CAN WE REALLY BE CIVIL ABOUT SAVILE AND BBC AS HE IS USED AS A PUBLIC SANITISER FOR SHAMEFUL DRAMAS
Time for Britain's broadcast shame to fall on its own sword?
From Jimmy Savile to Rolf Harris and Stuart Hall to Russel Brand, there have been just too many sexual predators, abusers and cover-ups at that jolly old British institutional ‘auntie’, the BBC.
And surely its new drama about Savile – I won’t point you at it, but it is easy to find - is shamelessly using his story about child abuse, necrophilia, cold-fish handshakes, manipulation, the incendiary wielding of power in high places, lies, cheating and unholy liaisons, to clean up its own tawdry little act.
Savile - just like that laughing hyena of family entertainment Stuart Hall - was twisted, callous and evil.
I avoided him socially and refused to shake his hand whenever I met him, then I hunted him for years on behalf of a number of news organisations. Fairly recently I worked on a tell-all documentary about him for a leading streaming company.
He was a guffawing, greasy, arrogant, pompous clothes-horse of a man who lived in a Manchester back-street dump and liked bubble cars. If he hadn’t been famous and just a dance club DJ, he would have found himself the victim of Manchester street justice.
Everybody in the media knew what he was doing but were blocked from high battlements on revealing anything.
The BBC knew all about him too, believe me.
Even, way back then, our national broadcaster was unaccountable, secretive and pustulating with a deep disregard for children and an obsession with stiff upper lips…
Savile’s disgusting shameful egotistical conduct was the BBC’s worst-kept secret and because of his bracelets and hair, he was television gold. He was an asset.
The BBC’s latest ‘drama’ about him, treats him as just that again.
Shameful.
Here are a number of stories about twisted people and the BBC:
A group of well thought out articles which helps to expose the hidden agenda of all mainstream organisations who do not like negative publicity. The fact that in itself it can show the openness of an organization and show how it wants to portray their ability to take negativeness and make it a strength is missed by most.
They are all about the three year stats that is all they will be there for and not think longer term.
Long live articles like yours as it exposes the natures wrongs.
Yes, but there's a big problem. Jim'll Fix It was the one "decent" thing on the telly (after 23.5 minutes of Dr Who) on a Saturday night of my childhood years. He certainly was an entertainer. Jim also volunteered at a hospital, ran loadsa marathons to raise money for charity, wore tracksuits and was allowed to smoke cigars on TV (how "cool" was that), and kids appeared to be in love with him. How many complaints did Mary Whitehouse's National Viewers and Listeners Association lodge with the BBC via newspaper letters columns about Saville raping girls? I don't recall anything like that. She did complain about Dr Who frightening kids, despite the fact Dr Who never even touched kids. If you'd have gone to PC John Bull, you'd be the one charged (if anyone was charged) - with wasting police time. Like Hitler, Saville had supporters in his lifetime and he controlled the media via threats of legal action for libel. You have to accept that this is not a one-off problem of the past. It is something that the legal system and the "celebrity" obsession repeatedly produces. His supporters were those he in turn supported, the BBC producers of his shows, the journalists who he gave promotional interviews to, etc. They may have known, but they didn't publish evidence to expose him.