Well, wonder what you make of the conclusions in the Pollard report on the BBC’s handling of Savile? It seems that, at best, the BBC is institutionally incompetent.
POLLARD!
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Up2snuff April 25, 2024 at 1:04 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024pug, re early election: the wisdom of John Curtice, psephologist extraordinaire, is that the Conservatives tend to do better with...
- pugnazious April 25, 2024 at 12:52 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1782013988542243238 From Guido.... 'Daily Sceptic editor Toby Young has just submitted a complaint to...
- pugnazious April 25, 2024 at 12:41 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Curious how the BBC is not reporting on Ofsted but campaigning against it and weaponising Ruth Perry's suicide in a...
- pugnazious April 25, 2024 at 11:58 am on Midweek 24th April 2024'Nadine Dorries criticised for sharing edited image of Sunak wielding knife' 'Ministers have criticised Nadine Dorries for sharing a doctore...
- Fedup2 April 25, 2024 at 11:45 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Not bbc But with the democrat legal mafia in the US - what will happen when president trump is required...
- Fedup2 April 25, 2024 at 11:40 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Do you notice the method the BBC uses to tell taxpayers and others what is going on in Gaza ?...
- Lunchtime Loather April 25, 2024 at 11:31 am on Midweek 24th April 2024I threw my trainers away because I did not want to look like that slob Tim Davie.
- Jeff April 25, 2024 at 11:13 am on Midweek 24th April 2024So, yet again, the pitifully useless Mark Rowley, leader of the once respected Met' police, feels the need to make...
- Thatcherrevolutionary April 25, 2024 at 10:33 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Experienced as we all are with the MSM, certain assumptions will have been made after the ambiguity and lack of...
- Flotsam April 25, 2024 at 10:30 am on Midweek 24th April 2024We, as Taxpayers, had to subsidise that furnace. More "Green" crap.
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
The only useful result so far is that Steve Mitchell has resigned. Helen “Hugs” Boaden should be next. But nothing effectively will change over this. Different biased Beeboids will be elevated to the open positions, but otherwise all will remain the same, just like in the Star Trek mirror universe.
Can you imagine the outrage if News International was allowed to do an ‘internal enquiry’ into phone hacking? That it would take precedence over judicial and police enquiries?
Yet, when it comes to the mass-raping of underage girls, the BBC is allowed this privilege?
It’s time for a judicial review, methinks, with jail sentences for those who were accessory to the crime and aided and abetted. ie. all BBC management for the last 30 years in jail.
Nothing will come of any inquiry – police or otherwise – about what Savile did all those years. Every adult witness (as opposed to those who claim to have had no knowledge whatsoever) who worked for the BBC at the time will sing from the same hymn sheet revealed by Pollard, and what we’ve heard from a few witnesses, like that driver: they were “older” teenage girls, and were generally “scruffy”, of questionable moral turpitude anyway. Basically, they were all star-struck young women who were gagging for it, all consensual if we’re honest, and only old-fashioned prudes would take into consideration the unrealistically low age of consent on the law books at the time.
All those men getting arrested recently will be free and clear soon enough, with the possible exception of Glitter since he has a record. Maybe Clifford if there’s proof of obstructing an inquiry somewhere along the line. But nobody currently at the BBC will suffer for it, and nothing will change the culture there.
And institutionally so convoluted that no-one knows who is responsible for making any decision. What is the logic in the deputy head of news being sacked (having to ‘resign’) while the head of news is again rewarded with her mega-salary?
They do know. The whole point of the neo-Birt management system is to make the system itself accountable rather than an individual. For example, the McAlpine thing happened because, their story goes, the management system was a mess. Nothing to do with corrupt (freelance) journalists or a feckless Newsnight (acting) editor agreeing to go to air with it. The system is to blame, you see, and any scorn heaped on an individual is mere scapegoating. The collective replaces individual responsibility. It’s a fair cop, but society’s to blame.
Well, in that case they have to get rid of the system.
Scrap the multiple layers of overpaid managers.
Make programme-makers responsible for making programmes.
Make reporters responsible for reporting.
Make editors responsible for editing.
That won’t fix the real problem either. The bias is in the people, not the system. Unless there’s a wholesale personnel and culture change, things like McAlpine and Savile will continue to happen.
