That was then this is now then

The crime scene


The British Broadcasting Corporation will not survive ‘Savilegate’.

Internal inquiries are ongoing. Reports will emerge in due course etc, but we’ve witnessed this process often enough: the subject of the inquiry is a vital pillar of The State, for example – the result will be expensive whitewash. First-world media-saturated mass-consciousness has assimilated the identifying features – we grew up with this stuff and know a fractal when we see one.

By the time any reasonable, objective analyst has access to comprehensive archives of the inquiries, trials, prosecutions, appeals – and concomitant horse-trading/confessionals – the likelihood is that Scotland will have declared itself an independent nation, thereby rendering ‘BBC’ a misnomer.

Aside from the exponentially festering pustule which is ‘Savilegate’, we heard recently that ‘Auntie Beeb’ instructs thousands of her highest earners to avoid paying tax. She does so while simultaneously producing expensive scare-campaigns – spanning print, billboard, online, radio and television – threatening to hunt-down and prosecute every wretch who hasn’t coughed-up their annual wodge for the privilege of being bombarded with State propaganda.

Now exposed as a safe haven for paedophiles, some typical views emerging from those inside the organisation when the ‘alleged’ abuse was ongoing: ‘everyone knew it was happening but we couldn’t say anything’; ‘I’ve never heard of such a thing, would never have dreamt it possible’; ‘I maybe just had a quick feel of some bird, but you can’t class me along with that perv’.

If this isn’t ‘doublethink’ straight from the heart of the Ministry for Information, what is it?

Apologists – some, to their burning shame, female – bleat that it was ‘just the sort of thing that used to happen’ because ‘it was such a male-dominated place’. This is the circular reasoning of last-resort used by sociopaths and chronic narcissists. By the same logic, no-one should ever have bothered to raise the issue of boys or girls in same-sex institutions being systematically abused, tortured, raped, and sometimes murdered by their elders.

Academic studies of the BBC’s output have been ongoing since the late 70’s (most notably by Greg Philo, John Eldridge, David Miller et al in the Glasgow University Media Unit). The bias, spin, innuendo, crafty editing has been recorded, analysed, catalogued: the perpetuation of stereotypes; denigration of so-called ‘lower-classes’; gestures towards ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’; blatant pro-Israel/US support; pointed ignorance of any subject which may cause ‘embarrassment’ to the Establishment; cloying sycophancy accompanying coverage of any matters ‘Royal’; fetishistic focus on anything bearing the Union flag; avoidance of any fora which may enable ‘live’ discussion on matters ‘political’; inability to assimilate/incorporate social media; shameless self-promotion bordering on corporate masturbation, etc.

If the BBC archive isn’t a case-study in straightforward brainwashing, it will suffice until a more obvious model comes along.

‘Auntie’ employs approximately 24,000 people – many of them are (or were) talented, driven and resourceful. They are employed by a decrepit quango which lurches from one crisis to the next, constantly struggling to define its own role – a withered limb of an ailing State, unfit for purpose, embarrassingly anachronistic, and doomed to oblivion when the secession of the UK’s constituent parts becomes a reality.

It should be remembered that the BBC was established in 1922 – most of us have relatives or neighbours who were alive before it existed. It behaves as though entitled to the same deference accorded great institutions of State, mythologises itself, lays claim to ‘tradition’ when all it has ever done is react to technological advance whilst kowtowing to mandarins and ministers. It purports to hold a mirror to the world, but reflects a long-gone era where ‘Brittania’ meant something.

Come its centennial, the BBC may comprise nothing more than a large-ish public relations outfit subsidised by Boris Johnson’s London Parliament. Right now, in Scotland, where many of us will forever be grateful for the good times – for Dads Army, Jeremy Paxman, Jimmy Hill, Porridge, Swapshop, Nationwide and The Mr Men – it will not be missed.

We have more than enough talent here to establish a national broadcaster which does not rely upon a poll-tax to fund itself, knows what it’s purpose is – an alliance of local broadcasters, working with home-grown filmmakers, writers, artists, musicians, across all genres, collaborating with our neighbours on the mainland and overseas, dedicated to the promotion of knowledge and societal progress, with an agenda based on the single most important quality the BBC demonstrably lacks – common decency.

There are thousands of experienced professionals in this country who are weary of the BBC, of the mendacity, mediocrity, cowardice and corruption it has come to represent. They know they can create a viable, vibrant (and, yes, profitable) alternative at a time when Scotland faces upheaval of such magnitude that no-one else can or should be entrusted with that task. Their colleagues in the BBC’s other ‘regions’ are every bit as aware of what is happening, and what the implications are.

