Resource: "College of Journalism" blog at BBC Academy

Ran across the "College of Journalism" blog hosted by the BBC Academy.  They're doing a good job "discussing current technical, ethical, production and craft issues in journalism."  I'll add a link to the resources list and encourage readers to explore, and try to monitor and share its efforts.

College of Journalism blog, BBC Academy

Yet Another BBC Sex Scandal?

A new book is claiming that two senior staffers with BBC's hallmark Sci-Fi series Doctor Who used their positions to sexually exploit young men, amny of whom were under the legal age of consent at the time.  The allegations appear in a new biography of the series' longest-serving (1980-1989) producer, John Nathan-Turner.  The book's author described his own experience of being propositioned while visiting the studio at age 17:

‘It happened after the first time I was invited to up to go and see a recording of the show, and he [Nathan-Turner] got a bit frisky, shall we say.
‘I was a bit taken aback; I was only 17 and . . . he said to me, “You’re so f****** provincial”. And of course I was f******* provincial, I came from Bishop's Stortford, I didn't know about anything.
'I just thought I was in this kind of wonderland that was Television Centre, thinking it was an amazing place, and so I wasn't really prepared for anything really sophisticated.'

The book's author, Richard Marson, describes Nathan-Turner as a gay man taking advantage of the situation he was in, rather than a predator.  That label he reserves for Nathan-Turners' partner, Gary Downie, who served as Production Manager, and who Marson says assaulted him in an elevator on a later visit to the BBC studios.
  In the wake of earlier allegations, the BBC has established a review commission to look into allegations, and whether the BBC's culture of aloofness contributed to the problem.  As for these particular allegations, a BBC spokesman said they would be referred to the Dame Janet Smith Review.

Source -  Two senior Doctor Who staff 'used their jobs to sexually exploit young male fans of BBC show in 1980s',  Mail Online

BBC scandal fallout at NY Times

It looks like the continuing child abuse scandals will also have ramifications for the NY Times.  Back in August I posted on the Times' decision to hire Mark Thompson as its new President and CEO.  The decision raised several eyebrows - Thompson, who had been Director General of the BBC, had no print experience and no commercial media experience; in addition the deal was quite lucrative ($1 million salary; with bonuses, $8 million for the first year) for an organization that had been losing a lot of money for a long time ($143 million last quarter alone).  Thompson started his new job at the Times this week.

  Thompson's tenure as Director General of the BBC included the period when the first abuse scandal (involving BBC presenter and personality Jimmy Savile) surfaced - and when someone at the BBC killed an investigation of the allegations by their news team.
  Thompson initially claimed to have no knowledge of the allegations or the questions surrounding Newsnight's investigation or its termination.  After documents started surfacing showing that his BBC office had been sent clippings of other news reports of the emerging scandal as part of the daily news briefing sent to BBC executives, and that his office had fielded numerous inquiries, Thompson reiterated his ignorance, saying he never bothered to read the morning clippings and wasn't told about any inquiries.  Then, he changed the wording of the denial a bit, to say that he had never been formally notified of any child abuse allegations or the Newsnight investigation.  Even that denial's being questioned as it now turns out that lawyers representing Mr. Thompson (while he was still BBC Director General) sent a letter to the London Sunday Times threatening to sue for libel if it carried any story about the Newsnight investigation or its cancellation of its investigation.  The letter, by the way, contained a detailed summary of the allegations against Savile.
  As questions mounted, NY Times chairman and publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., sent a letter to Times staff expressing his continued support for his new CEO.

"Our opinion was then and remains now that he possesses high ethical standards and is the ideal person to lead our company."

I've got to wonder a bit about the nature of that support and proclamations of ethics, as evidence mounts that, at a minimum, Thompson's office staff and lawyers were aware of both scandals (allegations that Savile had a long history of child abuse, including on BBC premises) and Newsnight's cancelled investigation), and thus Thompson had every opportunity to find out about them.  It's becoming pretty clear that one of three things is true - 1) Thompson's lying about his ignorance of the matters; 2) that as Director General of the BBC, he never bothered to follow current events, get briefings on inquiries and issues directed to his office from his staff, or bothered to read letters sent on his behalf by his lawyers; or  3) that he tried to insulate himself from matters by directing staff and lawyers to make sure they didn't "formally" tell him anything.
  As a former BBC producer and current member of Parliament Roger Gale quipped. Thompson was very well paid “to, apparently, not know what was going on under his own roof.”

  The NY Times' public editor reaches similar conclusions - 1) That Thompson, as editor in chief and Director General, should have known and had ample opportunity to find out; 2) That Thompson's story with respect to the Newsnight investigation has "evolved" (i.e., changed).  Still, he and Sulzberger feel that Times coverage of the BBC scandals and their new boss has been thorough, as if that, and not the personal ethics and competence of their new CEO, was the issue.
 

