The Sir Jimmy Savile Scandal: Child Sexual Abuse and Institutional Denial at the BBC

This study advances research on scandal through an empirical examination of one of the most extraordinary UK institutional child sexual abuse (CSA) scandals in the post-war period. Sir Jimmy Savile (1926–2011) was a BBC celebrity, showbiz friend of the establishment and philanthropist. In October 2012, one year after his death, an ITV documentary alleged that Savile was also a prolific sexual predator who for decades had exploited his BBC status to abuse teenage girls. As we demonstrate, this incendiary documentary triggered a news media feeding frenzy that in less than one week destroyed Savile’s reputation and thrust the BBC – the institution that made him a star – into a multi-faceted, globally reported CSA scandal. This study has four purposes. First, we propose a model of institutional CSA scandals that can account for critical transitions between key phases in the scandal process. Second, we apply this model to analyse the transition between the ‘latent’ and ‘activated’ phases of the Savile scandal. This transition corresponded with a dramatic transformation in the inferential structuring of Savile from ‘national treasure’, who had devoted decades to working with children, to ‘prolific sexual predator’, who spent decades abusing them. Third, we demonstrate how the BBC’s denial of responsibility for Savile’s sexual offending and its subsequent institutional cover-up triggered a ‘trial by media’ which in turn initiated the next phase in the scandal’s development – ‘amplification’. Finally, we consider the significance of our analysis of the Sir Jimmy Savile scandal for understanding the activation and development of scandals more generally

Theorizing Institutional Scandal and the Regulatory State

One by one, UK public institutions are being scandalised for corruption, immorality or incompetence and subjected to trial by media and criminal prosecution. The state?s historic response to public sector scandal ? denial and neutralisation ? has been replaced with acknowledgement and regulation in the form of the re-vamped public inquiry. Public institutions are being cut adrift and left to account in isolation for their scandalous failures. Yet the state?s attempts to distance itself from its scandalised institutions, while extending its regulatory control over them, are risky. Both the regulatory state and its public inquiries risk being consumed by the scandal they are trying to manage

Watergate and scandal politics: the rise and fall of the special prosecutor

This chapter is part of an edited volume of work on the impact of Watergate on US Politics. The Special Prosecutor section focuses specifically on the impact of the reactive legislation that came as a result of Watergate and what this meant for the post-imperial presidents.Watergate and Scandal Politics: the Rise and Fall of the Special Prosecutor This chapter will examine the emergence of the Special Prosecutor in American politics during the Watergate crisis and how as a result the office became an integral part of the US political landscape. Firstly, the piece will scrutinise how the Cox-Jaworski investigation set the scene for the office being held in such high esteem, and how the knee-jerk response to the Nixon crisis brought about a piece of legislation that many claimed was ill conceived and politically dangerous. However true this was, the statute was used continuously through the late twentieth century and in almost every instance was considered to be highly contentious. The Watergate investigation set a false gold-standard for later investigations, as such a clear-cut instance of good versus evil was unlikely to be repeated in the highly volatile world of US politics. President Nixon had ensured hero status for the Watergate Special Prosecutor by continuously stonewalling when asked for information during the investigation. In addition, Nixon’s decision to fire Archibald Cox when the investigative pressure became more than he could bear, confirmed what many had previously feared – that the president considered himself to be above the law. Dirty tricks were nothing new in US politics but this situation was unprecedented. The resulting maelstrom demonstrated the extent of public anger but Nixon’s decision was a tactical as well as a PR blunder. Cox’s replacement was in many ways a tougher adversary and again the Special Prosecutor’s reputation soared as Nixon’s plummeted. This was a classic incidence of hard cases making bad law. The Independent Counsel Statute brought with it a desire to ensure that every transgression, however minor, was hit with this legislative anvil. Response to executive misdemeanour required a certain amount of fluidity depending on the severity of the case. In the post Watergate years, initial use of the Statute was clumsy. In later years the legislation came into its own, specifically in the case of the Iran Contra Affair. Such a serious matter warranted the full weight of the statute. However, even then the flaws were apparent. With no financial or time constraints, and focusing on an individual, rather than a specific crime, an investigation could run and run. Inevitably, whichever party was being investigated would shout accusations of partisan witch-hunting at the independent counsel. Such allegations were even made when the independent counsel was from the same party as the accused, as in the case of Iran Contra. However, when the individuals involved were from opposite sides of the political fence, as in the case of Bill Clinton and Ken Starr, the gloves came off. In conclusion, the chapter will assess the pitfalls associated with efforts to legislate ethics. Fighting the last war invariably results in unintended consequence. However, as the last war in this instance was Watergate, there could hardly have been a more significant catalyst for the independent counsel statute. The office went on to make and break the reputations of many – but none so clearly as those involved in the Watergate crisis

The Cinematic Watergate: From All the President's Men to Frost/Nixon

'Watergate Remembered' examines Watergate as a constitutional crisis rather than a scandal, the more conventional label, and evaluates its enduring significance for late 20th and early 21st century American politics, notably regarding the perpetuation of the imperial presidency, scandal politics, campaign finance reform, the public presidency, and cinematic imagery. The book grew out of a US Presidency Centre symposium on Watergate, held at the Institute for the Study of the Americas in late 2009, and was expanded into an international collaboration in association with the Institute of Leadership Studies at Loyola-Marymount College, Los Angeles. It is simultaneously published in both hardback and paperback, and contains original research essays by four UK scholars and five US scholars