Top of The Pops producers who first signed up Jimmy Savile in the 1960s thought he was ‘dodgy’ because of his background on the club scene in Leeds
Savile’s background sparked initial concerns among the show’s bosses
It is claimed he was thought of as ‘dodgy’ and ‘you didn’t cross him’
But despite that the BBC hired him and he went on to be a regular Top of the Pops presenter for 20 years
The Corporation now embroiled in a sex scandal after scores of women claim they were abused by the DJ
By Leon Watson 2 November 2012
The BBC producers who first signed up Jimmy Savile to present Top of the Pops had doubts over whether he was suitable and thought he was ‘dodgy’, it was claimed last night.
Savile’s background as a club DJ and manager sparked initial concerns among the show’s bosses in the early 1960s before the allegations of sex abuse that have now engulfed the BBC emerged.
Paul Jackson, the producer of hits shows Red Dwarf and The Young Ones, and a former head entertainment at both the BBC and ITV, said BBC entertainment producers initially rejected Savile….
Jimmy Savile was an emperor with no clothes – and a celebrity cloak
Savile’s invisible but dazzling cloak of fame stopped everyone from suggesting he was exactly the scary, child-catching creature he seemed to be
Deborah Orr The Guardian, Friday 2 November 2012
It’s part of the grooming process to persuade the victim it’s wrong to think badly of the abuser. In that respect, Jimmy Savile groomed the nation. Children rarely said the emperor was naked – sometimes all too literally. But even when one did, the cry was never taken up. Adults also kept their suspicions quiet, even when they were strong. It seemed wrong to think badly of Savile, though many secretly did.
It’s telling, this collective failure to point at Savile and suggest he was just the scary, child-catching creature of nightmare he appeared to be. People tend to believe what’s easier to bear. Sadly it’s easier for a child to bear the idea that they deserve abuse than it is for them to believe the adult world does not protect the innocent….
Jim fixed nothing: Growing up in 1970s England with Jimmy Savile
Magical figure now accused of widespread abuse
Chris Jones Theater critic November 4, 2012
….There have been so many claims made against him — many of which entail stories of abuse involving girls, barely in their teens — that Savile’s estate was frozen Thursday by bankers who have realized that they will likely need to pay compensation. If Savile’s knighthood had not officially died with him in 2011, that would likely be gone too. His name has been stripped from buildings. An honorary degree has been rescinded. Even his gravestone has been broken up and sent to a landfill.
As with the Jerry Sandusky affair at Penn State University — with which the Savile affair has many horrible similarities — there has been a great deal of fallout from what appears to have been a multi-decade sequence of abuse by a TV star, cloaked in philanthropic good works, who had his own keys allowing him access to children’s hospitals and so much power that nobody dared take him on. There is the question of why his bosses and colleagues at the BBC, many of whose careers are now besmirched, did not confront him, given the repeated rumors of his attraction to young girls. As at Penn State, Savile’s bosses did nothing for, it seems, much the same reasons: It would be messy; it wasn’t entirely clear, if you didn’t want it to be; it might upset bigger bosses; and the brand of the organization (both, strikingly, are nonprofits) would be hurt by the finding out of the truth.
If the Sandusky affair revealed much that was disturbing about the culture of college sports, the Savile affair has done the same for the British media, especially in those tightly controlled pre-Internet days, when personal brands were carefully protected, bad behavior was laughed off as good showbiz fun and outside reporters could easily be manipulated or purchased. Savile, it now is clear, was a master of such manipulations, maintaining distinct private and public personas with formidable care. So potent was his brand and so associated was it with the unassailable, he just had to dangle a few threats about charities and money he raises for children, and the nosy reporter would look elsewhere for those rumors about underage girls. Ordinary pop stars didn’t raise all that cash for kids. Easier to bring them down.