It’s not easy letting go of a loved one. Most of us have aunties we cherish, who are bound to our memories in a way that parents or friends never are. But when their time comes? It’s best for all concerned that they go quickly, without fuss.

Comments (0)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published.

  1. All is there for us to see,but getting something done is the hardest part.There are those in the “Establishment” that need this “Propaganda Machine” to keep us plebs in “our place”,that is the real fight and it is an intllectual war,and I’m not equiped with the intellect to fight it,(could be cannon fodder like us plebs usually are”!

    1. Hi CPO’B-
      Perhaps you don’t feel equipped to fight them, but you have the will, and that’s what they really fear – I couldn’t agree more that this is an ‘intellectual war’, but who’s to define what ‘intellectual’ is? For some, it means a certain attitude, a particular world-view, and has pejorative connotations. For others, it refers simply to people who use their minds – according to the latter, few folk would consider themselves NOT to be ‘intellectual’. We all like to think that we do use our minds, and use them well – episodes like this, where propaganda and powerful vested interests combine, are a test for all of us, not just of intellect, but the ability to face up to unpleasant facts and act accordingly.

  2. Ian Smith says:

    A YES vote can sort out the BBC problem for Scotland. In the interim it can be rebranded as the BPC – British Paedophilia Corporation.

  3. bellacaledonia says:

    Today’s news that Children In Need had Savile on an Unwanted list for the last ten years should send shivers down the spine of everyone who suspected a major cover-up. Now we know this is the case. Heads must roll.


    1. Precisely. All else is fluff – how many establishment cover-ups do we have to witness before we get a grip and do something about it? This thread has thrown up some nasty stuff – unusual for BellaC. If folk are getting angered here, it’s because many of us have never faced such seismic change. Whether we like it or not, the landscape is shifting, and unless we want to see the usual suspects moving-in to claim the new territory, we’d better get our heads around how we’re going to stake our claims. From a selfish PoV, that means instigating and pursuing thorough debate of the sort that the BBC and MSM dare not. They’ve had their chance of late, but blown it big-time – barring some spectacular volte-face among mainstream MSM organs, the snidey, petty, vindictive propaganda will just get worse.
      FWIW, I don’t agree that there will ever be a SBC – if there is, it could easily become what Tam Dean Burn fears. Editorial control should never be subjected to market forces – if in doubt about that, ask the editors of whatever ‘quality’ newspapers remain in this country. (BTW, anyone care to take a bet on there being no Herald or Scotsman ‘dead-tree’ version come the 2016 election?)
      If we ever do end-up with Jocks Fox News? We’ll only have ourselves to blame. The fact that it could happen is an unpleasant reality we have to deal with, elsewise the ‘independence’ so many of us crave won’t be something worth celebrating.
      I attended an SSP meeting in Irvine tonight. One of the members who lives in the town-centre pointed out that he sees, passing his window on a daily basis, kids who don’t have decent shoes, are wearing unsuitable clothes, who are probably among the 25% of Scottish kids currently living in ‘official’ poverty – all across this country, thousands of our own children are going to bed hungry every night. Facts don’t get much more unpleasant than that, and in the face of the imminent cuts, that’s what the real ‘debate’ must be about – any media who stop us having that debate right now are media we just don’t need.

      1. Thanks Ian. I too was worried about what’s being thrown up here- its got pretty personal and reactionary. Apologies if I seemed to start it by gaun oot guisin as pretentious flippancy. I’m so glad you saw my serious points. To me, there’s two big dodgy areas- firstly, joining forces with those who have long wanted to destroy the BBC and those who are seeking to pin all the paedo blame there, letting all the other institutional child abuse off the hook. And allowing very reactionary forces, possibly displayed here, to try to stir up vigilante style politics- eg BNP anti-paedo fronts.
        Secondly, I think, Ian, you led the presumption that the referendum is already won, possibly rendering the BBC redundant. Suppose it isn’t? Shouldn’t we pay attention to Kevin’s warning that whatever the outcome, we are all still here and have to get on with things together. I’m all for a debate of what culture and media can mean now and not letting finance capital swallow it up. That’s what, to me, the debate around Creative Scotland is about- not letting the market dictate and it’s great you raise the spectre ( today of all days- Halloween!) of socialism as the force that must come to the fore with answers to all these creepy and creeping fascist problems.

      2. Bill McLean says:

        TDB – reactionary? MACarthyism!

  4. O aye, roll on/roll oot Jocks Fox News eh at least Murdoch has Scottish roots and aye make a profit in never-never aye-aye lulu land…

    1. Tam,
      Fit like?
      You did a memorable production of my Tales of The Great Unwashed years back with the Radio Resonance Orchestra. I’ve always wanted the chance to say ‘thanks’, didn’t expect to see you pop up here.
      So, ‘thanks!’

