits the fan.
This time I think they are going to struggle to convince the majority of the country that anyone but them needs holding to account.
While living in Germany I never met a single person who had once been a Nazi in WW2.
While in France everyone I met was proudly in the resistance – no one was a collaborator.
In England an older relative told me Chamberlain was the most popular man after his Munich speech. Now everyone thinks he was hoodwinked.
Today I doubt if anyone I knew in the Beeb ever knew, met, saw, talked to or worked with – what was his name again?
Must be careful to post only in the right place as in addition to grammar nazis there now appears to be a self-elected ‘on-topic’ adjudicator, too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-19869710
Good to see the establishment, in the form of the police and media, rushing to mete out justice here.
Crass and stupid in equal measure, so the book well and truly thrown for such awful words.
Now, had any deeds been involved, one wonders just how much initial dissembling and how slowly the calls for even an inquiry there might have been?
Has anyone from the Labour party said anything about this BBC employee yet?