Hard News: Media3: Whistleblower Season
100 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
BenWilson, in reply to
How do you Knock on a Bouncy Castle?
You drop it, in the direction of the try line.
-
Would that lead to a rolling maul?
"of Jobs and Growth initiatives." that is.But anyhoo.
I just watched Exposure - The other side of Jimmy Savile and couldn't help but think of the Christchurch Crèche case. Whilst, undoubtedly, Jimmy Savile was an unsavoury character by today's standards he was feted in his time and I wonder how many of his "victims" went on to valuable careers in the entertainment industry which seemed to find no wrong in the man.
Retrospect can twist judgement, especially with regard to Social mores, which is why we frown on retrospective laws.
I can see this becoming a witch hunt.
Men of that age who persist in having long blond hair are not alone in having more enthusiasm than talent it seems.
This gentleman is 71 apparently. -
Islander, in reply to
No.
He was completely under the horizon as far as I was concerned... -
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
How do you Knock on a Bouncy Castle?.
airily?
You drop it, in the direction of the try line.
ok, how do you convert a Bouncy Castle?
;- ) -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
No.
He was completely under the horizon as far as I was concerned...Then like Graeme your attention would have been engaged with higher matters than snuffling through the pages of Fabulous 208, that dirt-cheap source of popstar pinups, where you couldn't have missed his disconcertingly out of place pop-eyed gaze.
Because the big attraction of that pop cultural revolution was its promise of an unsupervised existence, free of the endorsement or otherwise of one's parents, Savile's old guy wacko image was a bit of a mystery. Even Rolf Harris was tangibly funnier back then.
-
Islander, in reply to
O struth! Never knew it existed!
But – this a person who had never heard of acid rock or indeed much
anything else from the 1960s – because I fell in love with Spanish & other guitar music, ‘black’ jazz and (hangs head in shame) film music…srsly- I found a lot of soundtracks to films I knew very well absolutely compelling…I can still sing (badly)
the Zulu dawn chorus & "Men of Harlech" from "Zulu".... -
ok, how do you convert a Bouncy Castle?
Tell it that last minute repentance doesn't wash in Bouncy Castle heaven, whilst suggestively holding a pin.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I just watched Exposure – The other side of Jimmy Savile and couldn’t help but think of the Christchurch Crèche case. Whilst, undoubtedly, Jimmy Savile was an unsavoury character by today’s standards he was feted in his time and I wonder how many of his “victims” went on to valuable careers in the entertainment industry which seemed to find no wrong in the man.
The two cases could hardly be less alike. They’re polar opposites.
The Christchurch creche case was the consequence of a weird, twitchy culture founded in a belief in so-called satanic ritual child abuse, as depicted in seminars delivered to police and social welfare workers. The chief investigating officer has sex with two of the complainant mothers. Children were interviewed repeatedly, in contravention of all good practice, until they gave the “right” answer. Most of the accused eventually had their charges dismissed, apparent victims recanted their testimony. Evidence that didn’t fit was kept from the jury and the defence. It was a travesty.
In Savile’s case, girls who complained of their abuse were ignored or even persecuted. Carers were instructed to ignore Savile selecting victims from hospital wards and taking them to his “bedroom” at the hospital because he brought in so much money in donations. There were eyewitnesses and people he told. He sexually assaulted disabled kids who couldn’t resist. There are now victims giving very clear, consistent testimony of being raped. There are, for fuck’s sake, actual broadcast TV pictures of Savile feeling up young girls.
Steve, you are really, really wrong on this.
-
David Hood, in reply to
ok, how do you convert a Bouncy Castle?
You turn it into a bouncy stonehenge
-
David Hood, in reply to
You turn it into a bouncy stonehenge
or, as my daughter just reminded me a bouncy marae
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
So … am I the only person here who had never heard of Jimmy Savile before this all became public?
Having lived in London for five years certainly had an influence on my awareness, but I was also aware of him before that via general cultural osmosis from British comics etc. And later, as an inventor of the modern idea of a working DJ. But I'd understand someone younger than me being mystified by it all. He did fade from view in his late years.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
There are, for fuck’s sake, actual broadcast TV pictures of Savile feeling up young girls.
Exactly, and nobody batted an eyelid. Now the public consciousness is going to scapegoat Savile the same way Christchurch scapegoated Ellis. The apparent reasons for the persecutions are different but it is all part of Societal change creating knee-jerk reactions, the Christchurch case stemming from cases built on historic cases of "Recovered memory", "False Memory Syndrome" or "Repressed Memory".
After 125 years of discarded enlightenment, we still act as if
victims are freaks and as if it is a virtue to be ignorant of sexual victimization.”People may have always accepted the possibility that sexual abuse can occur, but it remains debatable that people accept the reality that it actually does occur; especially the prevalence with which it occurs.
Let us say that a person’s friend or family member is a victim of sexual abuse. Would this change his look-the-other-way mentality towards the crime? This question remains debatable today just as it did prior to three decades ago. In fact, during the first seven decades of the 20th century, little was written about sexual abuse. Scholars did not consider rape and sexual abuse topics worth writing about.When writings were produced, they were filled with skepticism and fear, and downplayed the seriousness of the issue.
Before 1975, articles pertaining to rape and sexual abuse focused largely on the fear of fabricated allegations. Even as far back as Sir Matthew Hale, who served as Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench in England for several years a couple centuries ago, and who did not appear to have undue skepticism of women alleging rape wrote, “It must be remembered, that rape is an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, though never so innocent.”