Changing the management structure won’t alter the fact that the three most prominent economics and businesses “editors” are Left-wing ideologues. Revamping the layers of management won’t change the fact that the BBC’s Middle East “editor” is delusional and dishonest about the Muslim Brotherhood and has a personal grudge against Israel. Making different people responsible for reporting and editing will not change the fact that all BBC journalists in the US are Left-wing ideologues, including a former Obamessiah campaigner, nor would it have prevented the inane Sarah Palin obsession or the BBC calling me a racist for four years and running. Scrapping layers of middle management won’t solve the Derbyshire/Bacon problem, nor would it prevent a future occurrence of the Head of Comedy attending something like that forum where Climate Change activists instructed staff how to embed their agenda into all aspects of BBC broadcasting.
I think you get the idea.
In what way did the political bent of journalists play a part in the Savile report being shelved? Savile was a right winger and devout Catholic.
Agree with dando lol! Mc Alpine is a Tory and innocent that didn’t alter the BBC reporting of him in any way !!
Oh lol.
I didn’t mean the Newsnight spike, I meant how young girls were brought to him to fiddle and it was all tolerated for decades because of the drink, drugs, and free love vibe during the time when the BBC was – as admitted by Mark Thompson – a very Left-wing place. They were all at it (and apparently continue to sleep with each other regardless of marriage vows or how it might affect their children) and it wouldn’t have been the case if the culture was different. I’ve always thought that the real scandal was that Savile’s activities – and so much else – was allowed, not that Newsnight spiked a damning story about it after he died. Perhaps I was wrong?
“Free love” ?
I am unable to defend the indefensible on this occasion.
Totally agree with you, David. A filthy, rotten culture which allowed these kiddy-fiddling activities to go on within BBC premises is of far more concern than the Newsnight shambles.
He was a right wanker, and a devout sex maniac.
Ah, unable to defend the indefensible over their lies about the secret climate change meeting, then? A massive trust/confidence/impartiality issue which somehow has been overlooked.
‘Unable to defend’ will be assumed in the event of a null reply.
This is true, but Pollard politely savages Ms Boaden, for not being proactive enough, considering most of the department she was responsible for was in “meltdown” – his word.
I’ve worked for large multinationals and the one defining characteristic of them all, was that senior executives took personal, decisive, even ruthless action when things started going wrong, and they would keep their bosses informed of what was happening. Why? Because the buck stopped with them. I do not know what salary MS Boaden earns, but what is the point of her being head of a department if when her department is in crisis she doesn’t act in an executive manner and do what every other professional manager does?
She doesn’t have to, unless that means dumping a junior producer when the gods occasionally call for a sacrifice. It’s the beauty of the system. Any criticism is mere swivel-eyed anger from the BBC’s enemies who want to destroy a national treasure.
there is still a lot of smoke and mirrors around who said what to whom vis a vis pulling the Newsnight Saville report.
Helen Boaden, as you have stated, like most Beeboids works within a bubble totally divorced from reality.
Asked this morning on returning to work how she intended to mend the trust, she said there was nothing to mend, the BBC is still the most trusted media organisation in the World. So there you go.
The Pollard report is merely an exercise to demonstrate how open to inspection they are. As everyone predicted; nothing has changed and they continue on regardless. They know they are effectively untouchable because of a Royal Charter.
Time for Cameroon to grow some balls and take action on behalf of the public that are funding this mess. But of course he won’t because he is too scared of the BBC and he might upset the esteemed Patten.
The BBC are reliable. You can always rely on them to promote the views and interests of middle class Labour voters.
Cameron can’t and won’t do anything, ever, because it’s practically impossible for most people to separate the biased and troublesome individuals and the News department from the world-renowned documentaries, costume dramas, classic sitcoms, the Proms, the Archers, and the nearly century-long legacy of a deep cultural heritage and trust. Any attack on the BBC for this fiasco is an attack on all the rest of it. It wouldn’t even occur to Cameron to privatize it or break it up. It’s nothing to do with being afraid of Patten or anything.
As Mehdi Hasan and Harriet Harman have said, it’s vitally important to protect the BBC from political enemies who want to destroy a national treasure.
‘Asked this morning on returning to work how she intended to mend the trust, she said there was nothing to mend, the BBC is still the most trusted media organisation in the World.
Is there a URL for that quote?
She seems to be on a loop.
