TV Licensing

Flabbergasted: Savile Impersonated by Tweenies

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 13:19:00 +0000

In a further act of self-destruction the BBC astonished parents by broadcasting a children's TV character impersonating disgraced paedophile Jimmy Savile.

This morning's episode of The Tweenies, broadcast on CBeebies at 8.40 am, featured a two minute segment loosely based on Top of the Pops. We now know that following the filming of programmes like Top of the Pops Savile lured impressionable audience members back to his dressing room to abuse.

Orange-faced puppet Max was dressed in a wig similar to Savile's trademark blond locks, a tracksuit and a chunky gold medallion. Any sense of coincidence was obliterated when the puppet welcomed the audience to "The Tweenie Chart Countdown" in a Yorkshire accent and began yodelling. In a further sickening twist the Savile impersonating puppet introduced sidekick Milo's song, which was inappropriately named "One Finger, One Thumb".

This latest clanger comes just a few days after an official report revealed that at least 23 sexual offences were committed by Savile on BBC premises. That figure is probably a conservative estimate, given that police have branded the former Radio 1 DJ one of the most prolific sexual offenders of the twentieth century.

The Tweetosphere was quickly abuzz with comments criticising the BBC's choice of programme. Twitter user @mrkennysenior tweeted: "Are BBC trying to self destruct? Max from Tweenies dressed as Jimmy Savile just now nearly chokes on my cornflakes". @FiserableMucker tweeted: "They're doing a TOTP style show and he's all Savile'd up. Someone has dropped the ball at CBeebies".

The BBC said: "This morning CBeebies broadcast a repeat of an episode of the Tweenies, originally made in 2001, featuring a character dressed as a DJ impersonating Jimmy Savile. This programme will not be repeated and we are very sorry for any offence caused."

Anonymous Plans BBC Protest

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:31:00 +0000

Global "hacktivist" group Anonymous recently published a spoof news report on YouTube where they announced their intentions to target the BBC early this summer.

The one minute segment, which shows a newsreader wearing the group's trademark Guy Fawkes mask, is transcribed below:

"Dear citizens of the UK,

"We are Anonymous. We are not best pleased at the way the BBC, British Brainwashing Corporation, has been dealing with the issue of paedophilia within its realms.

"You (the BBC) have failed the public via fraudulent means. You force citizens of the UK to pay for a TV licence. You force them to pay over £145 a year to view your idea of what is worthy. You have failed the public; you have failed the free press; you have failed to not censor news stories; you have failed the people by the tax avoidance of your staff, which Anonymous takes very seriously, and you choose to hide the emails as well.

"And so we say here unto you, BBC: We are Anonymous. We are legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. The 1st of June 2013 you can expect us."

The group has previously claimed responsibility for hacking attacks that brought down the UK Government's Home Office, Ministry of Justice and Number 10 websites. Anonymous also managed to hack a secret telephone call between US and British cyber-investigators, which was all about how to tackle members of their group.

Given the content of this latest Anonymous statement, it seems likely the group will target the BBC's web and email servers. It would appear, in common with us here at the TV Licensing Blog, that Anonymous is incensed at the BBC's lack of transparency. There has been speculation that they might attempt to retrieve some of the emails the BBC has been so desperate to hide over recent months, in particular with regard to possible tax avoidance and Jimmy Savile.

We do not condone any illegal actions on the part of Anonymous on 1st June 2013. However, should they wish to protest within the law, we give them our total support and wish them the very best of luck.

TV Licensing PR: Truly Remarkable

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 13:31:00 +0000

A new year heralds a new crop of mass distributed TV Licensing press releases.

Few people realise that whenever they read an article about TV Licensing it was invariably planted by their PR people. TV Licensing "spokespeople" are actually employed by one of their PR contractors.

This time the topic is black and white television. Did you realise that there are still just over 13,000 black and white TV licences in force across the UK? No? Nor did we, but that figure is, erm, in the words of TV Licensing, "remarkable". In fact it's so remarkable that TV Licensing's massed army of PR harlots have been out in force saying just how remarkable it is.

TV Licensing's Stephen Farmer said: "It's remarkable that with the digital switchover complete, 41% of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet, more than 13,000 households still watch their favourite programmes on a black-and-white telly."

Such a remarkable statistic didn't escape the notice of East Midlands TV Licensing PR man Mark Whitehouse either: "It's remarkable that with the digital switchover complete, 41 per cent of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet more than 13,000 households still watch their favourite programmes on a black and white telly."

Meanwhile, over in the North of England, such remarkableness was also apparent to TV Licensing's Lucy Baird: "It's remarkable that with the digital switchover complete, 41 per cent of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet, more than 13,000 households still watch their favourite programmes on a black and white telly."

Fergus Reid, who works for TV Licensing PR contractor Smarts, decided he also wanted a piece of the remarkable action: "It's remarkable that, with the digital switchover complete, 41% of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet, more than 13,000 households still watch their favourite programmes on a black and white telly."

TV Licensing PR man Warren Carr has also been dabbling in remarkable claims in the Swindon Advertiser: "It's remarkable that, with the digital switchover complete, 41 per cent of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet more than 13,000 households watch a black and white telly."

Deborah King has also been spreading the gospel according to TV Licensing over in Northern Ireland: "It's remarkable that, with the digital switchover complete, 41 per cent of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet more than 13,000 households watch a black and white telly."

Completing the national picture is TV Licensing PR flunky Victoria Sykes, who, as you've probably guessed by now, was in awe at the number of black and white licences still in force: "It's remarkable that with the digital switchover complete, 41 per cent of UK households owning HDTVs and Britons leading the world in accessing TV content over the internet more than 13,000 households still watch their favourite programmes on a black and white telly."

Next time you're reading any of this bullshit in the newspapers just remember that it's sent out in bulk by TV Licensing for their own means. It is a sad fact that most bone idle newspaper editors publish this stuff without any questions at all.

Savile Crimes: Giving Victims a Voice

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:15:00 +0000

The Metropolitan Police and NSPCC have just released a joint report, which gives an overview of predatory paedophile Jimmy Savile's sordid sexual exploits.

