PhilGlass wrote:I am the first to disagree with guilty without a trial, but in this case there is no need.The stories are accepted as gospel truth because the evidence is gospel.
Circular arguments generally do not (and should not) stand up in court.
I fear you may have misinterpreted the meaning of my original replies and the implications of this form of "journalism".
Trial by press (and that's what we're talking about here, not some recently deceased pederast) is as anti-democratic as you can get. There's nothing complicated about it. Unless I'm mistaken Savile was presumed guilty by the public within hours of accusations (accusations mind, not proof) being published. Threats of (or actual) graveyard desecration occurred straight away. I don't seek to defend Savile, child abuse of any kind is appalling and utterly reprehensible. What I'm saying is, this sort of instant acceptance and tacit approval of anything reported is very dangerous, and as anyone with a sense of history will acknowledge, far from unprecedented. At its core the entire episode is a calculated diversion, didn't take long for politicians to jump on the outrage bandwagon did it? And it sells product, big time. Advertising rates go through the roof.
As always, no offense mate, just a difference of opinion

though i'm at a loss to say where, all i did was agree with your original premise for this topic.