It may be here too..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/helen-boaden-director-of-bbc-news-at-the-lse
Oddly that page is now ‘down’.
I’d like to chip in on the cited URL in the story as above, but… and here’s a shock, after 48hrs and 500 comments,… it’s closed.
What has remained is worth a gander and may explain if not excuse much again…
25. Kingfisherphil
DECEMBER 2012 – 13:07
Top woman keeps job, yet was not doing the job properly, the lessers get moved sideways or paid off……..this is not how a business should be managed, then again, the BBC don’t see themselves as a business and accountability is ZILCH. What a shambles, that is the reason Savile got away with it, “Felt Queesy” says it all! The guys knew the truth and said and did nothing, this is criminal !!!!!!!!
Actually, there are now surely moves afoot to assess the degree of actual criminality, as there is now testimony to act upon.
Or is the BBC now ‘unique’ in being above the law as well?
The above is precisely why John Humphrys was grilling Patten about Entwistle’s and Caroline Thomson’s golden parachutes instead, and allowed him to babble meaningless phrases about changing the management structure without challenge.
Indeed this seems common throughout the British public sector. There are far more managers than required , their roles are never defined properly so no one is ever really sure what they are responsible for. A side effect of this (or the main reason for it) is that it is them impossible to tell who made a decision so no one is ever to blame for anything. I’m told by friends who work there that this management technique has been developed to an art form in the NHS.
A level of managerial incompetence only Lord Lawson could sort out.
(1) Appoint Lord Monckton to return Climate Change science to presenting the facts.
(2) Appoint Martin Durkin to return the Documentaries to presenting the facts.
(3) Appoint Christopher Booker to return the News to presenting the facts.
(4) Appoint James Delingpole to return the Journalists to presenting the facts.
(5) Appoint Melanie Phillips to return the Middle East news to presenting the facts.
(6) Appoint David Bellamy to return the Environment policy to presenting the facts.
(7) Appoint Piers Corbyn to return the Weather policy to presenting the facts.
I’d replace Patten with Norman Tebbit, just to hear the piteous howls of anguish. The tortured wailing and rending would be a joy to behold.
To understand the difference between the way the BBC cover their own failings, as compared to the way they would have covered it had it been a rival organisation, is telling in itself.
Basically from the BBC we get a ‘yes, but…’ response, in which they give themselves all necessary space to tell the public that lessons have been learned, and all will be well from now on. Had it been Sky that was going through this process then the responder would have been challenged with the glaring inconsistencies that have been raised by this report, and whatever they claimed they were now doing about it to remedy the situation would have been rightly ridiculed.
Consider first that we are talking about criminal sexual abuses committed by a person that the BBC gave the celebrity status necessary for him to perpetrate his crimes. This is itself doesn’t convey any responsibility to the BBC, but when we add to that that many of these abuses were carried out on BBC premises, at least once in full view of the camera, (though the You-Tube video of it has now been removed), and that many of those who worked with or around him were aware of the abused being carried out over many years.
Now while this specifically was not the remit of the Pollard report, it does give a motive for the BBC not to want to air any of this dirty laundry. So how are we told that the BBC ‘covered its tracks’ by not airing the Newsnight report?
Apparently, according to the BBC narrative, it was due to ‘chaos and confusion’ underlined by weak disorganised leadership. The BBC basic response it to say – but that was then, lessons have been learned, and now on it’s back to business.
You can hear today’s World at One programme for the next 7 days and listen to them do it.
Let’s look at the basic facts that have been unearthed by this report, and bear in mind that Pollard has been prepared to accept ‘chaos and confusion’ as an explanation rather than pursue any more sinister intent. One can imagine the flak, and possible criminal proceedings that might have followed, had he dared to make that estimation.
That doesn’t mean it’s not true!
But we are to believe that due to miscommunication, bad management, unread emails, and the not realising the full implications of what the Newsnight report entailed, that it was just dropped.
Meanwhile nobody has lost their job as a result of it, though some have resigned. Some get shuffled around into other posts, and some like Head of News Helen Boaden, get to keep their job. But she was the one even according to this report, who failed to notify the higher ups with the full ‘gravity’ of the situation.
And what of Entwistle, the man put in the position of Director General for 54 days, and apparently never read any emails about anything important, or followed up on anything he was told. Whose way to avoid doing anything wrong was to avoid doing anything and hope it will just go away by itself. Yet he receives a massive pay out when he ‘resigned’.
