LONDON — In the growing storm surrounding the BBC's handling of an investigation of child sexual abuse accusations against one of its longtime television hosts, the network's current director general has largely stood as the public face of the revered institution, enduring heated inquiries from Parliament and the stinging outrage of viewers.
But with details of the case about the host, Jimmy Savile, spilling out day by day, questions are increasingly being directed at a wider range of executives, particularly Mark Thompson, who until recently was the BBC's director general and is the incoming president and chief executive of The New York Times.
Mr. Thompson, the BBC's chief from 2004 to last month, was not in charge during the years when Mr. Savile is now said to have engaged in widespread pedophilia. But he was when Mr. Savile died at age 84 last October and two branches of the network set off in very different directions to examine the life of the eccentric host.
Precisely why an investigation by the BBC program "Newsnight" into pedophilia accusations against Mr. Savile was killed while a package of Christmastime tributes to the host was broadcast was at the heart of a parliamentary hearing on Tuesday that featured an uncomfortable and apologetic George Entwistle, the current director general.
In the wake of that hearing, Roger Gale, a former BBC producer and current member of Parliament, asked in a statement why Mr. Entwistle's predecessors were not being pressed for answers, "most particularly the man who was in the hot seat when the 'Newsnight' decision was taken, Mark Thompson?" Mr. Gale's statement, reported in the news media here on Wednesday, said Mr. Thompson was well paid "to, apparently, not know what was going on under his own roof." The director general at the BBC is both chief executive and editor in chief.
Also Tuesday, another member of Parliament, Rob Wilson, who has publicly sought answers from Mr. Thompson, released a letter that pointedly said the former BBC executive had taken "the opportunity to correct and clarify" his earlier statement on the episode.
Since the scandal broke this month, Mr. Thompson has said he knew nothing about the 'Newsnight' investigation while it was under way, had no role in canceling it and also had heard none of the suspicions about Mr. Savile. He has agreed to answer questions by Parliament and by the independent investigators examining the events at the BBC.
The parliamentary hearings are mostly on hold awaiting the outcome of the independent investigations. And John Whittingdale, the chairman of Parliament's Culture, Media and Sport Committee, which held Tuesday's hearing, said he did not know if the panel ultimately would question Mr. Thompson.
"At the moment, we're told he had no knowledge of the 'Newsnight' investigation," Mr. Whittingdale said. "If reasons arise to talk to him, we will do so."
But he said that based on testimony already heard about how decisions are made on programming, the BBC's director general "doesn't get dragged into these things."
Mr. Thompson's version of his role has shifted somewhat over the past 10 days.
In a statement released on Oct. 13, Mr. Thompson issued a blanket denial of any knowledge of the squelched BBC report. "I was not notified or briefed about the 'Newsnight' investigation," he said, adding that "during my time as director general of the BBC, I never heard any allegations or received any complaints about Jimmy Savile."
But on Tuesday, in a letter in response to Mr. Wilson, the Parliament member, Mr. Thompson appeared to adjust his answer slightly, saying, "I was never formally notified about the 'Newsnight' investigation and was not briefed about the allegations they were examining and to what extent, if at all, those allegations related to Savile's work at the BBC."
In that letter, he said he was approached at a reception late last year by a journalist who mentioned the BBC investigative report and "said words to the effect of 'You must be worried about the "Newsnight" investigation.' " He wrote that he later asked news executives about it and was told that there had been an investigation but that the television program "had decided not to proceed with it on journalistic grounds."
Matthew Purdy reported from London, and Christine Haughney from New York.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
British Lawmakers Question Ex-BBC Chief’s Role
Dengan url
https://dunialuasekali.blogspot.com/2012/10/british-lawmakers-question-ex-bbc.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
British Lawmakers Question Ex-BBC Chief’s Role
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
British Lawmakers Question Ex-BBC Chief’s Role
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar