This is a very odd situation as I see it. There has either been a mass silence where none of the victims have felt the need or ability to speak until now, or they have and there has been a massive cover up.
Neither seem plausable, but it has happened. We need a proper enquiry to establish what has, and also has not gone on. This has been announced. Until then we will never really know.
I think the credibility of the BBC though will remain intact even if the enquiry finds them complicit because most if not all those involved have since left.
Regardless of the outcome, it is a sorry story and I certainly hope that if nothing else, it is not repeated in the future.
Re : BOLD
Most or all have left ??
I thougt the current DG of the Beeb was head of Telivision about 25 years ago !??
...George read Philosophy and Politics at Durham University. He began his career as a writer and magazine editor with Haymarket Magazines and went on to join the BBC in 1989 as a Broadcast Journalism trainee....
If there are findings that representatives of the BBC knew of any abuse that may have taken place then I think the credibility of the corporation will be destroyed.
What is a 'representative of the BBC' in your context?
And seeing as he was born on the 8th July 1962, he would only have been 25 (rather young for such a role, even for someone who was being fast-tracked).
Next week promises to be extremely ugly for the BBC, Entwistle in particular and deservedly so.
there's a lot there, but what I can't see (unless I've missed it) is an email acknowledgement to Liz MacKean and Meirion Jones, from senior management to the effect that "we're not going to run the Newsnight piece because we're about to laud Jimmy Savile in other programmes" - if that email exists, THAT would be pretty damning stuff.
that email may well not exist - even the dumbest exec would see the obvious issues in sending it.
however what is clear from what's already been released (leaked?) is that there is a difference between the execs and the journalists on the focus of the story - the implication being that the exec's version is a story that could be dropped for a "legitimate" reason, and the journalist's version, not.
we're seeing evidence of (a) a twisting of the story's focus and (b) the use of PR to advertise that alternate focus, which suggests lying on the part of one or more BBC execs (or the journalists - unlikely, but let's cover all bases).
Yep, in the "editors blog", reference was made to "There were some of my team who disagreed strongly with my judgement, and others who agreed equally strongly."
I think we're seeing the making public of that disagreement...
Yep, in the "editors blog", reference was made to "There were some of my team who disagreed strongly with my judgement, and others who agreed equally strongly."
I think we're seeing the making public of that disagreement...
K
i think you're missing the point. what is being made public is not a difference of opinion about pulling the piece. it is a fundamental difference of presentation of what the piece was about. the journalists are saying that the focus was JS, and that like the ITV doc, there were victims' first-hand accounts. the exec story is that the piece ran out of steam, because it was about lack of attention to the accusations at the CPS (which proved unfounded).
hopefully the full truth will come out. the more that is leaked rather than explicitly released, the worse it looks.
Is it Tuesday Entwistle appears before the Select Commitee?
Perhaps others were aware of this but I was fascinated to read of the fierce rivalry that exists between Panorama and Newsnight so the programme on Monday promises to pull no punches and will almost certainly set the tone for the next day and the rest of the week. IIRC police have said there may be arrests of other as yet unnamed individuals in the next few days as well.
We could be faced with the delicious prospect of Monday’s Newsnight having to devote a portion of it’s running time to discussing the revelations of that evening’s earlier Panorama covering Newsnight failures over the Savile item last year!! Does television get more navel-gazing than that?!
i think you're missing the point. what is being made public is not a difference of opinion about pulling the piece. it is a fundamental difference of presentation of what the piece was about. the journalists are saying that the focus was JS, and that like the ITV doc, there were victims' first-hand accounts. the exec story is that the piece ran out of steam, because it was about lack of attention to the accusations at the CPS (which proved unfounded).
hopefully the full truth will come out. the more that is leaked rather than explicitly released, the worse it looks.
Somewhere else (can't remember where), there was a reference to different NN journos working on different aspects of the case. As you say, though, until the full truth is known (and that assumes that the "truth" is an absolute concept!) piecemeal leakage is damaging.
I'm inclined to believe Rippon's version of events, however, I wonder if some of the Newsnight journalists are becoming a little too big for their boots: first there was that juevenile weather forcecast protest from Paxman, and now it's most unedifying to hear about other journalists' arguments when their stories don't make it to air. If you argue with a newspaper editor you get shown the door, or downgraded to writing about something trivial.
Perhaps the time has come for the BBC to be a bit firmer with some of the Newsnight team?