So why is Patten, the man who put him in that position, still there?
Let’s not forget Thompson, the former DG, and the one who presided over this chaos and confusion for years, though I haven’t heard him get too much mention on all this – yet.
The ‘trust’ the BBC will ‘gain from me’ over this, is the same as they had before I even knew about this – NONE!
YouTube video of Savile molesting girl on camera still available here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usbflxRjLLA
Or it can be seen here
The main problem in getting any real change to happen – or even in firing a good number of people who deserve to go – is that any admission of error is seen in certain circles as a victory by the people whom Harriet Harman described as enemies waiting to pounce, a triumph of evil over good.
If Cameron does anything it will be played as extreme Right-wing enemies going after a national treasure. So he won’t.
Here is a link to the Pollard Report on Gudio Fawkes site. http://www.scribd.com/doc/117365794
It has summaries and recommendations in its 186 pages.
Is this all there is at the end?
In my view, while the issues faced were challenging, a particular cultural issue (in which I have commented elsewhere in the Report) contributed to this issue. I have been struck by what I view as a “silo mentality” at the BBC – the notion that everyone knows what his or her job is, but there is reluctance to step into someone else’s territory and, indeed, a person who does would be criticised. In my view, such an approach hinders leadership and the proper taking of control. On this, I can say no more, beyond recommending to the BBC that it looks at this issue and considers ways in which it might be addressed.
For “silo mentality”, I would read “arrogance and jealously guarded fiefdoms”, but the result is the same. Other than Mitchell getting forced out by an obviously damning revelation regarding Rippon’s blog post, what on earth does Pollack think will happen? If, as he clearly sees, “Hugs” Boaden can get away with stepping back and sticking her fingers in her ears for a few weeks until it all blows over and then casually waltz back into her top job as if nothing happened, what chance is there of real reform anywhere? And who is going to replace Mitchell? Just another Beeboid with the same mentality.
No sackings, a few moving around and retiring early no doubt on mega bucks…to add to the previous resignation of Entwhistle. Not really a clear-out in anyone’s book. Just seen Christopher Bland on news pretending to say harsh things but really given a 5 minute praising of how good the BBC really is.
Not the trustworthy BBC 🙄
‘Eye-opening’ texts reveal BBC PR machine planned to save George Entwistle by providing ‘scalp’ of Newsnight editor Peter Rippon for shelved Savile probe
*The text messages were uncovered by Nick Pollard who carried out an investigation into why Newsnight ditched investigation into Savile
*One text message suggesting Mr Rippon should quit was sent from Julian Payne – the BBC’s head of press – to director of communications Paul Mylrea
*The text said: ‘Thought of the hour: PR (Peter Rippon) changes blog and accepts he was wrong and goes, giving Panorama a scalp’
No, no, you can still – must still – trust the Beeboids themselves. It’s this mad management structure – apparently thrust upon them out of thin air, as if it came from another dimension – which caused this.
I need to read the whole thing more in depth, but I got the impression that Mitchell made Rippon make that somewhat fraudulent blog post. Now, what was Mitchell’s job before rising to the highest echelon? Oh, that’s right: Head of BBC Radio News, where he helped destroy Andrew Gilligan’s BBC career over the “sexed-up” Sadaam Hussein deal, for which the Hutton report criticized him. Imagine that. He got promoted for it anyway.
So was it the management structure to blame then as well?
His Wikipedia entry seems to have been sent down the memory hole and replaced with a stub. Curious.
Next time anybody wonders whether the BBC could praise and back the Palestinians the way they do, if they really thought the Palestinian agenda was a load of crap, just recall the tribute to Savile last year.
Anyone else sick of the measly words and inquiries? I want action not criticisms! Entwhistle should have got nothing but the front door opened for him on the way out!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20793496
Think about the Leveson inquiry and the tough justice (deservedly) dished out for deception, criminality and incompetence, and then think about the feeble ‘investigation’ launched by the BBC which will result in nothing. It seems the Lefty BBC can get away with anything!
