.. by Private Eye reminding me of the dog that didn't bark in the night time?

[somebloke123]

Private Eye has in its time been a scourge of the powerful, and an exposer of their misdeeds.

For example, in its early days in the 60s it was the first UK publication to print the names of the Kray twins. They have had other run-ins with such formidable figures as James Goldsmith, Reginald Maudling, Robert Maxwell and those corrupt politicians from Tyneside e.g. Poulson, T. Dan Smith.

But nothing over the years on Jimmy Savile. They must have been aware of the rumours. OK you do need more than that but was he a more difficult person to investigate than the others mentioned?

I watched Have I got News for You at the a few days ago, and when the JS question came up the panellists completely forgot that it was a comedy show and launched into a defence of the BBC and attack on the Daily Mail.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01nd9dc/Have_I_Got_News_for_You_Series_44_Episode_1/

(from about 9:50 in)

No mention of PE's (non)role

End after Savile's death, it was the Oldie (editor ex Private Eye ed Richard Ingram) and not Private Eye that made the running.

[Sevenfourseven]

I'd say PE comes across as male-dominated, but in an ex-public school way rather than a 'blokey way'. I admit I've got no idea about Ian Hislop's morality - just because he criticises other people's morality on TV doesn't mean he's necessarily beyond reproach himself. But equally, I've got no reason to think he is immoral.

I've been a fairly regular PE reader for 20 years or so: as I said above I think they do a valuable job in exposing corruption, though I'm not naive enough to believe everything they say (or draw the inferences they want you to draw). It might be as others have suggested, that they are planning a special on this. Or there may be another reason. Guess we'll have to wait and see ...

[TunipTheVegemal]

I've been reading it since the 70s, long enough to remember the 'Wimmin' column they used to run in which they laughed at what they called 'loony feminist nonsense' (much of which has thankfully entered mainstream thinking since then). It is a lot less overtly sexist than it used to be (along with being less snobbish and antisemitic, and it doesn't have the occasional flashes of racism it used to) but I think the fact that there have been very few women involved in the magazine could have had an impact on the kind of story it covers.
I agree that Hislop has a strong sense of morality. Above all he's anti-hypocrisy and the hypocrisy of some of the people involved in Savile cover-ups has been enormous. I hope they're planning a special.

[PenelopeChipShop]

I did wonder the same actually. I hope it's just the obvious answer, lack of definitive evidence. There are ALWAYS rumours swirling around Fleet Street and some have the status of 'open secrets' but still, you don't publish unless you have irrefutable evidence. I guess they didn't have it, or hadn't looked into it, as others have mentioned, because their priorities usually lie elsewhere. Hopefully they will now though.

[edam]

I know at least one of the subs is a woman. But it is v. blokey in a ex-public school quasi footlights kind of way - as if the writers from footlights had got together.

One of the very few print publications that is actually growing - more and more readers every quarter and year.

[PenelopeChipShop]

Yes Edam I think there are women there but not in positions of editorial decision making I don't think - subs and production people I think.

[somebloke123]

It's perhaps inevitable that such a magazine will get safer and more mainstream as time goes on as its personnel become older and have family responsibilities etc.

In the early days PE was quite reckless. In being the first to print the names of the Kray twins they were not just opening themselves to litigation but putting themselves in physical danger.

www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php?showme=189


The way they went after Poulson, Maxwell, Goldsmith etc was also presumably quite risky. And taking on the Distillers' Company over Thalidomide (though I guess that was perhaps more the Sunday Times):

www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php?showme=285


Also sacred cows such as Christian Barnard the heart transplant specialist.

www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php?showme=195


I remember when they Danish cartoons of Mohammed the Islamic prophet issue blew up, PE followed the rest of the mainstream media in not printing them. I would guess that in their earlier years they might well have done.

Anyway, as has been said, maybe they're planning a special.

[somebloke123]

Sorry forgot to do links:


www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php?showme=189


www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php?showme=285



www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php?showme=195

[boschy]

I think the Eye is keeping it's powder dry...
and yes I agree the humour is sometimes blokey but I have also seen the opposite where they are supporting women and they are also very happy to expose the old boys' network.
I shall not be cancelling my subscription.

[Sallyingforth]

I shall not be cancelling my subscription
Non-readers will not understand that!

I've read the Eye for many years but I may have to cancel mine as I find it SO depressing. Year after year the same scandals are revealed, sometimes with the same names and sometimes with new ones. But nothing ever seems to improve and the corruption just goes on and on...