I'm inclined to believe Rippon's version of events...
ITV ended up interviewing many of the same victims NN did and they managed to make their story stand-up to the satisfaction of their lawyers enabling it to go to air so I don’t buy Rippon’s retrospective excuse at all. I suspect that’s the real reason the NN journos are so ****ed off, that ITV of all people scooped them almost a full year after the BBC could’ve had the exclusive.
How the BBC must regret that decision now as by spiking that small, ten-minute piece on Newsnight they effectively opened Pandora’s Box, as they were warned would happen, and even compounded the fatal arror by airing the hagiographies at Xmas.
The BBC should pray for another hurricane to hit Britain next week because it’s the only thing that’ll take them off the front pages Tuesday and Wednesday.
The programme's makers [Panorama] have asked for an extension to the usual 30-minute running time for the documentary and may yet go beyond a 60-minute slot.
This is a very odd situation as I see it. There has either been a mass silence where none of the victims have felt the need or ability to speak until now, or they have and there has been a massive cover up.
Neither seem plausable, but it has happened. We need a proper enquiry to establish what has, and also has not gone on. This has been announced. Until then we will never really know.
I think the credibility of the BBC though will remain intact even if the enquiry finds them complicit because most if not all those involved have since left.
Regardless of the outcome, it is a sorry story and I certainly hope that if nothing else, it is not repeated in the future.
"most if not all those involved have since left. "
Would you be so kind as to hand your list of names in to the Police?
You seem 100% certain that there are no pedophiles at the BBC anymore.
How can you be so sure unless you know them all?
The BBC, seeminlgy, covering this up suggests they STILL have something to hide and I see no evidence that "most or all of left", because we simply do not know who they are.
How do you know that abusers from the BBCs past have not risen to positions of power within the BBC?
The BBC were aware of rumours. The BBC questioned Savile about rumours. The media including all of us on these forums, are brilliant at spinning things for our agenda. Again, while everyone is condemning the BBC instead of Savile, the focus is taken away from the places where the majority of his crimes took place. NHS buildings and premises.
"most if not all those involved have since left. "
Would you be so kind as to hand your list of names in to the Police?
You seem 100% certain that there are no pedophiles at the BBC anymore.
How can you be so sure unless you know them all?
The BBC, seeminlgy, covering this up suggests they STILL have something to hide and I see no evidence that "most or all of left", because we simply do not know who they are.
How do you know that abusers from the BBCs past have not risen to positions of power within the BBC?
Be careful what you say. Some things are dangerous and slanderous. For goodness sake to even suggest that the BBC are covering up because they are protecting paedophiles apparently stalking their corridors today is probably the most sickest and damn right moronic thing I have read. Ever.
Be careful what you say. Some things are dangerous and slanderous. For goodness sake to even suggest that the BBC are covering up because they are protecting paedophiles apparently stalking their corridors today is probably the most sickest and damn right moronic thing I have read. Ever.
you forgot the /sarc.
And if asking if the BBC is covering up for pedophile network is the sickest thing you have read, EVER....then I suggest you were born about an hour ago.
And if asking if the BBC is covering up for pedophile network is the sickest thing you have read, EVER....then I suggest you were born about an hour ago.
Again, while everyone is condemning the BBC instead of Savile, the focus is taken away from the places where the majority of his crimes took place. NHS buildings and premises.
Savile is dead. The BBC (primarily) and other institutions are the focus because it’s there that charges will be brought. The reason Savile got access to everywhere he did is because of his BBC status as radio and television personality so why is it so hard for some people to understand why the BBC are attracting the most attention in all this? They had an opportunity to distance themselves from this, get ahead of the story, last year and they spiked the story.
Surely now, even hardcore supporters of the BBC can see the dirt on their hands?
Savile is dead. The BBC (primarily) and other institutions are the focus because it’s there that charges will be brought. The reason Savile got access to everywhere he did is because of his BBC status as radio and television personality so why is it so hard for some people to understand why the BBC are attracting the most attention in all this? They had an opportunity to distance themselves from this, get ahead of the story, last year and they spiked the story.
Surely now, even hardcore supporters of the BBC can see the dirt on their hands?