Deluded Nick Higham (one of the Beeb’s own) re Pollard’s conclusions:
“That will come as a relief to those who believe that the reputation of BBC News for trustworthiness and independence is one of the Corporation’s most valuable assets.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-20790891
The goverrnment seems unable to challenge the BBC ” fair” news service, When the then PM Tony Blair brilliant speech in Las Angeles 2006 was dismissed by the political commentator on News at Ten as “this is what the PM MEANT to say” I complained . The government acted by asking the Director General of the BBC to deal with it but this was ignored and he got away with it! He forwarded it to the Head of Complaints for the gobbledygook treatment.
‘forwarded it to the Head of Complaints for the gobbledygook treatment.’
Do not give up.
That’s what they want.
It may not be today; it may not be tomorrow, but one day the mechanisms of obfuscation the BBC has put in place to ensure they do not get held to account will be breached, and when they do, you and others like you will be there to assist with who were willing parties to it all.
And there will be an accounting then.
And that… is a trust issue.
I have just completed my inquiry into the failing at the BBC.
Findings:
Newsnight was spiked and the Jimmy Savile tributes went out because the BBC is celebrity obsessed and unwilling to admit any internal failings.
Newsnight put out lies about a senior Tory because the BBC is institutionally anti-Tory. The more risk averse elements of management was distracted and muddled by the fall out from the previous Newsnight scandal at the time and let the activists off the leash.
That’s it. Gratis. No cost to the licence payer.
Pollard inquiry = Beeboid ‘Musical Chairs’ (played with extra chair),
– so no one loses their Beeboid seat.
“BBC Avoids A Bloodbath Over Savile Report”
By Niall Paterson, ‘Sky News’
http://news.sky.com/story/1027722/bbc-avoids-a-bloodbath-over-savile-report
I can see it happening:
‘BBC BIAS: The Musical’.
Ms BOADEN, bursting into song in ‘Biased BBC: the Musical’, trilled with apparent sincerity about the Pollard Report being a ‘grim day’, but she seemed to have a spring in her step as she moved off stage to collect her salary of £354,000.
‘Telegraph’:-
“BBC News boss Helen Boaden describes publication of Pollard Report as a ‘grim day’ as she returns to work.
“Helen Boaden, the BBC’s head of news, has described the publication of a report into the Jimmy Savile affair as a “grim day” for the broadcaster’s journalists as she returned to work today.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9758665/BBC-News-boss-Helen-Boaden-describes-publication-of-Pollard-Report-as-a-grim-day-as-she-returns-to-work.html
The finale performance of the Beeboid cast’s number,
“Everyday’s a Holiday at Our BBC”,
seemed to get, to put it mildly,
a mixed reception.
Note to Helen: Don’t do anything stupid, dear.
I can envision George Entwistle on stage singing “If I were a rich man” followed by DLT warbling “Thank heaven for little girls” while Patten, after delivering a lengthy homily on the virtues of the license fee, breaks into “You’ve got to pick a pocket or two.”
The BBC Newsnight twitterfeed and FaceBook are all that’s left of this once proud ‘news’ magazine’s engagements with the public.
And the public is so far having a hoot on this car crash recreation:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20789566
‘BBC DG defends response to report’.
Whatever it is, a ‘defence’ of anything, it isn’t.
George, come back! In comparison you were Churchillian.
Watch & weep at what a market rate talent at the BBC can reduce you to.. with laughter
Good grief, I didn’t realize that Mitchell is staying on for another six months and then “retiring”. I knew about the full pension, but still, this is a result?
I have to say, though, Paxman’s questions sound like he’s been reading my comments. And Davie sounds like he’s a parody of them.
Considering the amount of articles generated by the BBC during the ‘hacking’ scandal, there’s a paucity when it comes to their own. The main article showing is still the same one that they generated yesterday.
I see too the subtle brainwashing titles on their video and audio links to the story – like
Decision made to ‘restore trust’
The honourable thing to do – DG
Speaking of ‘trust’, following Pollard’s report being made public, and showing the failures of those like former 54day DG Entwistle in the way the Newsnight exposee of Savile was binned, Head of BBC Trust Patten has admitted ‘With the benefit of hindsight, we chose the wrong one,’
“WE chose the wrong one!” The royal WE.
Far as I know. though it is up to the BBC trust to select the DG, as head of the Trust, Patten has the final word. It was HIS decision to hire him, the same as the new prospect due to start in a few months. But typical of the mindset that Patten displays in so many ways, the buck for him stops ‘kinda around him but not quite by him’.
