h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Er, I don't realy appreciate it that you have assumed that I am huffy and puffy, or that I tyring overly hard to get to offended to this, or that I would characterise my response as offended

I get that it was an oversight, a hilarious one, no.

and no I haven't been demanding heads on platters, for this broadcast, or generally

So given this was an oversight, was an apology not called for and an ackonowledgment this episode not to be shown again on repeat

I get it that people are tired now of the hand wringing, the hype and the endless apologies, the explainations,

but to post a link to a episode of The Tweenies, of all things and then just at the apology that followed,

kind of read, bored now, therefore we should 'just get over it'?

Well I stand by the fact that I find it laugh-out-loud hilarious. Glaringly out-of-place or inappropriate broadcasts are always funny in my book, regardless of subject matter, with the key proviso that it is accidental. If it transpires that a malicious television archivist at the BBC deliberately aired this episode for cheap laughs, then, it is not so funny, no (though perhaps still in an ironic- oh how could we have been so wrong about him- kind of way).

Sorry, but that just my sense of humour and I'm sure I share it with millions of others.

mmm, do you know what I probably can imagine phoning Spiller and saying 'cock up of the day by the beeb, broadcast an episode of the tweenies with Max doing a turn as Jimmy Savile' and that being greeted with a ' No! jaysus'

stretching that to finding millions of people finding it rip roaringly laugh out loud hilarious, is a stretch

saying that anyone who wrote in and complained about it is being huffy and puffy and is making an effort to be offended

or going to the effort of posting on this thread bringing everyone's attention it and to dismiss the apology as 'another boring apology'

is probably what I am responding to

now atinythorn's post

was laugh out loud funny, admittedly not to everyone's taste,

The Tweenies episode is funny. Not everyone laughs at the same stuff, but to me, it was funny. The right thing to do is to apologise to anyone who may have been offended (and there are a few, VERY few, who might have been legitimately offended), raise a middle digit to the many hundreds or thousands who got huffy and puffy without reason, and move on.



I've had the interesting experience over the last few days of watching some shows on Dave which I know to have been filmed before the scandal broke, but which contain references to Savile.

One specifically was an episode of Have I Got New For You from about last March (i.e. after he died, but before the scandal broke) talking about (I think) raising the dead, and Jo Brand as host said "And to any children watching, don't worry, it won't work on Jimmy Savile", or something like that. And it got a HUGE laugh. Oh ho ho ho ho, went the audience, poor silly children, being frightened at the thought of a reanimated Jimmy Savile, 'cos he was a comedy paedo, wasn't he? Ho ho ho ho ho.

WE ALL KNEW.

(Interestingly they made a reference on the same programme to the still-in-the-future Olympics, and how if you were watching the show on Dave "what a wonderful games they were", and that got a big laugh from the audience as well, trading off the then stil prevalent idea that they were going to be a bit rubbish. It felt quite odd, sitting in that future they were referring to, watching the repeat on the repeats channel they were referring to, and thinking, actually, y'know, they WERE great. And you saps there back in the past have no idea, and you're joking about it. Hah! )

SCANDEL: BBC DO NOT CHECK OLD REPEATS OF CBBC SHOWS FOR REFERENCES OF JIMMY SAVILLE.

DAILY MAIL HEADLINE: THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Yes, I think that was part of the problem.

I'm not sure if *WE ALL KNEW* for certain. More like, given what we've learned in the last 20 years about pedophiles, the idea of Jim'll Fix It could, if one was inclined to look at it that way, with a cynical frame of mind, look a bit like grooming.

But there's some distance between "We all thought, in hindsight, it could look a bit suspect" and "We all knew".

The space between those two is why it was a joke, and not an accusation.