The forty page report, called Giving Victims a Voice, outlines sexual offences committed by the disgraced former Jim'll Fix It host between 1955 and 2009.

Alarmingly the report reveals that no less than six different police investigations took place into Savile's crimes, but none of them were able to bring him to justice. The Metropolitan Police received its first complaint against Savile in the early 1980s, when it was alleged that he had abused a young girl in his camper van parked at BBC Television Centre. By that time Savile had already committed literally hundreds of sexual offences. Had the Met grasped the nettle more firmly at the time the 20 or 30 subsequent offences may never have been committed.

Savile's last offence took place in 2009, when he put his hand up a woman's skirt on the train between Leeds and London Kings Cross.

Following the Daily Mail's lead, here is some more information about Savile's crimes in numbers:

8: The age of Savile's youngest victim, who happened to be male.
14: The number of offences Savile committed in schools.
22: The number of offences Savile committed at Stoke Mandeville Hospital.
23: The number of offences Savile committed on BBC premises, predominantly Television Centre.
34: The number of rapes committed by Savile.
42: The number of Savile's offences that took place in the Metropolitan Police area.
47: The age of Savile's oldest victim, who happened to be female.
73%: Of Savile's victims were under the age of 18.
82%: Of Savile's victims were female.
128: The number of indecent assaults committed by Savile.

The report has also revealed that Savile abused a dying child in a Leeds hospice.

The Metropolitan Police's Commander Peter Spindler said that Savile used his celebrity status to "hide in plain sight" while abusing children over six decades.

Dozens of Savile victims are now taking legal proceedings against the institutions he was associated with, including the BBC and NHS.

Victims of TV Licensing

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:17:00 +0000

TJoK presents his latest video exploring the sinister tactics used by TV Licensing to coerce licence fee payment where none is due.

They're a bit like car clampers TV Licensing, but only less scrupulous. At least car clampers can only persecute those people with a car, whereas TV Licensing persecute many tens of thousands of people without a TV. Anyone paying to have their vehicle released can go about their lawful everyday existence without being threatened by the clamper. That's where the similarity with TV Licensing ends.

The 15 minute video begins with TJoK recounting some email correspondence he's recently received, which includes complaints from elderly lady that a visiting TV Licensing goon was aggressive on her doorstep. This despite the fact the lady was eligible for a free over 75s licence and was almost completely blind.

He also gives an update on the ongoing Steve Heather case, which TV Licensing undoubtedly hoped was dead and buried by now. Briefly, Steve was the victim of a TV Licensing search warrant, which came about as the result of them having "detected" a TV receiver in use in his property. Anyhow, the TV Licensing goons sent to search the property didn't find any evidence at all of TV use, which meant Steve was found not guilty of TV licence evasion in court.

Steve's story gets even more interesting after that, but you're going to have to watch TJoK's video to find out the reasons why!

The video concludes with the following legally sound words of advice:

Do not respond to TV Licensing's threatening letters.
Do not call them, because they won't believe anything you say anyway.
Do not speak to TV Licensing employees. Simply close the door on them.
Never let a TV Licensing employee into your home (barring the exceptional circumstances they have a search warrant).
Do not be worried by the threat of a search warrant or the police. These threats are oft mooted as a last gasp desperate attempt by a TV Licensing goon to secure their commission payment.

As this is the first post of 2013 may we wish all our loyal readers a very happy new year.

Going Against the Grain

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 29 Dec 2012 20:12:00 +0000

We have thought very hard before writing this post, as it may lead to an irreconcilable difference of opinion between us and one of our most loyal followers.

As regular readers will know TJoKayaking has been a very vocal opponent to TV Licensing. At one stage he offered £1000 to anyone that could prove the BBC's mythical TV detection equipment did actually exist and work, but thankfully his money was safe. On another occasion, posting under his alter ego of onlywhenpissed, he deliberately set up equipment to receive live broadcast TV signals and invited TV Licensing to use their detection equipment. He informed TV Licensing that his set up would be used every evening for a month, but they were having none of it. Probably just as well, as he really would have been caught bang to rights.

TJoK is upping the ante even further this festive season. He has uploaded fresh footage to YouTube that clearly shows him enjoying live TV programmes without a TV licence. His first short video, which was uploaded on Christmas Day, shows him sitting back to enjoy the Doctor Who special on BBC One. In the blurb that accompanies the video he jokes: "Licence dodging scum me. 5:15 (pm) BBC1 Christmas Day 2012. I'm so gonna get done for this."

We can only assume that TJoK has been emboldened by the BBC's recent misfortune and Ian Doyle's abysmal attempt to execute a search warrant. He thinks that TV Licensing is now weakened to such an extent that he is going to flout the rule of law at their public expense.

Unfortunately we are unable to agree with TJoK's actions on this occasion. As we have maintained from the inception of this blog, anyone that uses equipment to receive TV programme services should be correctly licensed to do so. Indeed our entire existence is founded on the principle of lawful opposition to the licence fee, which TJoK has sadly discredited.

Hopefully this latest stunt won't backfire on him.

Stopping TV Licensing Trespass: In the Words of the BBC and TV Licensing

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:14:00 +0000

Some people, mainly BBC luvvies and DigitalSpy members, incorrectly believe that George Entwistle was good value for money, Jimmy Savile should be canonised and TV Licensing can do whatever they want.

We might not be able to remove their affection for Entwistle and Savile, but hopefully we can dispel the myth that TV Licensing can act with legal impunity.

One way of holding TV Licensing to account is to ban their employees from stepping foot on your property. This dynamite option, known as Withdrawal of Implied Right of Access (WOIRA), is being increasingly used by the legally licence free community in protest at TV Licensing's sustained campaign of harassment against legitimate non-viewers.

Here, in words taken directly from the BBC's own policy document, is a quick run down of everything you need to know on the WOIRA process:

1. Right of Access:

"It is well established that an implied right of access to a property exists for those that have a legitimate reason to be on the property. This implied right allows the caller to come to the front door/gate if they have legitimate business with the occupier. If they are asked to leave then the implied right no longer applies."

2. Trespass:

"Requests to withdraw the implied right of access must be respected as TV Licensing Enquiry Officers would be committing trespass if they visited the address after the right of access had been withdrawn."