Rightly so the BBC are being investigated. Any hint of a cover up needs investigating and mistakes need to be addressed and actioned upon, and that means punishment for people who are still alive and may have been involved. Savile did work for the BBC that is true, and I agree with you that it was through his work at the BBC that he was able to undertake activities at his charity locations too. But, his charity work was seperate from the BBC work. And, while he was on the premises of those charitable organisations, he committed (allegedly) most of his most perverse and sickest crimes. Therefore, these establishments should not be considered any lesser than the BBC as to do so would lessen the disgusting acts of perversion he committed on the vulnerable people who dwelled within the walls. I am a BBC supporter it's true, and I do accept that it is likely that some ill advised cover up may be discovered in due course. However I do not believe that it will be as big a cover up as some people are gleefully suggesting it will be. I think the biggest error will be the Newsnight scandal rather than the culture at the BBC at the time.
I am a BBC supporter it's true, and I do accept that it is likely that some ill advised cover up may be discovered in due course.
This doesn’t inspire confidence in the BBC inquiry into NN does it?:
The programme [Panorama] may also touch on why the BBC's own investigation into the dropping of the segment, headed by the former Sky News executive Nick Pollard, will not look at the editorial reasons behind Mr Rippon's decision. Some claim Mr Pollard's terms of reference do not allow him to fully explore if Mr Rippon sacrificed the programme to allow Savile tributes to air. Yet a failure to ask his reasons would weaken the investigation's credibility, possibly leading to claims of a whitewash. One well-placed newsroom source said: "[The omission] is absolutely ridiculous."
Other BBC journalists – including head of news Helen Boaden, her deputy Steve Mitchell and former director-general Mark Thompson, could also be forced to give evidence to the committee, it has emerged.
"most if not all those involved have since left. "
Would you be so kind as to hand your list of names in to the Police?
You seem 100% certain that there are no pedophiles at the BBC anymore.
How can you be so sure unless you know them all?
The BBC, seeminlgy, covering this up suggests they STILL have something to hide and I see no evidence that "most or all of left", because we simply do not know who they are.
How do you know that abusers from the BBCs past have not risen to positions of power within the BBC?
On a purely factual point, anyone working for the BBC in the 1950s and 60s would have retired by now and might well be dead, justifying the statement ''most if not all those involved have since left.'' Roger Ordish, who produced Jim''ll Fix It, has certainly retired; Michael Hurll, long-time TOTP producer, died recently.
Comments
Re : BOLD
Most or all have left ??
I thougt the current DG of the Beeb was head of Telivision about 25 years ago !??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/managementstructure/biographies/entwistle_george/
K
And seeing as he was born on the 8th July 1962, he would only have been 25 (rather young for such a role, even for someone who was being fast-tracked).
George Entwistle went on to join the BBC in 1989 as a Broadcast Journalism trainee
1989 + 25 = 2013
and, no doubt, will receive his engraved barometer next year as his 'long service award'.
He became head of television in April 2011 !!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/revealed-newsnight-emails-that-accuse-bbc-of-jimmy-savile-coverup-8218971.html
Next week promises to be extremely ugly for the BBC, Entwistle in particular and deservedly so.
K
however what is clear from what's already been released (leaked?) is that there is a difference between the execs and the journalists on the focus of the story - the implication being that the exec's version is a story that could be dropped for a "legitimate" reason, and the journalist's version, not.
we're seeing evidence of (a) a twisting of the story's focus and (b) the use of PR to advertise that alternate focus, which suggests lying on the part of one or more BBC execs (or the journalists - unlikely, but let's cover all bases).
I think we're seeing the making public of that disagreement...
K
i think you're missing the point. what is being made public is not a difference of opinion about pulling the piece. it is a fundamental difference of presentation of what the piece was about. the journalists are saying that the focus was JS, and that like the ITV doc, there were victims' first-hand accounts. the exec story is that the piece ran out of steam, because it was about lack of attention to the accusations at the CPS (which proved unfounded).
hopefully the full truth will come out. the more that is leaked rather than explicitly released, the worse it looks.
Perhaps others were aware of this but I was fascinated to read of the fierce rivalry that exists between Panorama and Newsnight so the programme on Monday promises to pull no punches and will almost certainly set the tone for the next day and the rest of the week. IIRC police have said there may be arrests of other as yet unnamed individuals in the next few days as well.
We could be faced with the delicious prospect of Monday’s Newsnight having to devote a portion of it’s running time to discussing the revelations of that evening’s earlier Panorama covering Newsnight failures over the Savile item last year!! Does television get more navel-gazing than that?!
