You can show video of Hitler but not Saville?

[gr1340]

So the BBC had to apologise for showing Jimmy Saville on iplayer. Yes, what he did was bad but do people really expect him to be wiped from visual records for all of time?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-29308...

So why are you allowed to show footage of Hitler, effectively responsible for millions of deaths? Surely that is much worse?

[zuby84]

There's too much pandering to the "easily offended." Read these fora for a while and you'll realise just how many of these people are out there.

[Dracoro]

What is the issue, is it Savile and what he did (as you say, plenty of other evil people on TV etc.)?

I suspect the real reason they are "censoring" it is due to fhe BBCs association with Savile, the shame etc....

[OldSkoolRS]

At the rate things are going the BBC will have to censor so much of 1970s TV that there won't be any left. On the bright side it'll stop them doing these tedious 'sounds of the 70s' type programs. (I grew up the 70s and enjoyed the music at the time, but FFS move on please).

[GTIR]

If Saville was Jewish/Muslim/Christian I bet they'd still show it for fear of offence.

[-Pete-]

Anybody got a clip of that 1944 Top Of Ze Pops?

[steveo3002]

-Pete- said:

Anybody got a clip of that 1944 Top Of Ze Pops?

[-Pete-]

steveo3002 said:

-Pete- said:

Anybody got a clip of that 1944 Top Of Ze Pops?

PH never disappoints...

[aw51 121565]

OldSkoolRS said:

At the rate things are going the BBC will have to censor so much of 1970s TV that there won't be any left. On the bright side it'll stop them doing these tedious 'sounds of the 70s' type programs. (I grew up the 70s and enjoyed the music at the time, but FFS move on please).

That they are - as expected - censoring-to-death just shows what a fractured organisation they are .

Talk about a half-baked idea... the past is the past, it cannot be changed no matter how we try . On this basis, the BBC - once again - is not fit for purpose .

[Mr GrimNasty]

Erasing people from history is just sinister, and pointless. The sort of nonsense best left to North Korea, China, Russia, Greenpeace etc.

[Jimshorts]

I think this censorship of history gives you some interesting thought experiments: I don't expect to hear Gary Glitter - Leader of the Gang ever again, likewise Rolf Harris won't be getting too many more royalty cheques, those Scouts on the roller coaster have had their 30 years of fame etc.

My thought experiment is what would happen if a huge star, say Michael Jackson for instance or one of The Beatles had been convicted of fiddling - would you never hear another Michael Jackson, Jackson 5 or Beatles record played again?

[Pommygranite]

Its not about Saville, its about the BBC.

No company would retain public promotion of one of its employees if that person had committed crimes inextricably linked to that company.

For example if Barings Bank was still around they wouldnt have Nick Leeson on their 'About Us' link.

Hitler affected global history, Saville committed crimes whilst in part working for an employer.

[anonymous-user]

Pommygranite said:

Hitler affected global history, Saville committed crimes whilst in part working for an employer.

This.
Footage of Htiler is pretty much always used in historic context when documenting what he did and what he stood for.
Hitler was, ultimately, a world leader - just not a very pleasant one.
Savile was simply a grubby paedophile.

[Type R Tom]

Question, if you were directly affected by what he did I can see how seeing him on TV could be unpleasant but would you watch 70’s TOTP repeats? If you weren’t directly affected why is seeing him on TV that bad? Again why put yourself in a situation where you could be offended?

As I’ve never had anything “bad” happen to me, I do find it difficult to understand how people get so easily “offended” by so many different things.

[Pommygranite]

Type R Tom said:

Question, if you were directly affected by what he did I can see how seeing him on TV could be unpleasant but would you watch 70’s TOTP repeats? If you weren’t directly affected why is seeing him on TV that bad? Again why put yourself in a situation where you could be offended?

As I’ve never had anything “bad” happen to me, I do find it difficult to understand how people get so easily “offended” by so many different things.

Whats the good in showing something from 40 years ago for entertainment purposes? nostalgia?

Now whats the good in showing something involving your most notorious employee?

Its only going to blow up and be perceived badly all for the sake of what? showing your back book for entertainment purposes. Not exactly a compelling reason.

I would say that the BBC are using a little bit of sensitive judgement and I'm pretty sure that everyones world is not worse off by not having a repeat of Top of the Pops on telly.

[Butter Face]

RIP reruns of Animal Hospital too

[SWoll]

Pommygranite said:

Whats the good in showing something from 40 years ago for entertainment purposes? nostalgia?

Now whats the good in showing something involving your most notorious employee?

Its only going to blow up and be perceived badly all for the sake of what? showing your back book for entertainment purposes. Not exactly a compelling reason.

I would say that the BBC are using a little bit of sensitive judgement and I'm pretty sure that everyones world is not worse off by not having a repeat of Top of the Pops on telly.

Couldn't agree more.

[Type R Tom]

Pommygranite said:

Whats the good in showing something from 40 years ago for entertainment purposes? nostalgia?

Now whats the good in showing something involving your most notorious employee?

Its only going to blow up and be perceived badly all for the sake of what? showing your back book for entertainment purposes. Not exactly a compelling reason.

I would say that the BBC are using a little bit of sensitive judgement and I'm pretty sure that everyones world is not worse off by not having a repeat of Top of the Pops on telly.

My Mum absolutely loves the old repeats as she is from that age group, if you are too young or old you may not care but for it but you have the potential to lose a lot of history, live performances from band and artists that have long since split or died. Youtube aside, it’s not easy to see old acts and unless the BBC are willing to do some serious editing a lot of history will be lost.

[anonymous-user]

It did amuse me that the headline "BBC apologises for airing Jimmy Savile appearance" is directly above an enormous photo of him.

[CYMR0]

I'm fairly sure that if Hitler had been a popular light entertainment presenter, you wouldn't see much of his work in the media today, ignoring the fact that the same applies to any German-speaking radio announcers of the 1920s.

So it's hardly like-for-like.