If it would have been a good decision that would have been shown, undoubtedly the ‘we’ would be nowhere to be seen.
‘We picked the wrong man’: Lord Patten could claw back some of George Entwistle’s controversial £450,000 payout after Pollard criticism
Not to worry – Tim Davie will lead the culture change without removing a single person who was part of the problem, then Lord Hill will take over and all will be well. Nothing will change except a few nameplates on doors.
It seems to be part of the overall BBC mindset that we saw so clearly with Entwistle.
See no evil;
Hear no evil;
Do no evil:
As present acting DG said‘Success for me is not necessarily how many people I dismiss’,
It would be when they’re found to be incompetent. But as we know all too well now, they’d rather be seen as incompetent in an ‘auntie’ sort of way, and ‘addressing the issues shown as worthy of a first rate world media organisation’so they can carry on business as usual, than actually do anything to remedy their real failings.
‘Success for me is not how many people I sack’:
Fact is, if they were a private organisation they would not be able to survive being so incompetent. If the government were intelligent and had more gumption than we’ve seen so far, they would use this aspect as the reason to end the licence fee funding. What better way to make them more efficient and trim the excess?
It’s Xmas… spread the love..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/dec/21/newsnight-jimmy-savile-lord-mcalpine-bbc?
If anyone’s begging for a kicking, it’s Patten
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Patten must take the blame for a sorry saga
When the paedo ring in Boston was exposed, their churches were sold off…and the Catholic church there rendered bankrupt near enough.
How come the BBC aren`t getting broken up and sold off to Rupert-who never knowingly groomed anybody as far as I can tell!
The BBC is wonderful, a national treasure which you must protect from right-wing enemies who want to destroy it for political purposes (which does not mean the BBC is biased to the Left or anything like that, of course).
This is all a minor managerial structure problem, the system is to blame, not the people making the mistakes. The system exists not to ensure quality journalism and broadcasting, but to protect the Beeboids themselves from too much scrutiny. Tim Davie and then Lord Hill will work tirelessly to ensure that the system protects them all even better in future.
How on earth could the Pollard report have cost £2,000,000 unless he was paid an absolutely enormous fee.
Shouldn’t we be told?
Does anyone feel an FOI request coming on?
£2m. Most of this cost will have been spent on legal advice. BBC top brass who were under the Pollardv spotlight each had lawyers supporting them and this cost they claimed on their expenses and the BBC was more than happy to pay for it out of our licence fees.
Win win situation for the Beeb. No one gets the blame for any mistrakes. All BBC arses well covered.
‘All BBC arses well covered.’
Steady on. That will bring out a whole new set of vapour-fitting offence takers on triple time.
Actually, again there is ‘balance’, of sorts, in The Farce.
Here an ‘independent’, secret internal investigation has spent a small fortune finding they are all innocent as new born lambs, the BBC got it 110% righter than ever (h/t: Boaden, H (c) 2012, in part) before and in fact if they were any more trusted Santa himself best not bother coming down the corporate chimney. And if there is anything that might spoil that cosy finding, there are a half dozen lawyers ready to bring out an FoI exclusion before anyone can say ‘market rate’.
Which all offsets any ‘independent’ internal investigation by, say CECUTT, on, say, an expedited complaint.
To kick off they can and will find those they deem contrary to BBC interests guilty until… well who cares… banned!!!!
Appeal, and a small fortune gets spent finding the appelant is guilty by association (often with anyone the BBC feels is not ‘on team’), the BBC in fact got it 110% righter than ever (h/t: Boaden, H (c)) at the outset, and now, for the cheek of a customer holding them to account they might even make an exception to the anti-death penalty advocacy they are not meant to have. And if there is anything that might spoil that cosy finding like facts or lying staff, there are a half dozen lawyers ready to point to the bit in the communications that says ‘it’s our little secret’ (h/t Savile. J (c) RIP) before anyone can say ‘Bunker-mentality Flokkers’.
It’s just one of the things that makes the BBC such a unique part of anyone’s life for ever, like it or not. Like Herpes.
You can try and avoid Tax and Death is just a postscript, but only the world’s most delusional media monopoly will be with you from the moment you buy your first broadcast enabled device.
Lords Hall Hall or Patten’s index-linked couldn’t be met any other way.