BBC & C4 have rightly launched inquiries into Brand — they must be thorough

Brand damage

LIKE the paedophile predator Jimmy Savile, Russell Brand hid his nature in plain sight.

Savile — always obviously weird — remained a TV favourite for decades because the public, without evidence of the monster he really was, assumed him to be a harmless eccentric.

And although the grave allegations denied by Brand still fall far short of Savile’s many crimes, the similarities in the two BBC stars’ cases are striking.

Once again a rich, charismatic celebrity is accused of abusing his power for sexual ends.

And, as with Savile, viewers and fans were so blinded by Brand’s flamboyance and occasional wit that they overlooked that he was often an openly creepy misogynist.

But there is no excuse for anyone in authority at the BBC or Channel 4 if they knew or suspected his private behaviour went far beyond that.

In Savile’s case the corporation protected its “talent” despite widespread staff suspicions. Did it do so again?

Some of the sleazy public incidents Brand got away with should have caused deep concern.

Not least a radio interview with Savile himself where Brand “joked” he would send him his female assistant, naked, to do his bidding.

Ex-BBC1 chief Lorraine Heggessey says: “He was allowed to say the unsayable, to do the unthinkable, and consistently got away with it.”

Behind the scenes his behaviour was allegedly far worse. Some junior workers were appalled.

What did bosses know? As Foreign Secretary James Cleverly says, the entertainment industry has questions to answer.

The BBC still refuses to say if executives ignored staff complaints.

Channel 4 has found no written ­evidence it did so.

Both public service broadcasters have rightly launched inquiries. They must be thorough — and they are urgent.

Because given the serious accusations, of rape and sexual assault, the current evasions will not suffice.

Women erased

HOW revolting that the General Medical Council has erased women from its guidance on both maternity and menopause.

Only women can experience either, as an organisation regulating doctors should know.

2

But woke clowns at the GMC switched mother for “parent” and women for “colleagues experiencing the menopause”. Why?

Because they would rather risk upsetting legions of female staff than a single trans man or the ever-militant trans community.

And, crucially, because no one in power properly pushes back.

The Tories talk a good anti-woke game. But they have been in power 13 years.

Why haven’t they actually done anything to prevent its spread?