I light of the change in attitude it is inevitable that some people who considered themselves to be very proper in all respects were indulging in or just indulging, behaviour which would later prove to be abhorrent to Society as a whole, they should be considered victims also. We must also remember in this particular case that Savile is dead and that the real reason for the prosecution in this case is so that all the "Good" people can, once again deny knowledge or worse,involvement.
-
Lilith __, in reply to
The apparent reasons for the persecutions are different
Yes, the reasons are that Savile abused children and that Ellis was framed.
-
Lilith __, in reply to
You turn it into a bouncy stonehenge
Wow, thanks for that David, how awesome! And I loved the bouncy marae too, and regret not bouncing on it when I had the chance.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Yes but the prosecutions are both coming from Society distancing itself from its past by placing blame on individuals. Savile would not accept that he abused children, in fact he leaped to the defence of Garry Glitter, Paul Gadd, claiming that no harm was done to anybody because Gadd had done nothing in public.
The part of the Documentary that spooked me the most was the clip from Savile's "Clunk Click" show (based around his seatbelt campaigning) where Savile escorts Gadd to sit with the young girls in the audience and "gives" him two girls "I get two?" Gadd says with glee, the programme ends with the viewer in no doubt something "naughty" was about to happen but of course nothing "Bad"
We see these images now and think "why did nobody stop them?"
It is because that was then and now is now and people like to pretend that the past is a foreign country and they are the purveyors of all things good.
The hypocrisy, it burns. -
Lilith __, in reply to
the prosecutions are both coming from Society distancing itself from its past by placing blame on individuals.
No.
The “ritual satanic abuse” alleged in the Civic Creche case did not happen: it was invented. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the case at all but the allegations were truly bizarre.
In English TV there’s a long tradition of outrageous innuendo. It’s generally supposed to be in jest. What nobody could credit about Savile was that he wasn’t joking.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
The hypocrisy, it burns.
Nothing like a good old-fahioned auto-da-fé to sort out those hypocrites.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
The “ritual satanic abuse” alleged in the Civic Creche case did not happen: it was invented.
Er, yes, by members of Society in knee-jerk panic mode fearing association with such evil doings to the point of believing such bizarre accounts from children. Why else do you imagine people would pursue such outrageous claims?
What nobody could credit about Savile was that he wasn’t joking.
Not really a question of crediting him with anything, more a case of denying what was going on and by doing so, condoning.
Another effect of this "moral panic" was the impeachment of Bill Clinton, what was once accepted as part of the trappings of power, the wooing of maidens, was used as a means of denigrating a person who would otherwise be considered "a Good guy", as was Savile in his time. My point is that the changes in societal mores can cause people to make judgements based on current standards in historical cases to distance themselves from the wrongdoing and in doing so magnify the perceived guilt.I have not come to these conclusions easily but the attitudes of the "Witch Finder Generals" and their hypocrisy make me angry.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
My point is that the changes in societal mores can cause people to make judgements based on current standards in historical cases to distance themselves from the wrongdoing and in doing so magnify the perceived guilt.
And you make your 'point' in the service of what - as an apologist for abuse and exploitation of the vulnerable by the powerful, as if personal moral codes are some kind of arbitrary nicety?
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Makes Jimmy Saville look positively angelic.
Yeah, Steve, because whatever you’d say about John Key and Mitt Romney they’re exactly like a sexual predator who non-metaphorically abused hundreds of women over decades while a non-trivial number of people were more interested in protecting their institutional mana than actual human beings. .
-
I light of the change in attitude it is inevitable that some people who considered themselves to be very proper in all respects were indulging in or just indulging, behaviour which would later prove to be abhorrent to Society as a whole, they should be considered victims also.
If we could keep the label 'victim' for people who were sexually abused, and they can choose whether or not it fits them, not for the people were the abusing them, I'd feel slightly less sickened. Thanks.
-
Matthew Littlewood, in reply to
In Savile’s case, girls who complained of their abuse were ignored or even persecuted. Carers were instructed to ignore Savile selecting victims from hospital wards and taking them to his “bedroom” at the hospital because he brought in so much money in donations. There were eyewitnesses and people he told. He sexually assaulted disabled kids who couldn’t resist. There are now victims giving very clear, consistent testimony of being raped. There are, for fuck’s sake, actual broadcast TV pictures of Savile feeling up young girls
Yes, it was the sheer calculated and systematic nature of the abuse-- and the levels of the cover-up -that sickened me the most. You wonder why and how it got to the stage where Savile became (ironically) beyond reproach. I mean, it clearly went beyond the usual "that was a different time then" social mores: people knew about it, and knew it was bad. Even the notorious Louis Theroux doco tiptoed around him- although ultimately its portrait did poke somewhat under the supposedly harmless "eccentric" exterior, suggesting a man who cultivated everything for effect. The clip showing him boast about his "no tolerance" policy as a DJ (look it up on Youtube) was quietly chilling.
Oh, and good show this week Russell: the discussion around whistleblowing, particularly Hager's comments, were instructive.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Yeah, Steve, because whatever you’d say about John Key and Mitt Romney they’re exactly like a sexual predator
No, more like the kind of people that send your kids off to kill a non-trivial number of women and children in other countries for their natural resources.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
as if personal moral codes are some kind of arbitrary nicety?
I wish that weren't so, I wish that there were a set of moral codes that worked, that crossed the boundaries of religion and politics but there are not and the codes we have are constantly changing. That was my point.
Graham Caphill had morals, or so he told us. -
Steve Barnes, in reply to
I’d feel slightly less sickened. Thanks.
Yeah well, I am really sorry that it made you feel a bit ikky. Perhaps you would like to be called a victim too.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.