Jimmy Savile Scandal Deepens, Threatening Reputation of BBC

The investigation into pedophilia charges against a former BBC host Jimmy Savile continues to widen.

Christina Patterson is a columnist at the British newspaper The Independent.

She tells host Marco Werman about new email evidence alleging the BBC shelved a documentary exposing Savile’s pedophilia because the victims involved were “teenagers, not too young.”

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: I’m Marco Werman and this is The World, a co-production of the BBC World Service, PRI, and WGBH-Boston. The investigation into child sex abuse charges against a former BBC TV host continues to widen. Jimmy Savile died last year, hailed at the time as a British cultural icon. But allegations have surfaced that he molested as many as 200 young girls and boys, some on BBC premises. This week the BBC’s director general testified before a parliamentary panel. Lawmakers want to know what BBC officials knew and when they knew it, and they’re especially interested in why the BBC TV program Newsnight decided not to air a documentary exposing the allegations. The latest evidence surrounding that decision is an email message sent by BBC reporter Liz MacKean. In that message she says the Newsnight editors shelved the documentary because the victims making the charges were, quote, teenagers, not too young, end quote. Christina Patterson is a columnist at The Independent newspaper in London.

Christina Patterson: What actually was very shocking and that’s emerged over the last few day, both in a program on Monday night called Panorama, which investigated this whole thing, and in some emails that were leaked to or sent to Channel 4 news yesterday, was that actually the reason the editor of Newsnight dropped the story was because he thought it wasn’t a strong enough story. He thought that, paraphrasing, because one of the reporters used these words and they’re not his words, but she said that he thought that the girls weren’t that young, that it was a long time ago, and that the sex offenses weren’t that serious, which, of course, is absolutely shocking if that’s true.

Werman: Well, I’d like to play a clip now of BBC Director General George Entwistle speaking to members of Parliament of the BBC’s capacity to investigate the scandal, including that documentary program, Panorama, you just mentioned, on the BBC that aired this in-depth look at the scandal on Monday. Here’s George Entwistle.

George Entwistle: Here’s an organization investigating itself, in its own air time, on its main TV channel, with appropriate resources given to the task, and asking questions of itself that I don’t believe any other media organization on earth would do. The BBC’s capacity to interrogate its own corporate situation, its own corporate priorities, its own corporate handling of things, is unmatched in the world.

Werman: So Christina Patterson, you’ve been covering this story. From what you’ve seen so far do you think the BBC is showing the toughness, the capacity to interrogate its own corporate structure?

Patterson: The point George Entwistle made about Panorama is absolutely right. I mean to sit there, it was quite thrilling actually on Monday night, to sit there and watch this program which was actually saying terrible things about other people in the organization. I’m not sure there are that many other news or broadcasting organizations in the world that would do that. This is my second BBC interview today slagging off the BBC, you know, which again, I work at a newspaper, you sure as hell couldn’t do that in a newspaper. You couldn’t slag off the proprietor or the editor in the paper and expect to keep your job. So I think it’s important to keep a sense of proportion in relation to all of this. From a journalistic point of view, it can interrogate itself fairly effectively and I think these inquiries will do that. And certainly poor George Entwistle had a thorough grilling from MPs in the select committee yesterday. So my feeling is the BBC will have no trouble getting to the bottom of this. Whether George Entwistle will remain in his job is another matter.

Werman: Christina, what’s your sense of what this scandal, the Jimmy Savile scandal, has meant for the trust Britons and the whole world put in the BBC, arguably one of the most, if not the most, trusted news organizations in the world?

Patterson: Well, I think it’s very, very serious, and I think John Simpson, who’s been at the BBC for more than 50 years, who’s one of the most eminent broadcasters, said it’s the most serious crisis facing the BBC in 50 years. I’m not sure that that’s true, but I think it is a very serious crisis, and I think Entwistle did not present himself well to MPs yesterday. I also think that actually people at the top of organizations often have a rather slender grasp about what goes on below them. They shouldn’t, and particularly if you’re the director of an organization that’s funded by the license payer, and you’re in a very good salary, frankly you should do better than that. But the truth is, we all know that people at the top, they don’t engage with all the detail of stuff, and I think it’s not good, it certainly doesn’t reflect well on his management and leadership, buy I don’t think it’s always all that surprising.

Werman: Christina, the incoming chief executive of The New York Times is the BBC’s former director Mark Thompson. He’s supposed to start his new job at The Times on November 12, but today The New York Times public editor, their ombudsman, Margaret Sullivan, weighed in on a blog post and she questioned Thompson’s suitability for the job. What is known of Thompson’s role in the scandal, the Jimmy Savile scandal, at this point?

Patterson: Certainly so far he has claimed not to know anything about this and he hasn’t been deemed to be culpable. Clearly, in one sense, anyone at the top of an organization where bad stuff happens is culpable. One has to take responsibility. I think we don’t know enough yet to know whether he actually is.

Werman: Christina Patterson, a writer and columnist at The Independent newspaper in London. Thank you very much

Patterson: Thank you.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.