  In addition to the above, Thompson's likely to also get linked to the latest BBC/Newsnight child abuse scandal, where they falsely accused a retired politician of child abuse.  (The BBC's acknowledged its fault in a recent settlement of the resulting libel claim, along with coughing up a large settlement) As it looks now, a lot of the blame's likely to be directed at a bloated management structure and what seems a corporate culture that saw little of value in oversight or competence.  Structures and cultures that developed during Thompson's tenure, and under his direction.  And a lot of the people Thompson supervised and directed are stepping down in the wake of the scandals and the inquiry into management structures and decisions.  The emerging management issues does give some support to the latter two possibilities listed above: that Thompson's not that good a manager or executive.  Most analysts see the management (and newsroom) at the NY Times to already be quite bloated and inefficient, with little evidence of strong managerial skills - they don't need to get worse.

    Personally, I don't think any of these behaviors are good professional traits for leaders of news organizations.  They clearly do not reflect "high ethical standards" - either in business or in journalism. I'm getting the feeling that Thompson will prove to be another embarrassing gaffe in the NY Times' search for a CEO in recent years.  (And frankly, given his history, Sulzberger's evaluation doesn't help things).  For me, the question is how long before the Times feels the need to shed itself of its latest embarrassment.
 
Sources -  Times See No Evil CEO Mark Thompson's Veil of Ignorance Continues To Unravel,  JustOneMinute blog
As Mark Thompson Starts New Job, the BBC's Implosion Is Felt in New York, Public Editor's Journal, NY Times
Mark Thompson's Office Was Reportedly 'Warned' About Jimmy Saville Child Sex Abuse Allegations, Huffington Post
Mark Thompson Claims Ignorance Of Letter About Jimmy Savile Scandal Sent On His Behalf, Huffington Post

edits - added missing link to earlier post.

BBC Scandals Mount Up; Director-General Resigns

Earlier this fall, the BBC faced a child-abuse scandal involving one of its star presenters - and charges that the BBC failed to address early allegations and junked its own investigation of renewed charges, allowing it to be scooped by its competition.

  Now comes a second child-abuse scandal - this time falsely accusing a politician of child-abuse on its premier news program, Newsnight.  After airing the allegation, the victim said he had misidentified his abuser, and Newsnight reporters admitted they had neither shown the victim a picture of the politician, nor sought a comment on the story from his office.
  This was enough to for George Entwistle, Director-General of the BBC, to resign after two months on the job.
  These two scandals come in the wake of a scathing public inquiry about BBC news reports of government impropriety in the lead-up to the Iraq war.

One of the BBC's most prominent figures, Newsnight presenter Jeremy Paxman, said since the Iraq report furore, management had become bloated while cash had been cut from program budgets.
"He (Entwistle) has been brought low by cowards and incompetents," Paxman said in a statement, echoing a widely-held view that Entwistle was a good man who had been let down by his senior staff.

The head of the BBC Trust, which oversees BBC operations agreed that management structures were a problem -

"Apparently decisions about the program went up through every damned layer of BBC management, bureaucracy, legal checks - and still emerged," he said.

Patten continued, saying that radical changes were needed to restore the public's confidence in the public service broadcaster.

"If you're saying, 'Does the BBC need a thorough structural radical overhaul?', then absolutely it does, and that is what we will have to do...
"The basis for the BBC's position in this country is the trust that people have in it," Patten said. "If the BBC loses that, it's over."

It'll be a hard job, but someone really has to do it - quickly.

Source -  BBC Head says broadcaster must reform or die,  Hollywood Industry blog

It's About Time: BBC Apologizes

Last week the BBC apologized to a group of women for a decades-old sex scandal.
  In the 1970s and 1980s, a number of women claimed they had been sexually abused by a then-prominent BBC entertainer and host Jimmy Savile.

Some women said Savile had abused them when they were as young as 12 and described a culture of sexual abuse inside the BBC at the height of Savile's fame in the 1970s and 1980s. Some also alleged that they had been attacked on BBC premises.

  The story came to light after a documentary on the subject was aired by rival network ITV.  The ITV documentary raised questions about both Savile's conduct and the BBC's handling of the situation at the time and ignited a firestorm of criticism within both media and government.  Criticism was further fueled when it was learned that the BBC's own flagship news program, Newsnight, had been investigating the claims before the program's editors shelved the project last December.
  The BBC said it would "address all questions," but only after the police investigation was concluded.  In the meantime, Director General Entwistle issued an apology to the women involved:

 "The women involved here have gone through something awful and it's something I deeply regret... I would like to apologize on behalf of the organization to each and every one of them for what they have had to endure here."

Source - Britain's BBC apologizes over sex abuse scandal,  Broadcast Newsroom