This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Pedophilia Article WatchWikipedia:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchTemplate:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchPedophilia Article Watch
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
What is the way forward for this article? Well, at least some of it can be merged into the Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal article, while the part concerning the appalling treatment of Lord McAlpine by Newsnight may be better at something line 2012 Newsnight controversy. Any thoughts? Paul MacDermott (talk) 21:51, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that what may be needed - but can't be written yet - is an article covering the culture in the BBC in the 1950s-80s (say) that permitted the abuse to take place. It can't really be written until the Dame Janet Smith inquiry reports.[1] Otherwise, the Savile material in this article should be merged back into the Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal article, and details of any criminal prosecutions that arise should be in the Operation Yewtree article. The claims against individuals like Derek McCulloch and Stuart Hall, who worked at the BBC, are not at all directly related to Savile, and should be covered in their own biographical articles - unless and until it becomes obvious that they were part of a wider culture, when they should also be linked from a new Smith inquiry article. The McAlpine / Newsnight case is different as it doesn't relate in any way to abuse by BBC employees, but rather to the BBC's journalistic standards and management. It's covered at various articles at present, including the articles on McAlpine, Newsnight, and the North Wales child abuse scandal which (rather than the Savile scandal) is where the story began. It's also covered at Criticism of the BBC and BBC controversies. There's a case for that whole affair to be in a separate new article (2012 BBC ''Newsnight'' controversy) - but, in the meantime, I think it is best tackled at the "Criticism of the BBC" article - which should focus on criticism of the BBC as an organisation, rather than on specific broadcasts. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:34, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We certainly have this subject dealt with in too many articles. Whatever happened was not directly the fault of the BBC or its senior management.
Savile was a low-level employee. We clearly need an article on what he did.
At the next level, we need an article that also covers other allegations, with a "main" link to the Savile article. This should only contain a summary of the above.
Above that comes (again with a "main" link) the BBC controversies article, again with no more than a summary of the above.
I would suggest that the McAlpine controversy does not belong in any of these except the last. It is a case of very poor journalism, not (as far as BBC is concerned) a case of sexual abuse at all. There was a victim of sexual abuse, but by a person who remains unknown. It is a question of who the policeman who referred to a Tory treasurer meant. I suspect that every branch has a treasurer. It is possible that a policeman thought it not worth his while investigating an allegation by a boy in a children's home against an apparently prominent member of society with influence, but that is merely my opinion.
I would suggest that the Criticisms article should not refer to the matter at all, save possibly by a link to the Controversies article.
It will nodoubt be necessary, after amendment, to defend the articles against officious people, who will object to these changes and want to put excessive detail back in. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:26, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
so far seven people from the bbc have been imprisioned Stuart Hall, Chris Denning, Michael Souter, Peter Rowell, A bbc engineer Darren Shearer and the bbc chauffeur David Smith killed himself. I think this article should be updated to show not only people's opinions on the bbc in the media but also the actual people who have been convicted and imprisioned who have worked there. and how can you say savile was a 'low-level-employee'??? he ammased millions of pounds in money from his job with the bbc...doh...and there are still court cases going on at the moment with 'former employees'. jakthelad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.73.33 (talk) 11:54, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