3. Name Not Required:

"There is no legal requirement to provide a name when someone withdraws their implied right of access. However, TV Licensing will always request a name as this the best way of ensuring we are corresponding with the occupier."

4. WOIRA Notification:

"Notice of WOIRA is not legally required to be in writing. TV Licensing may receive a notice of WOIRA via either:

letter
email
telephone
verbally when an enquiry officer is told by an occupant that he has withdrawn the implied right of access."

"Upon receipt of a WOIRA notification, written acknowledgement and an explanation of the policy will be sent to the individual by TV Licensing."

"Regardless of whether a name is provided, once the occupant at an address has notified the BBC or TV Licensing of the withdrawal of the implied right to visit, a WOIRA guard will be applied."

"As withdrawing the implied right of access may be a potential method of evasion, unlicensed WOIRA addressees will be sent bespoke mailings which do not refer to Enquiry Officer visits."

5. Visiting Addresses:

"WOIRA addresses must not be visited."

"Addresses will become available for visits again under a limited number of circumstances, for example if notification is received from the Royal Mail that the occupant has moved away."

6. Guards:

"Once an address has given notice of WOIRA then a WOIRA guard will be applied immediately to prevent standard mailings being sent and the address being visited."

"Withdrawing the right to visit can be for an indefinite period. But, as circumstances can change, e.g. when people move house, TV Licensing needs to ensure that such guards continue to be accurate. A confirmation letter asking if the situation remains the same will be sent to unlicensed properties every two years."

"The WOIRA guard will be removed-

if TV Licensing receives no response to its confirmation letters
if TV Licensing receives new data that indicates the person who withdrew the implied right of access has moved."

7. Detection and Search Warrant Procedures:

"Given that TV Licensing is unable to visit WOIRA addresses, detection and search warrants will be used as necessary and appropriate. Negative detection results will result in the WOIRA guard being reset and bespoke mailings being stopped for 2 years. Positive detection results will result in further investigations being undertaken."

The appendices of the policy document contain, quite appropriately, a series of idiotproof diagrams showing how the WOIRA policy is to be applied in a range of circumstances.

Hope you're all having an enjoyable festive period. Unless, of course, you're working for the BBC or TV Licensing!

TV Licence For Sale

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:41:00 +0000

Just happened across this TV licence advertised on eBay.

The seller obviously agrees that this year's festive TV has been an absolute pile of tripe.

As we suggested on Twitter the other day, perhaps the BBC can't afford any decent new programming because their Christmas TV budget was used to pay off incompetent half wit George Entwistle?

TV Licensing Offers Cash Sweetener

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 19:53:00 +0000

A year ago we touched on an article published in thedailynag blog.

The author, who has no legal need for a TV licence, had been on the receiving end of TV Licensing threats and intimidation for several years.

She moved home and was greeted by a pile of TV Licensing threatograms, which spurred her decision to withdraw the errant organisation's implied right of access to her new property (read our earlier post about WOIRA). Two days later, in direct contravention of her lawful WOIRA instructions, a TV Licensing employee trespassed onto the property regardless.

That's about where we left the story back in November 2011.

In the intervening year thedailynag's author has moved home again. This caused her to issue a fresh WOIRA instruction to TV Licensing, which again refused them access to her new property. As you've probably guessed by now TV Licensing, who like to pretend they respect WOIRA instructions, displayed contempt for her lawful wishes by trespassing yet again.

She takes up the story in a recent blog post: "Springing to the door with a pen and paper, I politely took the man's details and informed him that he is now trespassing, as he is not actually allowed to attend the property since I withdrew his implied right of access a few weeks ago.

"This obviously phases him less than the idea of losing his commission so he stands his ground nonetheless, ignoring my complaint and continuing to ask if he can enter my property or not. I again explain that legally, he's not even allowed to be standing where he is and politely inform him that on that note, he's most certainly not coming into my house.

"I then tell him that I will have to contact the police to discuss this matter and he stands up (now a bit more confrontational) and tells me not to worry about contacting the authorities as he will be doing so himself.

"Of course, I go on to say I don't actually require his help in doing so and he tells me that it's actually to obtain a search warrant to enter my property. "Knock yourself out" I reply, shutting the door."

The author was rightly incensed by this stage, that some minimum wage jumped up little Hitler was standing on her doorstep issuing legally baseless threats. She contacted TV Licensing several times by email and their response was lethargic to say the least.

Just then an email arrived, seemingly acknowledging that TV Licensing's actions had caused her inconvenience and offering £30 as a gesture of goodwill.

She wrote back explaining that their offer was unacceptable: "I would be prepared to discuss a more reasonable figure which takes into account the sustained harassment I feel I have received from your company, including 3 breaches of a right of access restriction, constant threatening letters, threats of court action, threats of covert surveillance and threats of a police search warrant."

TV Licensing wrote back and offered her £75 instead, which they emphasised was their final offer.

The author is currently discussing matters with her solicitor and deciding if it's worth pursuing TV Licensing through the courts on a point of principle. After all, TV Licensing's own letter and subsequent cash offer appears to acknowledge their shortcomings: "That said if we have made an error, and feel that inconvenience to someone could have been prevent, we would consider a monetary amount as a goodwill gesture."

We'll be glued to this one to see how it turns out. There are thousands of other people that have withdrawn TV Licensing's implied right of access and had their wishes ignored, so this case could set a very significant precedent.

TV Licensing Goon on Twitter

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:10:00 +0000

A TV Licensing Goon has broken cover to Tweet about some of the more sinister and humorous aspects of his employment.

Before the BBC and TV Licensing soil their festive undercrackers too badly, closer inspection reveals that this Twitter account is firmly tongue in cheek instead of the ramblings of a disgruntled turncoat.

