The admissions by the BBC of widespread fraud should deeply shock listeners and viewers. They should also be followed by equally widespread resignations, starting from the top.
HM The Queen is one of the very few Heads of State to be highly regarded around the world for her public service and selfless dedication
It appears that the only reason for these damning confessions to be made in public is that widespread condemnation followed the attempts by the BBC to falsely portray HM The Queen. In some some countries, any attack on the Head of State would result in immediate imprisonment and possible execution, even if the allegations were correct. To attack the Head of State by editing film to show an event that never happened defies belief.
In attacking the Head of State, this is not just an attack on someone who has an impeccable record of service over many decades, but is also attack on the nation.
Once upon a time the British Broadcasting Corporation enjoyed an international reputation for the honesty and integrity of their broadcasts. Even enemies agreed that the BBC could be relied on for accurate reporting.
Dr David Kelly was a tragic victim of the Blair Brown regime and his honesty was used to bully the last BBC resistance
As the politicised Blair Broadcasting Company, BBC standards rapidly and visibly fell. The death of Dr David Kelly, caused by the Blair Brown regime, was used to bully any remaining resistance inside the BBC. From that point the BBC has become known for its political basis, its unreliable reporting and its profligate waste.
It has continued under the revised Blair Brown regime to display outrageous political bias, promoting the Brown fiction that he leads a brand new Government when only the deck chairs have been moved around the decks of the Titanic.
Now comes the admission that widespread fraud of viewers and listeners has become standard practice. Officials have attempted to mitigate the crimes by claiming that no individuals profited personally. Even if this was true, it is still no defence of criminality.
The reality is that the public have been tricked into paying to enter competitions that were fixed so that no money would be paid to real contestants. On each occasion, a contestant was being charged only a few pounds, but the total scale of the fraud ran into millions. That money was used by the BBC and one use was to pay employees who therefore benefited personally from the fraud whether they were aware of it or not. Those organizing the frauds were fully aware of what they were doing.
It remains to be seen how many BBC personnel will resign, how many will be sacked, and what rank they held in the BBC at the time of the frauds.
It also remains to be seen what action the police will take to investigate the situations exposed by the BBC confessions and who will be brought to trial on charges of fraud. If the public had been defrauded by an insurance company or a high street store, the police would already be conducting a vigorous investigation.
The BBC has tried a further mitigation by suggesting that fraud on this scale is endemic in British broadcasting. This is no mitigation. If the allegations are justified, the police should be vigorously investigating all broadcasters and only investigation on this scale would establish which broadcasters are guilty of fraud and which are innocent.