      1. Cheers Ian, I loved your Unwashed and read more on the Resonance show I did with Gareth Sager- he played along with them I think. Will dig them out & find you

      2. If you could make it to Neu Reekie on Nov 22, I could bring copies…

      3. Top man. I’ll try and make it. Cheers.

    2. John Muir says:

      “aye-aye lulu land” What an obnoxious comment. I can see from your comment bellow you also hate tartan or at least are content to use it to insult Scots. May I remind you our culture was created in the union. How convenient for unionists that it can also be used to belittle us. Your attitude stinks. If you really feel less able to look after your own affairs than your betters in London I insist you give me your money each month and I will decide how much you require.

  5. Bill McLean says:

    Tam Dean Burn – are you apologizing for a corporation that allowed paedophilia to take place within it’s buildings? You’d rather that than our own broadcasting system?

  6. I’m not apologising for anyone, just suggesting not throwing the beebie oot wi the mingin bath water & raising the spectre of Sky4Skots. And your second question smacks of MACarthyism tae me…

    1. Bill McLean says:

      MACarthyism – what utter gibberish!

      1. I’d suggest your second question fits a definition of gibberish- unnecessarily pretentious or vague language. You paint an “utterly” simplistic choice- paeado beebo or “our own broadcasting system” – black&white (& tartan all over) tv stylee…

    2. Spout says:

      Tam, brother, take that splinter of cringe out of your own will not have to carry that burden of anglo-centric shame for too much longer. We will have an SBC. It will reflect our culture and employ gifted people in Scotland.Reflecting Scotland is not parochial. We get parochial now – London parochial.

    3. vronsky says:

      Go on, guddle around in the slime. I think you’ll find there is no baby in that rank bathwater.

  7. muttley79 says:

    The BBC has a lot of enemies in the right-wing media. They have been waiting patiently for a opportunity like this. The Conservatives might seize this chance as well to at least clip their wings. They have privatised almost everything else after all. Remember Cameron said the English NHS would be safe in his hands.

    1. Clunk click that’s their trip alright.

      1. Bill McLean says:

        You should take a look at the first post I commented on and ask yourself about “pretentiousness” – I painted no choice but commented with disgust at you defending the BBC in relation to your arrogant remark about “Jocks Fox news” and your arrogant and ignorant comment about la la land. You excuse paedophilia i’ll make my own judgements.

    2. vronsky says:

      Do try to keep up. The BEEB was privatised some time ago. Oh, but you pay taxes to them? As you do to the railways. Are they publically owned?

      1. muttley79 says:


        What is point of your “Do try to keep up” comment. You are being an obnoxious twat. Don’t try to be a smart arse. Comprende?

  8. fitheach says:

    Yesterday, a blogger continued his 6 year FoI battle against the BBC when he attended an Information Rights Tribunal instigated by him. Setting aside your personal views on climate change it is interesting to note the lengths to which the BBC will hide its decision making processes. A brief report of the proceedings [1] and the blogger’s website [2] are noted below.

  9. The BBC is part of the ‘Establishment’ and was never a public service broadcaster which is the problem with it as it is not accountable to us the general public which is why they can get away with “Not in our opinion” if one complains. If it was not protected by the establishment it would of been closed down and the boys in blue would be swarming over them like flies on a cowpat before they remove evidence linking Savile further up the food chain which is where the real problem lies.

    Would they be missed? not by me as I can live without their propaganda brainwashing day after day. Listen to their reporting of the financial crisis in getting those ‘experts’ who were part of the problem to broadcast that the crash was unforeseen rather than speak to people who had been warning of the impending bubble for years beforehand and giving the reason why.

    ‘Auntie Beeb has turned into the Sleazy Uncle’ courtesy of the Daily Record.

  10. Disco says:

    Tam Dean Burn appears to be an anagram of Under Batman.

  11. bellacaledonia says:

    The recent LRB essay by Andrew O’Hagan is a must read on how the BBC got to this point. He makes some perceptive points when he writes:

    “There’s something creepy about British light entertainment and there always has been. Joe Orton meets the Marquis de Sade at the end of the pier, with a few Union Jacks fluttering in the stink and a mother-in-law tied in bunting to a ducking-stool. Those of us who grew up on it liked its oddness without quite understanding how creepy it was. I mean, Benny Hill? And then we wake up one day, in 2012, and wonder why so many of them turned out to be deviants and weirdos. ”

    Full article:

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.