Incredibly upsetting piece about the BBC and Savile

[SomepeopleareTERFSgetoverit]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/nov/02/jimmy-savile-bbc-journalists-risked-jobs-reveal-truth

As we know, the testimony of the victims was dismissed because they had troubled backgrounds but I had not appreciated how hard Liz MacKean fought for the story and what it cost her as the BBC closed ranks in her face.

That is an alarmingly good idea...

Me too.

Calling the rape of at least 450 children a 'sleb expose' is so blind, it's difficult to believe.

I sincerely hope that when they get a chance to redeem themselves in the reckoning, Liz features prominently as well as the victims.

I hope it's not just an opportunity for Steve Coogan to be controversial.

I wonder if it would have been a different story if those 450 children had all been boys.

It makes me so angry how Saville's so called contribution to entertainment and pu lic life were repeatedly considered more important than the lives of women and children which were forever marred by his abuse. So many knew, so many ignored, disbelieved, so many chances for him to be stopped. It is by their actions ( or inaction) thst we shall know them, shame on them.

It at the very early stages when only the women who had been living at a children’s home as girls had spoken out. It’s the same kind of attitude from the BBC towards them as that of the police and social services towards those who were targeted by grooming gangs in Rochdale etc. much more recently. Predators choose the vulnerable who aren’t likely to be believed or, if they are, are easy to write off as ‘bad’ teens indulging in high risk behaviour rather than being viewed as victims.

It was

Predators choose the vulnerable who aren’t likely to be believed or, if they are, are easy to write off as ‘bad’ teens indulging in high risk behaviour rather than being viewed as victims.

This is such an important point. When you look at the big cases of repeated child abuse - or even abuse of adults - the victims are so often people who are less likely to be believed: children in children's homes or behavioural units; very young, pre-verbal children; children with criminal records; children or adults with learning disabilities. And of course abusers target those groups for those very reasons. I find it hard to begin to convey the rage I feel about this.

Thank you for posting that.
What a brave set of journalists.
I feel very angry about the way MacKean was treated.

I came on to say exactly the same as you TrevorFountain - she does deserve a blue plaque.

The woman who worked so hard to expose what was happening to the girls in Rotherham lost her job too. Blue plaque for her too.

It’s as though Power has an instinct and need to try to get rid of the agent behind its exposure especially if it was a woman.

It is so awful to think that vulnerable children who are likely to be problem children who have done something wrong can be so easily abused because the CPS will say they are not credible witnesses.

@SomepeopleareTERFSgetoverit

(Sorry, this may be in the wrong place but it reminded me of the current cotton ceiling story, the BBC seems to have made better decisions on that one)

given that one of the witnesses currently calls for trans women to be killed on her website, I am not sure I agree.

It was more known at the time than anyone is prepared to acknowledge even now. Someone I worked with, who was quite senior in the BBC when JS died, called out the obituaries at the time and objected to them in senior meetings.

Also, nothing was a surprise to anyone who read Popbitch in its heyday. Although they are the only people to have talked about visits to the hospital mortuaries as well.

given that one of the witnesses currently calls for trans women to be killed on her website, I am not sure I agree.

So what?* Does that mean she can't be coerced into sex by TRAs? Are only the pure of heart allowed to be victims of rape?

*and I don't believe anything you post anyway.

I really question the motives of the BBC in the making of this programme about JS. Seems to me they want to get out in front of it and control the narrative, playing down the parts that make them look the worst, or even details that aren’t common knowledge but could become so if say… Channel 4 dramatised it. I don’t trust them an inch.

I agree, LondonWolf , I think it is in extremely bad taste to make what is essentially an entertainment piece about your own internal fuck up that led to the abuse of hundreds of children, and your own complicity in the cover up; to have a big time star mostly known for his comedy as the "star"; and then to no doubt flog this around the world. Will they be giving the profits to the victims? Or channelling them into Children in Need, which is effectively governed by Stonewall rules?

I understand the BBC commissioned the drama but that they won't be making it themselves, which is something at least.

I loved this article by a friend of hers, including the photo of her coming out to meet the press after her work on Savile was vindicated. Hope - but doubt - she'll get the credit she's due.

www.channel4.com/news/by/jackie-long/blogs/my-friend-liz-mackean-a-forensic-journalist-who-had-time-for-people-who-others-ignored

Lordamighty

I wish someone would photoshop a picture of Saville wearing a T-shirt with the Amnesty International slogan “I am who I say I am”, to highlight how sinister it is.

It's been done, but I don't think it's appropriate to upload it here, assuming I know where to find it.

given that one of the witnesses currently calls for trans women to be killed on her website, I am not sure I agree.

Did you even bother reading the article @CatherinaJTV ? It is exactly your sort of thinking process that led to Savile's victims being dismissed by the BBC - they were "bad girls".

Also, how does one person's internet postings negate the other women's experiences as set out in the BBC investigation? Do you apply the same logic to all the bad apples in the trans community and their "choke on my lady dick" type postings?

It's an incredible piece and I just cannot fathom how some people have twisted comments about it into a distorted comparison (Little OJ)

@TedImgoingmad

given that one of the witnesses currently calls for trans women to be killed on her website, I am not sure I agree.

So what?* Does that mean she can't be coerced into sex by TRAs? Are only the pure of heart allowed to be victims of rape?

*and I don't believe anything you post anyway.

you can go to her website and read for yourself - it is a rant about executing trans woman, with the specific names of who she would kill. Don't take my word for it. Please go and read who you are aligning with.

What's Talcum X said now, HDDD?

you can go to her website and read for yourself - it is a rant about executing trans woman, with the specific names of who she would kill. Don't take my word for it. Please go and read who you are aligning with.

1. I don't know who you are referring to.

1. I am not aligning with anyone. I accept the interviewees are victims of coercive sex.

1. So what? Rape victims can be nice people or they can be unpleasant people. If they are the latter, they are no less a victim.

I cant put the OJ tweets up but John McManus has just handed him his arse gift wrapped.

@TedImgoingmad

you can go to her website and read for yourself - it is a rant about executing trans woman, with the specific names of who she would kill. Don't take my word for it. Please go and read who you are aligning with.

1. I don't know who you are referring to.

1. I am not aligning with anyone. I accept the interviewees are victims of coercive sex.

1. So what? Rape victims can be nice people or they can be unpleasant people. If they are the latter, they are no less a victim.

The woman this thread is about is dead, @CatherinaJTV . So you mean one of Savile's victims? We should ignore them all because one has unacceptable views?

I mean unless you're endorsing punitive rape, you're making no sense here. And if that's what you're endorsing ... well it's of a piece with the most aggressive trans activism, unfortunately.

As you put it - please go and read who you are aligning yourself with. I doubt many people on either side of the "gender debate" have any time for Savile.

Please go and read who you are aligning with.

What on Earth do you mean? Are you trying to imply that she deserved it?

CatherineJTV is referring to the BBC article on the cotton ceiling.

@TedImgoingmad

CatherineJTV is referring to the BBC article on the cotton ceiling.

so I am - someone else brought this up though. BBC rotten to the core and that cotton ceiling piece is one piece of evidence for that.