For the past fortnight the TV Licensing Goon has been Tweeting pearls of wisdom on all manner of TV Licensing topics. For all it is described as a parody account, the author has clearly done his research as he quips about some of TV Licensing's most embarrassing failures. He's already joked about slapping a wheelchair user (as TV Licensing convicted criminal David Clark did) as well as seeing frozen images on TV screens (see Michael Shakespeare's story). He's thus far given the subject of Jimmy Savile a wide berth, but with so many dropped bollocks in the BBC and TV Licensing back catalogues there is plenty of other material for him to work with. Perhaps he can comment on the recent search warrant fiasco, which saw TV Licensing's Ian Doyle (of Shakespeare fame) scurry for cover despite having the court's authority to enter a property.

For the latest updates please follow the TV Licensing Goon on Twitter.

Very best wishes of the season to all our loyal readers.

TV Licensing Enfarcement: Another Botched Search Warrant

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:46:00 +0000

I'm your wicked Uncle Ernie... but no fiddling about today!

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas; Ev'rywhere you go; Take a look in the five and ten glistening once again; With candy canes and silver lanes aglow.

Waiting in our inbox this evening was an unexpected treat that warmed the festive cockles of our heart. It's been a pretty good couple of months already with BBC nonces exposed, Newsnight's dropped bollock on the McAlpine affair and George Entwistle paid £450k for achieving Sweet Fanny Adams.

Ian Doyle, the Brylcreemed goon made famous by TV Licensing's botched attempt to shaft Michael Shakespeare, has been captured on YouTube terrorising the legally licence free again. He might not be wearing glasses on this latest adventure, but there's no mistaking his hypnotic tones or tessellating brow lines. It must be heartening for Doyle to realise that his bosses consider him expendable by sending him out on all the high profile jobs.

Doyle is the lead Capita gobshite in today's 20 minute offering. He was attempting, very unsuccessfully, to execute a search warrant at the property of amateur film maker Danny Allen. We've followed Danny's YouTube channel for a very long time and are under no doubt at all that he does not require a TV licence.

The footage begins with Danny and his friend answering a knock at the door. They actually open the porch window and engage in dialogue with the Police Sergeant standing outside, who quickly identifies the fact he is accompanying TV Licensing as they execute a search warrant.

Legal arguments ensue about whether the warrant, granted under section 366 of the Communications Act 2003, is legally valid without the consent of the occupier. Should the occupier be legally compelled to prove a negative, solely to satisfy the curiosity of an organisation he has no legal business with? It's all very interesting, although veers a bit close to the Freeman of the Land ideology for our liking.

At one point Doyle tries, unsuccessfully again, to get the police officers to arrest the occupier for obstructing the warrant, but his request falls on deaf ears. They no doubt recognised the farcical situation unfolding before their eyes, with an occupier refusing to prove his innocence to TV Licensing when they had no evidence whatsoever of his guilt.

Doyle had lost all control of the situation by the time he attempted, unsuccessfully again, to caution the individuals peering through the porch window. He then abandons the visit with his tail between his legs, having failed to secure entry to the property. It just goes to show how weak TV Licensing's rarer than hen's teeth search warrants actually are. The Police Sergeant, obviously somewhat amused by the situation, manages a cheery wave goodbye as he walks down the garden path.

Our advice to anyone finding themselves in a similar predicament, TV Licensing on the doorstep with a search warrant, would be to allow them access to your property. The search warrant, whether obtained by fair means or foul, represents the will of the court and should be complied with. Humorous as Danny's video is, there is the distinct possibility the court will take umbrage at his lack of cooperation. As he genuinely doesn't require a TV licence, he may have unnecessarily caused problems for himself.

This video will be a serious embarrassment to the BBC, TV Licensing and Capita because it demonstrates just how little authority their employees have. It also shows that they can't rely on the unequivocal support of the police during an enforcement visit

That's a message they really don't want made public, so please shout it from the roof tops!

TV Licensing Goon Forces Door Handle

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 20:10:00 +0000

A YouTube video has come to light showing the desperate lengths some TV Licensing employees will go to in order to secure their commission payment.

The CCTV footage was captured on 9th October 2012 in Hartlepool. It shows a TV Licensing visiting officer conducting routine enquiries at the address in question. Inside the TV-free property was a lone female and her young child. She answered the door and spoke with the goon for a few moments, before telling him that she was going to telephone her partner. It was at this stage, as the video clearly shows, that she tentatively closed the door leaving the TV Licensing man out in the cold.

Just then, in an apparent pique of rage, the goon snatched at the door handle and attempted to push the door back open. One can only imagine the terror that must have gone through the woman's mind at the moment the undesirable stranger, with no more legal rights than any other visitor, snatched the door handle from her grasp. This incident happened a ten minute drive away from where Gary Catterick, a TV Licensing visiting officer at the time, raped his pregnant victim in Middlesbrough.

A TV licence is only required for those properties where equipment is used to receive television programme services. TV Licensing is a trading name used by companies contracted by the BBC to administer the collection and enforcement of the fee. Capita Business Services Ltd is the TV Licensing contractor that employed the star of this video.

We have known about this video since mid-October, but are only publishing it now because Cleveland Police has decided to take no further action against the door snatching goon.

The goon, who we're informed is now an ex-employee of Capita, managed to avoid further police action by telling them that his foot became trapped in the door when the woman closed it. According to him he only tried the door handle in an effort to release his foot. Yes, we're smelling bullshit as well!

Below is a still image of the moment he grabs at the door.

We consider the goon's explanation extremely implausible, as the video clearly shows how slowly the door is closed. Furthermore, the goon's aggression is not a pained reflex action, as there is a small time lag between the door closing and him grabbing at the handle. The still image shows that the door is a very good fit to the frame, which seems to preclude the idea that anything was wedged in the bottom of it. Indeed the door fits as snuggly to the frame as it did at the start of the video before it had even been opened. We also doubt that the woman would have been able to close the door fully, as she apparently did, had a man's foot been obstructing the way.

In our opinion this chancer has given a creative account to the police, which they appear to have swallowed. Please view the video and make up your own mind. Was this an act of aggression designed to scare the lone female occupant into buying a TV licence she doesn't legally need?

We certainly think so.

BBC Delays Truth Over Savile Exposure

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 12:20:00 +0000

As recent weeks have shown there are many things the BBC is abysmal at.

