The Jimmy Savile scandal should end theÂ Â TV licence fee Â if it is proven that the BBC actively tried to protect the reputation of a child sex offender employee.
It was not long ago thatÂ JimmyÂ Savile was regarded by the British public as a national treasure, but since the recent revelations over his abuse of underage girls and boys it is hard to watch old television footage of Sir Jimmy without feelingÂ nauseous.
Many people in the country such as myself feel sickened to think that their childhoods were spent sitting in front of a television waiting in eagernes to watch Jimmy Savile present BBC's Jim'll Fix It, which unknown to us was presented by what police are reporting to be the most prolific sex offender on record.
The public feel cheated by the BBC and not for the first time this year.
Earlier this year the BBC misrepresented the news as was the case of using an image taken from 2003 of the Iraq war allegedly in order to fan the flames of hate towards Assad's government in Syria over an alleged attack by Assad's forces upon the village of Houla.
The BBC can no longer claim impartiality and their reputation is in tatters.
Preliminary investigations by the media and the authorities reveal possible editorialÂ censorshipÂ in the BBC's alleged cover-up over a Newsnight program that was due to be aired late in 2011, which would have outed Savile as a notorious paedophile.
The finger points towards the pressure coming from senior management who have denied the reasoning behind pulling the Newsnight investigation was to protect theÂ reputationÂ of BBC and the memory of the lateÂ SirÂ Jimmy Savile.
But whenÂ knowledgeÂ of Savile's practices was so widespreadÂ amongstÂ BBC staff the public has a right to know why they are being forced by law to pay for an organisation that protects or at the very least remains inactive against a paedophile employee who has directÂ accessÂ to children as part of his working day on work premises.
It may seem outlandish but the only reasonable conclusion one can draw from this fiasco is that Savile was not acting alone as is the testimony of many of his victims.
But could it be that this sort of thing was widespread in the BBC and involved many senior public figures from the top of the British establishment?
If so, the rule of law to payÂ a Television licence would not be the only questionable compulsory payment made by the public.
The payment of taxes would also wrench up more moral hazard than they already have.
Image by Jmb at en.wikipedia [CC-BY-2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5), GFDL (www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/)], from Wikimedia Commons