Geggs

As someone who actually saw the episode on its broadcast (I have 2 children under 5 and we were waiting for my Dad to pop by, but he was running late due to snow) I must admit I was a little shocked. Not on the content, which was just of 4 children characters singing their favourite songs introduced by a character wearing a vaguely Saville wig, medallion and doing an impression of how Top of the Pops was introduced while he was on it. I was shocked that the BBC were broadcasting it, but doubted that any of the intended audience would get the reference - Top of the Pops stopped broadcasting years before they were born, yet alone when Jimmy broadcast it. My reaction was 'I can't believe they're broadcasting this' and then, to be honest, I promptly forgot all about it when my family arrived.

It does seem to have caused an over-reaction now.

<BB<

An emotional response to a puppet?

WRT to March Have I got News - most people seem to have forgotten that the story that Newsnight had shelved to story broke in January 2012 by The Sunday Mirror - hard to actually find these days as the web is saturated with Savile stories - I couldn't recall which paper and when and had to read the BBC mPollard Report (http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/pollard_review/pollard_review.pdf) page 119

So when that HIGNFY was recorded the story was out there.

CHawke

of course now I know where and when it was broken - here's the story

8 January 2012

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bbc-axe-investigation-into-sir-jimmy-157675

Bluebottle



Well yes, are the BBC expected to prewatch every programme that is to be repeated for any Saville stuff?

Up until sometime last year Saville was just seen as a bit of an eccentric DJ who did stuff for charidee...then suddenly everyone was struck by the hindsight fairy and realised that he was in fact exactly what someone who goes after young adults/kids look like.

Very very few people 'knew all along'.

Based on the rep for Saville and even Jonathan King, Timmy Mallet should be watching his back as he sems to be EXACTLY what we now expect from someone who 'likes' young kids: dresses strangely, is a bit whacky and does a lot for charity and encouraged kids to wear glasses and not be bullied etc.

DISCLAIMER TO MODS - NO LIBEL INTENDED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THIS POST ***JUST THE OPPOSITE***: I AM NOT ACCUSING TIMMY MALLETT OF ANYTHING. JUST POINTING OUT HOW THESE 'WE KNEW IT' BECAUSE HE LOOKED WEIRD CAN GO TO EXTREMES.

Totally agree with last post; very well said No, everybody emphatically did not know he was a paedophile. He was a very popular entertainer right up until a few months ago- people have such short memories. The hindsight fairy indeed. Note how that article which was linked to before the story broke properly only claims one historic unproven allegation from 40 years ago! We've come a long way since then, yes, but to claim it was obvious back then. No it wasn't.

so specifically then where are you coming from?

That seems a very generalised statement, given that Savile committed sexual offences over decades, which we know now, and that child protection has changed over decades, at which point 'should people have known'

I think they've been very clear in "where specifically they are coming from": they are saying that claims that "everybody knew all along" are, quite simply, untrue.

As for when different people *should* have known, it depends entirely on what information was available to them. Answering that one with a simple one-fits-all answer *would* be a generalisation.

ok, let me rephase my question, given what Winnoch knows now, at which point would they have concerns?

and that is not with the 'hindsight fairy', it is with the actual concerns and reports that didn't go anywhere

But that's the point. I'd say my situation is representative of most people in this regard, namely:

a) I never met JS;
b) I never met any victims of JS;
c) I never heard anyone making allegations about JS;
d) I'd never even been to the places where any abuse took place;
e) I'd actually spent less than ten minutes of my life even thinking about Jimmy Savile.

And so on, and so on. Given all that, it's highly unlikely that most people could possibly have known all along.

Keeping in mind that I am American, nevertheless I don't find this Saville guy in any way attractive. In other words, he seems very off just in appearance. During the time when he was active and popular I would not have watched his stuff nor allowed my kids to do so. He seems to be Trying Too Hard and his bleached blond hair and bizarre facial expressions are very offputting. Perhaps it is a type of British humor. The thing is that I was always very attracted to certain British things like the Beatles and other English bards, Monty Python - so I think it is a matter of taste and quite honestly this guy leaves a bad taste in my mouth just on appearances alone. What I am trying to say is what were all you Brits thinking? I mean why was he even popular at all?

And no offence intended. We in America certainly have way more than our share of tasteless and tacky "entertainment."