Something they have been abysmal at for a very long time is transparency under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Indeed, it is becoming a bit of a TV Licensing Blog crusade to hold the BBC to public account by forcing them to answer awkward questions using that piece of legislation. We are reminded of one particularly cringe worthy moment when the BBC did not have a clue how many people had actually complained about TV Licensing. They didn't know that, despite knowing full well that TV Licensing receives regular criticism for its heinous enforcement tactics.

Every now and then the BBC raises its drawbridge and refuses to play ball. They often cite the most spurious of legal exemptions in a desperate effort to keep some of their innermost secrets away from the public spotlight. Did you know that the BBC refuses to answer half of the Freedom of Information Act requests it receives? Are those the actions of an organisation with nothing to hide? That performs its public function under the legitimate scrutiny of the licence fee payer? We think not.

We are currently at loggerheads with the BBC over the ITV "Exposure - The Other Side of Jimmy Savile" programme, which aired on 3rd October 2012. Media reports suggest that the BBC were forewarned of ITV's intent to broadcast this programme, so we reasoned that the BBC may have gone into self-defence mode in the intervening days. We tabled the following request for information to the BBC:

"On Wednesday, 3rd October 2012 ITV broadcast a programme called "Exposure - The Other Side of Jimmy Savile". The programme, which was well publicised in advance of being broadcast, contained several allegations about former BBC presenter Jimmy Savile.

"Under the terms of the 2000 Act please provide me with all information the BBC holds in relation to the broadcast of "Exposure - The Other Side of Jimmy Savile" on ITV on 3rd October 2012. My request for information includes that contained in relevant letters and emails generated by the BBC, their staff, or others acting on their behalf."

The days passed and true to form the BBC failed to respond in the 20 working days required by law. After a gentle nudge we received an email from BBC lawyer Stephanie Simmonds, who told us that she was refusing to disclose the information as the BBC needed longer to weigh up the public interest.

Let's put that into some context. The BBC, who have known Jimmy Savile was a child sex offender for at least the past year (since their aborted Newsnight exposé in November 2011), can't see the public interest in disclosing their response to the ITV programme that finally unmasked him. They can't see why the public might want to know the BBC's opinion on ITV "stealing" their original Newsnight report.

The BBC has also suggested that they don't want to preempt the findings of their own Pollard review into the botched Savile Newsnight investigation, which was actually established several days after we made our request for information.

With the UK audience in uproar at the frivolous way the BBC has handed out public funds to disgraced former employees, there should be a new era of transparency at the Corporation. Instead there is a wall of silence. The same air of secrecy that swept the corridors of the BBC when Savile was abusing some of victims at Television Centre is sweeping the paragraphs of their Freedom of Information responses. That situation is gravely unacceptable.

We have made an internal review request, so stay tuned for further updates.

TV Licensing Premium Rate Phone Scam

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 11:06:00 +0000

Contacting TV Licensing is often a pointless exercise, as many people who have volunteered their non-viewer status would testify.

We would always recommend that anyone needing TV licence advice performs a web search first, because there is already plenty of information out there.

Anyone making the mistake of contacting TV Licensing using the details on the tvlicence.tv website could be in for a particularly rude awakening when their phone bill arrives.

The site, which appears as a sponsored result at the top of a Google search on "TV Licensing", invites people to contact TV Licensing via an expensive premium rate number. Reading the small print it would appear that anyone calling the number is directed to the official TV Licensing call centre, although they can't guarantee it.

Curiously the Google ad suggests this third-party offers "24/7 support", but limited hours of opening are given on the side of their web page. The text is littered with typographical errors, further illustrating the fact that it can't be trusted.

What is guaranteed is that anyone choosing this expensive number, instead of TV Licensing's official national rate (0300) number, would face the eye watering charge of £1.53 per minute from a BT landline, considerably more if they use a mobile.

If you must contact TV Licensing then please be sure to use the details on their official website.

TV Licensing Stocking Filler

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 15:36:00 +0000

Browsing Amazon earlier today we came across this gem.

The TV detector van mug, which was created using the "finest dye sublimation techniques" and has a "stunning dishwasher safe finish", would make the ideal novelty gift for the legally licence free.

The mug features an image from TV Licensing's press release archive, which purportedly shows one of their employees sat in the back of a detector van. Sadly it is unable to boil a kettle in 20 seconds from the far side of a party wall, but it can hold a fair amount of tea or coffee.

Who would have thought it? Contrary to our earlier findings TV detector vans really do have a useful purpose!

TV Licensing Twitter Behavioural Change

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:40:00 +0000

A couple of months ago we made a quick observation about the content of the official TV Licensing Twitter feed.

TV Licensing are not very good with Twitter.

Our earlier comments went something like this: "Out of the last 60 Tweets showing on the @tvlicensing official Twitter feed (going back as far as 5th April) there are 39 in which they say the word "sorry". That's two thirds of their Twitter interaction with disgruntled "customers", not including those without the word "sorry". Pretty damning."

It appears they have acted on our earlier observations, because they are now adopting a noticeably different strategy for interacting with their many Twitter critics.

Instead of posting snivelling apologies online, they now prefer to ask people to contact them via phone or email. It is pretty evident that, as a result of our earlier post, they now want to avoid critical interaction being posted live on their Twitter feed.

TV Licensing has made 54 Tweets on their official @tvlicensing Twitter account since our earlier post of 22nd September. Of those 54 Tweets they have asked the disgruntled party to contact them privately (by phone or email) 30 times. In the same time they have mentioned the word "sorry" only once, which stands in stark contrast to their previously frequent apology Tweets. Such a change of tone is unlikely to be coincidental.

The BBC is probably paying millions for TV Licensing PR services. It must be pretty annoying that we can so easily discredit them!

How to Deal With TV Licensing Goons

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 10:10:00 +0000

An epic YouTube montage of unsuccessful TV Licensing visits was uploaded a few days ago.

The eleven minute video shows some of the most repugnant characters in the TV Licensing Blog hall of fame. Particularly noteworthy is the inclusion of convicted TV Licensing thug David Clark, who thumped a wheelchair-bound disabled man during routine enquiries, and TV Licensing hard man Mr Grumpy, whose potty-mouthed tirade we featured back in January 2012.

