George Entwistle has resigned as Director-General of the BBC.

Why?

He wasn’t personally responsible for the output of any news programmes which the BBC has broadcast. And nor should he have been. It is not the Director-General’s job to second guess every jot and tittle of the BBC’s output.

The BBC (or more particularly Newsnight) has now been damned for not broadcasting allegations of sexual abuse (in the Jimmy Savile case) and now for broadcasting such allegations (against a Senior Tory.)

What message does this send to the BBC news outlets? Keep your head down. Which I believe is precisely the point. No-one in government likes the BBC poking its nose into their business. This is true for governments of either stamp. It was Greg Dyke of the BBC, not anyone in government, who resigned over the David Kelly affair.

And so again. How come in all this saga has the only person to go been at the BBC?

And do you see any other news organisations beating themselves up over mistakes they have made (News International I’m thinking of you) as the BBC does?

David Cameron (aka Mr Irresponsible) said on ITV’s This Morning last week that he didn’t want a witch hunt (of people who happen to be gay.) I agree that witch hunts are unedifying. But a witch hunt of the BBC has been exactly what has occurred since the Savile allegations broke.

When he appointed Andy Coulson to his staff at Number Ten Cameron himself made a much greater error than any George Entwistle might have. This put Mr Cameron in the frame of a scandal that reached into the heart of British society as it involved the possible (nay, probable) suborning of the police by news editors and journalists – possibly the most egregious of activities in a democracy. I have yet to see Mr Cameron resign over his association with that.

To the BBC I say; stop going along with the news agenda of those who have it in for you. To those who attack it I say; you may not miss it when it’s gone, but plenty will.

I see BBC Director General George Entwistle has been “grilled” by MPs over the Jimmy Savile allegations.

While Savile’s activities ought to be investigated and the truth brought to light I suspect that similar failings of oversight to those the BBC is being charged with would have been present in any large organisation during the times concerned. The mechanisms were not in place then and neither was the awareness.

Granted, the presence of teenage girls at the average Top of the Pops recording was likely to be higher than at other places. These girls (possibly some boys too) were moreover likely to be starry-eyed, but the same would also have been true backstage at any rock gig; and probably still is.

So why the focus on the BBC? It was not only there that Savile is alleged to have acted predatorily or carried out abuse.

I look forward to MPs smilarly “grilling” the bosses at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Leeds General, Broadmoor and at the various children’s homes he was given privileged access to – all of whom arguably had a greater duty of care to those on or in their premises than had the BBC – and for that questioning to be given similar prominence in news reports.

It is sickening to realise that Savile’s volunteering to “help” at these hospitals and homes and also his charity work may have been undertaken – most likely was – precisely as a means of gaining access to vulnerable people.

This affair should not be a stick with which to beat the BBC but a way to ensure that victims of predatory sexual behaviour and of abuse can be encouraged to come forward – and be listened to when they do and for those in charge of vulnerable individuals to be much more careful about to whom they grant access to their in their care.