K
Perhaps the time has come for the BBC to be a bit firmer with some of the Newsnight team?
ITV ended up interviewing many of the same victims NN did and they managed to make their story stand-up to the satisfaction of their lawyers enabling it to go to air so I don’t buy Rippon’s retrospective excuse at all. I suspect that’s the real reason the NN journos are so ****ed off, that ITV of all people scooped them almost a full year after the BBC could’ve had the exclusive.
How the BBC must regret that decision now as by spiking that small, ten-minute piece on Newsnight they effectively opened Pandora’s Box, as they were warned would happen, and even compounded the fatal arror by airing the hagiographies at Xmas.
The BBC should pray for another hurricane to hit Britain next week because it’s the only thing that’ll take them off the front pages Tuesday and Wednesday.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/20/jimmy-savile-bbc-protecting-stars?newsfeed=true
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/20/jimmy-savile-bbc-sexual-abuse?newsfeed=true
"most if not all those involved have since left. "
Would you be so kind as to hand your list of names in to the Police?
You seem 100% certain that there are no pedophiles at the BBC anymore.
How can you be so sure unless you know them all?
The BBC, seeminlgy, covering this up suggests they STILL have something to hide and I see no evidence that "most or all of left", because we simply do not know who they are.
How do you know that abusers from the BBCs past have not risen to positions of power within the BBC?
The BBC were aware of rumours. The BBC questioned Savile about rumours. The media including all of us on these forums, are brilliant at spinning things for our agenda. Again, while everyone is condemning the BBC instead of Savile, the focus is taken away from the places where the majority of his crimes took place. NHS buildings and premises.
Be careful what you say. Some things are dangerous and slanderous. For goodness sake to even suggest that the BBC are covering up because they are protecting paedophiles apparently stalking their corridors today is probably the most sickest and damn right moronic thing I have read. Ever.
you forgot the /sarc.
And if asking if the BBC is covering up for pedophile network is the sickest thing you have read, EVER....then I suggest you were born about an hour ago.
http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/just-ask-damn-question.html
Read it if you dare. Here is the opening quote.
"THE BBC AND JIMMY SAVILE:
COULD IT HAPPEN AGAIN?
Yes – Because it’s Happening Now."
Sorry, but the very fact you seem to assume that you know it is happening now actually suggests you haven't got a clue about anything.
Here is an interesting fact for you:
Virtually every company in the world has probably, at some time, employed a sex pervert, murderer or paedophile. That doesn't mean the employer knew.
Savile is dead. The BBC (primarily) and other institutions are the focus because it’s there that charges will be brought. The reason Savile got access to everywhere he did is because of his BBC status as radio and television personality so why is it so hard for some people to understand why the BBC are attracting the most attention in all this? They had an opportunity to distance themselves from this, get ahead of the story, last year and they spiked the story.
Surely now, even hardcore supporters of the BBC can see the dirt on their hands?
Rightly so the BBC are being investigated. Any hint of a cover up needs investigating and mistakes need to be addressed and actioned upon, and that means punishment for people who are still alive and may have been involved. Savile did work for the BBC that is true, and I agree with you that it was through his work at the BBC that he was able to undertake activities at his charity locations too. But, his charity work was seperate from the BBC work. And, while he was on the premises of those charitable organisations, he committed (allegedly) most of his most perverse and sickest crimes. Therefore, these establishments should not be considered any lesser than the BBC as to do so would lessen the disgusting acts of perversion he committed on the vulnerable people who dwelled within the walls. I am a BBC supporter it's true, and I do accept that it is likely that some ill advised cover up may be discovered in due course. However I do not believe that it will be as big a cover up as some people are gleefully suggesting it will be. I think the biggest error will be the Newsnight scandal rather than the culture at the BBC at the time.
This doesn’t inspire confidence in the BBC inquiry into NN does it?:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/panorama-on-savile-no-stone-left-unturned-8219522.html
Or this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2220802/BBC-war-astonishing-claims-reporter-aunt-saw-Savile-abuse-school.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
On a purely factual point, anyone working for the BBC in the 1950s and 60s would have retired by now and might well be dead, justifying the statement ''most if not all those involved have since left.'' Roger Ordish, who produced Jim''ll Fix It, has certainly retired; Michael Hurll, long-time TOTP producer, died recently.