The BBC has previously said: "We do not agree that TV Licensing officials intimidate the public." Have a quick look back at Clark and Mr Grumpy and see if you agree.

The video begins by summarising the following rules of engagement when dealing with TV Licensing goons:

Rule 1: Never give them your name or any other personal details. Never let them into your home, and never admit to anything.
Rule 2: Provide them with an official notice that you are revoking their "implied right of access" to your property. Also provide them with a notice outlining your fee schedule.
Rule 3: Always film them right from the outset. This will prevent them from trying to intimidate you and it usually scares them away.

Sound advice indeed.

If you decide to follow rule 2, please be aware that withdrawing the implied right of access (WOIRA) to your property sometimes serves to heighten TV Licensing's interest in your circumstances. It's also fair to say that TV Licensing often break BBC rules and ignore WOIRA instructions.

For further advice on how to deal with TV Licensing please download our free ebook, TV Licensing Laid Bare.

BBC in Freedom of Information Farce

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:03:00 +0000

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is without doubt one of the most powerful tools at our disposal for probing the integrity of the BBC and TV Licensing.

In the past we have effectively used the legislation to force the BBC into releasing information they would otherwise have kept hidden, like the fact their mythical TV detection evidence has never been presented in open court.

The BBC don't like the Freedom of Information Act, because it allows ordinary people the chance to pry into their innermost secrets. As some of the BBC's most sordid secrets have recently been exposed to public scrutiny, it should come as no surprise that they want to keep the remaining latches on Pandora's Box firmly shut.

For the past six years the BBC has been desperately trying to keep one of its biggest secrets hidden from the public gaze - the names of those attending a controversial seminar on climate change at the start of 2006.

Blogger Tony Newbery used the Freedom of Information Act to ask the BBC about the "Climate Change - the Challenge to Broadcasting" seminar, which convinced the BBC to abandon its impartiality on the subject of climate change. The BBC, in a further demonstration of its contempt to the legislation, refused to answer Tony's request on the basis that it held the information for the purposes of journalism, art or literature.

Hundreds of thousands of pounds later an Information Tribunal has just ruled in favour of the BBC, confirming that their refusal was legally sound. It is, however, very much a Pyrrhic victory for the national broadcaster, as someone else has disclosed the information they sought desperately to keep hidden.

A few day's ago blogger Maurizio Morabito found the information the BBC has spent thousands defending archived on the Wayback Machine. In a sick, but incredibly humorous, twist of fate the BBC's legal muscle and expense has been completely wasted, as the information was out there in the public domain all along.

A complete list of those that attended the "Climate Change - the Challenge to Broadcasting" seminar at BBC Television Centre in White City London on 26 January 2006 is available to view here.

Read and digest the names carefully, enjoying the fact that the BBC never wanted you to see them.

Over the next few months there'll be a lot more uncomfortable reading for the BBC.

BBC Fiasco: Patten and Boaden Must Go Now

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sun, 11 Nov 2012 21:23:00 +0000

Last night, in his most recent blithering about turn, George Entwistle resigned as Director General of the BBC.

Only hours earlier he had declared his intention to weather the storm and remain as head of the BBC.

He had been in post for only 54 days, having previously served as a BBC journalist for 23 years. What a tumultuous 54 days those have been.

As much as we loathe the BBC, we are actually quite sad to see Entwistle go. His continued presence was having a seriously debilitating effect on the Corporation, with trust in the national broadcaster descending to an all time low according to a recent Comres poll.

But it wasn't all Entwistle's fault. He placed his trust, albeit misguided, in the senior executives and editorial teams working in the bowels of the BBC's massive hierarchy. They let him down badly. The BBC's finest journalists, who should have been well equipped to read the road ahead, failed to warn Entwistle of potential disaster waiting just around the corner.

It is almost impossible to believe that no-one in the Newsnight team, which was already facing unprecedented editorial scrutiny, took the initiative to warn the Director General's office of their report into abuse at the Bryn Esten children's home. Surely the Head of News, Helen Boaden, is as culpable as Entwistle for failing to scrutinise and moderate Newsnight's controversial output.

News is breaking this evening that Entwistle has received a full year's salary, £450k, as a pay off. What on Earth do the BBC Trust think they're doing by approving such a generous severance package for Entwistle's disastrous tenure? Having resigned he was actually only entitled to half that figure, but has somehow managed to negotiate very favourable departure terms.

The Chairman of the BBC Trust, Chris Patten, is also a worthy recipient of considerable criticism. He appointed Entwistle from a broad field of arguably better qualified candidates, has seen his man buffeted by two months of scandal, and has now rubber stamped Entwistle's reprehensible golden handshake.

Patten and Boaden must both go. They must go soon, and at minimal expense, if the public is to regain any trust at all in the BBC.

TV Licensing Botches Warrant

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 15:55:00 +0000

We would hate anyone to be under the misapprehension that the BBC, and therefore TV Licensing, run such a slick operation that they are beyond reproach.

Indeed their recent handling of the Jimmy Savile and Lord McAlpine scandals proves beyond doubt that they are often clueless when it comes to presenting honest facts, which probably explains why a recent Comres poll shows that audience trust in the BBC stands at an all time low.

Back at the start of January 2012 we ran a story and subsequent analysis of TV Licensing's own resident hard man who we dubbed Mr Grumpy.

Mr Grumpy arrived at a legally licence free property and made it immediately obvious that he considered the occupier, who goes by the name of j2LightWorker on YouTube, was a licence fee evader. His conduct, which was quite frankly appalling, was captured on YouTube for everyone to see. With his eyes glazed and nostrils flared Mr Grumpy launched into such an offensive tirade that it is amazing that the occupier didn't lamp him one. Mr Grumpy was adamant that the occupier was guilty, although he offered no evidence of the fact whatsoever. Perhaps he was on secondment from the Newsnight team?

On 6 June 2012 Neil Blood of Capita Business Services Ltd. applied to Kirklees Magistrates Court for a warrant under section 366 of the Communications Act 2003. The fact that Blood made his application in June proves once and for all that Mr Grumpy's original threats of seeking a warrant in January were complete fabrication.

