…as Ian Hislop brown noses the BBC?
The editor of Private Eye
the self-styled “thorn in the side” of the British establishment, was shameless in his rant in support of the B.B.C. on Have I Got News For You as the Corporation face questions over their facilitating Jimmy Savile.
Well actually they did. Plenty knew. It wasn’t just rumour and innuendo. It was an
open secret, which means it’s widely known just no one talks about it. Though Savile did at numerous times, in his autobiography and in
quip. It wasn’t just rumours.
There’s a number at the B.B.C. who walked into his dressing room when Savile was doing something he shouldn’t to an under-age girl.
If this had been going on at say an organisation owned and run by Rupert Murdoch, Hislop would have been all over it. Evidence or not. The most sued man in the land – though notice as he becomes more and more entrenched in the establishment those legal causes are few and far between – would have risked it.
But no you can’t question the sacred cow that is the B.B.C. it never does any wrong.
That’s why it’ll never fess up to the lies it pedals, will never fess up to breaking it’s charter in respect to political bias – it’s an “open secret” the celebrations that went on in Broadcasting House when Labour won in 1997. Just look at how much of the tax payers money – licence fee being a tax, that at times is extracted through threat and intimidation – they’ve wasted on the Balen Report and the hypocrisy of the Corporation in doing so.
A Corporation that’s always banging on about others being open and above board doesn’t have a leg to stand on when it’s spent hundreds of thousands on keeping this report from the public. And the only reason it would have gone to such lengths is because the report doesn’t show them in a good light. It must prove there was an anti-Israel bias in their reporting, or it would have been out straight away with them having
look, we we’re right all along shit eating grins on their faces.
But no the B.B.C. has done no wrong.
Savile was at the Corporation in a big way from the start of Top Of The Pops in 1964 to the end of Jim’ll Fix It in 1994. 30 years of facilitating him being around young girls. Management questioned him, seemingly on a number of occasions, they investigated allegations, though not thoroughly. Why not? Didn’t want to come up with answers that would be difficult. Numerous allegations over those 30 years yet none of them said
one more Jimmy and you’re out, no matter what. No he was a star of TV & radio, their TV & radio. No rocking the boat.
And I mean back in he 1970s if two girls came up with the same story in different parts of the country then there was something to it. It’s not like today with modern communication technology, where for a long time on teh interweb Savile’s actions have been widespread, well before his death.
Widespread enough for a B.B.C. investigation on Newsnight. An investigation that was dropped. Which again brings the Corporation into disrepute.
Why was this investigation dropped? It seems because they wanted to show three tribute shows about Savile over Christmas and well that wouldn’t go down well if he’s exposed as a paedophile a few days before.
So the head of news at the B.B.C., Helen Boaden , told the then head of vision, George Entwhistle, that the investigation was being spiked. According to him he replied
thanks for letting me know and that’s it. A senior executive who is now the director general of the Corporation did nothing but say
This is either one of two things. Firstly it’s the truth. If so then it’s incredible that he wouldn’t ask why it was being binned. That there is a sacking/resigning offence for incompetence.
Secondly: It’s so incredible because it’s not true. In other words he lied, asked about the investigation told all the gory details and backed the decision for the tribute shows to trump the investigation. Again a sacking/resigning offence.
He buggered himself with one comment because his entrenched in the B.B.C. mindset of never admitting faults or mistakes.
So back to Hislop and well the question is can you blame him for his sucking up to the B.B.C.?
After all a few years back a news reader on the Corporation’s News 24 channel, that you’ve probably have never heard of or would pick out in a line up, let slip she gets paid nearly £100,000 for reading out loud – probably reading from the Grauniad. So if a no one is on 6 figures what would a face of Have I Got News For you, going out prime time on Friday nights with extended repeat later be getting for a run? Then there’s all those cosy public schoolboy documentaries on B.B.C. 2 and 4, the appearances on Question Time, programmes he’s written scripts for. Hislop at imdb.
No you wouldn’t want to have a blast at a Corporation that was handing you all those checks. Better being in the establishment looking out. Play safe, let’s have another Jeffrey Archer dig or how about one at the Daily Mail.
And when the next time the B.B.C. bleats about not being able to afford to make decent dramas and have to show repeats and the like because the nasty government cuts froze the licence fee, think on that a nobody newsreader earns £100,000, think on about all the other disproportionate salaries handed out, to go with all the expenses for things like, first class flights, taxies and chauffeured cars – when they’re telling us to take the bus – that our money is paying for instead of programmes you want to watch.