These warrants, which are exceptionally rare, give Capita employees, acting under the guise of TV Licensing, permission to search a person's property for TV receiving equipment. This particular warrant was executed towards the end of June.

According to j2LightWorker the warrant was executed by two TV Licensing agents and two police constables. They arrived on a warm day when the front door was already open. After expressing his dissatisfaction to one of the police constables he allowed them entry so they could conduct their search.

One of the TV Licensing agents took a close interest in the TV set in the main room, but quickly discovered it was unable to receive live TV programmes and therefore did not require a TV licence. The TV was set up to watch DVDs and non-live internet streams only, which is perfectly legal without a TV licence. After a cursory glance at the remainder of the house the TV Licensing agents scuttled away with their heads down, tails between their legs and crucially no evidence whatsoever of licensable TV usage.

It appears that TV Licensing has again wasted police time on the basis of their sloppy intelligence and evidence gathering. We eagerly await information about the exact nature of the evidence included in Blood's deposition.

The BBC would deny it, but we're getting the distinct impression that anyone who challenges TV Licensing's authority becomes a target for increased harassment, regardless of whether or not there is evidence against them. The BBC is currently in a position where they are denying lots of things, so their opinion cannot be taken as sacrosanct.

A video explaining this latest twist in j2LightWorker's battle with TV Licensing appears below.

Newsnight Embroiled in Second Scandal

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:30:00 +0000

Online Surveys & Market Research

The BBC's self-proclaimed "flagship" news programme Newsnight is embroiled in a second child sex abuse scandal in the space of a month.

The latest calamity comes shortly after Newsnight was accused of shelving a report exposing Jimmy Savile's paedophilia in order to preserve the ratings of future BBC Savile tribute shows.

On Friday, 2nd November, in response to a tweet from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism's Iain Overton, the UK media started to report that Newsnight was about to name a leading Thatcher-era politician as a child sex abuser.

Overton had been investigating the harrowing tales of sexual abuse that took place at the Bryn Esten children's home in Wrexham back in the 1980s. He was the journalist that would be presenting the report on Newsnight later that evening. His suggestive tweet whipped up a media frenzy, with the press and Twitterati frantically searching for the name of the prime suspect.

Several names attracted speculation, one of which was Thatcherite peer Lord Alistair McAlpine. Along with thousands of others we had stumbled across that name hours before Newsnight went to air. As the facts were still very patchy we took the sensible decision not to preempt Overton's report by suggesting the suspect's identity.

A bumper audience tuned into Newsnight eagerly awaiting the publicised naming of the Bryn Esten abuse suspect. Overton introduced the piece and reiterated previous claims that a leading Thatcher-era politician had abused children from the home. Abuse victim Steve Messham spoke movingly about the abuse he had faced during his time at the Wrexham home, but despite the innuendo and pre-broadcast furore not once was the suspect named. Viewers had been lured to Newsnight on a falsehood, which was propagated by Overton's earlier over-egging on Twitter.

Disappointed at Newsnight's failure to clarify the facts the viewing public headed back to the web in their masses, eagerly seeking the name that Newsnight had failed to deliver. The name of McAlpine was still perched high in the search results, so more and more people arrived at the mistaken conclusion that he must be the unnamed abuser.

It now transpires that those speculating on McAlpine's name were wrong. Messham has now clarified the situation by saying that McAlpine was not the man who abused him as a child. Furthermore McAlpine has said that he will take legal action against those outlets that publicly named him as the suspect before the facts were established. According to the non-domiciled peer, who was the Conservative Party treasurer, he has never been to a children's home and has only visited Wrexham once.

BBC arses went into spasm the moment McAlpine threatened to unleash his legal dogs. BBC Director General George Entwistle has been touring the BBC studios to defend the Corporation's handling of the case. His furrowed brow betrays the fact that he is a man paddling frantically against a current of editorial sleaze and negative publicity. Tellingly Entwistle refuses to be interviewed by anyone but the BBC, no doubt fearing the candour of questions that could be posed by a rival broadcaster.

Despite reassurances to the contrary there is little doubt that Entwistle's days at the BBC are numbered. Questions will no doubt also be raised about the security of Director of News Helen Boaden's position. Both of these high profile BBC roles are looking distinctly untenable at the moment.

In the space of a month the BBC has failed to expose their own Jimmy Savile, one of Britain's most prolific child sex offenders, and has wrongly implicated a senior politician in the Bryn Esten child abuse scandal.

A recent poll by Comres on behalf of BBC Radio Five Live, asked 1,002 viewers and listeners about the impact of the Jimmy Savile sex abuse allegations. Just 45 % of respondents believe the BBC is trustworthy, compared to 62 % back in 2009.

Not bad for a month's work Mr Entwistle.

TV Licence: Your Right Not to Buy

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:06:00 +0000

A big thanks to one of our loyal Twitter followers Richard Mitton for bringing an article from today's Telegraph to our attention.

Telegraph blogger and BBC Radio 4 broadcaster (maybe not for much longer) Jake Wallis Simons wrote a post about some of the legally licence free alternatives to buying a TV licence.

He explains: "For all of my adult life, I’ve never owned a television. In the past, this meant that one was limited to watching videos, which was extremely limiting. These days, however, with the advent of DVDs and the internet, there is not a huge difference between having a television and not having one.

"I can watch BBC programmes for free on iPlayer, which is perfectly legal so long as you're not watching live. I can watch Channel 4 On Demand. Films can be watched on DVD, or downloaded on iTunes, Curzon Soho online, and any number of other websites. The news is better consumed on the web, which includes all the video footage one could wish for at the click of a mouse."

As Jake correctly indicates, a TV licence is only required for those properties where equipment is used to receive live broadcast TV programmes. Using the BBC iPlayer, 4oD, ITV Player and other on-demand services to watch non-live content does not require a TV licence.

What he failed to mention is that anyone adopting this legally licence free lifestyle will undoubtedly be hounded by TV Licensing, who ignorantly assume anyone claiming not to watch TV is a liar. Rest assured that TV Licensing, the BBC's revenue collection racket, has no legal authority whatsoever over anyone not requiring a licence. The legally licence free can safely ignore TV Licensing's caustic and legally hollow correspondence and employees.

With the BBC up to its neck in sexual abuse allegations there has never been a better time to abandon the TV licence and stop funding their dubious operation.

Check out our free ebook, TV Licensing Laid Bare, for further information about TV Licensing and the licence fee.

TV Licensing: Harassing Phone Users

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 18:09:00 +0000

Earlier today, in common with thousands of other people across the UK, I received a telephone call from a number I didn't recognise.

Usually, if I'm sat near the computer, I quickly Google the incoming number and decide whether or not to answer it. If the number is withheld my default setting is the hit the reject call button. I view the telephone very much as a device for my convenience and no-one else's.

Researching my anonymous caller I came across the Who Phoned Me? website and my curiosity was naturally drawn to comments left about TV Licensing calls. It appears that TV Licensing's unsolicited phone calls, which we have touched on in the past, are about as popular as their unsolicited monthly letters.

Below, for your entertainment, we list some of the critical soundbites people have published in response to TV Licensing's cold calling. This is only one website for reporting cold calls, so it's probably just the tip of the iceberg as far as the complaints go. I have brushed up some of the spelling, but other than that the comments are as posted:

"Receiving repeated blank calls from this number, when I answer having no response. It is extremely irritating and quite worrying as I have no idea who's on the other end."

"Answer to this number and the person on the other line said "fu**ing c**t" then hung up. Nice!"

"Calls from this number are a pest. On returning call no response."

"My TV licence was due for renewal end of June this year... Not paid it yet as paying rip off stealth tax sticks in my throat... Anyway... been getting these calls recently... Coincidence?"

"I refuse to speak to anyone from their call centre after being patronised and insulted last time I spoke to them."

"They are extremely rude and unprofessional with no interest in dealing with anything other than payments."

"My calls were deliberately disconnected by the agent."

Please leave a comment below if you have also experienced woeful service from the TV Licensing call centre.

Shamelessly Targeting Students

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:17:00 +0000

Unlike TV Licensing proper we have enough balls to admit that we're actively hunting down students.

Students: Please download our latest creation, share it with your friends, tweet the link to your Students' Union and generally spread the word that a TV licence is not obligatory, despite TV Licensing's continual harassment of you and your peers.

We've also designed an information leaflet about laptop usage, as there is often confusion about when a TV licence is required to watch on portable equipment.

Let the good fight continue.

Guess the Next BBC Paedophile

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:51:00 +0000

The Director General's recent observation that Jimmy Savile was a "skillful and successful sexual predator" has sent shock waves rippling through the heart of the BBC.

The Corporation has confirmed it is closely investigating nine more allegations sexual harassment, assault or inappropriate conduct regarding current staff or contributors. With the police poised to make further arrests it seems only a matter of time before other BBC associates are implicated in the sordid Savile child sex scandal. Some of Savile's victims have claimed that an organised paedophile ring operated at the BBC, which involved the procurement of teenagers for the sexual gratification of thus far unnamed celebrities.

Gary Glitter, a known child sex offender, was arrested yesterday as part of the Metropolitan Police's investigation into Savile's abuse, Operation Yewtree. He was released on bail late last night, to return to Charing Cross Police Station in early December. Of course the police have the option of rearresting the disgraced glam rock performer, real name Paul Gadd, if new evidence comes to light.

On reflection the clues of Savile's depraved sexual obsession were clear for all to see. His arrogant air of superiority allowed him to commit sexual predation on a massive scale. So self-assured of his perverse actions Savile groped a teenager live on Top of the Pops in front of millions of viewers and right under the noses of BBC bosses. When she tried to complain about the Yorkshireman's wandering hands she was told to "get lost" because he was "only messing about".

Today, with the temperature at Portland Place reaching critical levels, we take a look at some fictional BBC characters we have suspicions about:

1. Willy the Dog

Last seen in Albert Square in 1992, Ethel's little Willy was a mainstay of tortuous soap Eastenders for almost a decade. With drooling jowls and a glint in his eye, Willy already possesses some traits that liken him to Jimmy Savile. Some people believe Willy's sudden departure from the Square was brought about by him dry humping a passing child's leg, although the BBC refuse to comment on that speculation.

2. Davros the Dalek

Davros is a deranged scientist who wheels around in the exoskeleton of a dalek. He is horribly scarred and crippled, although we wouldn't wish to portray those as characteristics of sexual predation. Rumour has it that if Davros leaves his seat he will shatter into a thousand pieces. Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence pointing at Davros is his ability to speak with a stupid voice, just like Jimmy Savile did.

3. Edd the Duck

It would be no exaggeration to say that Edd the Duck, sporting his trademark green mohican, had an unnatural obsession with children during his time at the BBC. He spent most of his time in the Broom Cupboard, where he lured impressionable youngsters into watching televisual tripe in the late 1980s. Some say that Edd's subliminal messages, which also appeared on milkshake bottles, turned children into submissive zombies that were glued to the gogglebox.

4. Bob the Builder

Bob the Builder has made it to the list because he was recently implicated in a joke about Jimmy Savile. For those of you that haven't heard it goes something like this:

Joker: "Did you hear that Bob the Builder had been sacked by the BBC?"

Victim: "Really? No, I hadn't heard that"

Joker: "Yes. The BBC said they had no option but to sack him, as they're unable to trust any children's TV star who says he can fix it"

It's a good joke, but not quite as subtle as the one that inadvertently made it to air when some moronic BBC Radio Ulster presenter mistook it for a genuine listener comment the other day.

5. Tinky Winky

Effeminate purple Teletubby with a triangular child detecting aerial on his head, who allegedly carries a handbag full of chloroform and cotton wool balls to subdue his targets. Tinky Winky has previously been the centre of sexual innuendo with the revelation that he was actually gay.

Defending Tinky, as he's known to his special friends, against previous rumours a BBC spokesman said: "This is not the first time that people have read symbolism into a children's TV programme and it probably won't be the last.

"As far as we are concerned Tinky Winky is simply a sweet, technological baby with a magic bag".

That denial just about seals it!

It shouldn't be too much longer before other real names come to the fore.