Most Recent Posts

British TV personality Jimmy Savile, who died in 2011, was a sexual predator who abused hundreds of victims on a scale that is "unprecedented" in Britain, according to a comprehensive police report on the disgraced celebrity. The report by a team that included 30 detectives found that Savile exploited "the vulnerable or star-struck for his sexual gratification."

The case received widespread attention on Oct. 4, 2012, when British broadcaster ITV aired a program in which five women said they had been abused by Savile in the 1970s. Three of them said the abuse occurred at BBC facilities.

The accusations led to the creation of a task force, named Operation Yewtree, the day after the program aired. It also sparked tumult at the BBC, where Savile worked between 1965 and 2006.

The arrival of the report three months after the ITV broadcast in which the women made their accusations against Savile. The report is titled "Giving Victims A Voice." Here are some of its findings:

450 people came forward with information related to Jimmy Savile.

214 crimes were formally recorded, spanning 28 jurisdictions.

The reported abuses occurred between 1955 and 2009, most of them in Leeds and London.

82 percent of those who came forward are female.

73 percent of Savile's victims were under age 18; 27 percent were adults.

The victims' ages at the time of the abuse ranged from 8 to 47.

"It is now clear that Savile was hiding in plain sight and using his celebrity status and fundraising activity to gain uncontrolled access to vulnerable people across six decades," the report's authors wrote. Police say "the locations where victims report being abused include 14 medical establishments (hospitals, mental care establishments and a hospice)."

Enlarge image i

On the criticism Girls has received about a lack of diversity

"I take that criticism very seriously. ... This show isn't supposed to feel exclusionary. It's supposed to feel honest, and it's supposed to feel true to many aspects of my experience. But for me to ignore that criticism and not to take it in would really go against my beliefs and my education in so many things. And I think the liberal-arts student in me really wants to engage in a dialogue about it, but as I learn about engaging with the media, I realize it's not the same as sitting in a seminar talking things through at Oberlin. Every quote is sort of used and misused and placed and misplaced, and I really wanted to make sure I spoke sensitively to this issue. ...

"I wrote the first season primarily by myself, and I co-wrote a few episodes. But I am a half-Jew, half-WASP, and I wrote two Jews and two WASPs. Something I wanted to avoid was tokenism in casting. If I had one of the four girls, if, for example, she was African-American, I feel like — not that the experience of an African-American girl and a white girl are drastically different, but there has to be specificity to that experience [that] I wasn't able to speak to. I really wrote the show from a gut-level place, and each character was a piece of me or based on someone close to me. And only later did I realize that it was four white girls. As much as I can say it was an accident, it was only later as the criticism came out, I thought, 'I hear this and I want to respond to it.' And this is a hard issue to speak to because all I want to do is sound sensitive and not say anything that will horrify anyone or make them feel more isolated, but I did write something that was super-specific to my experience, and I always want to avoid rendering an experience I can't speak to accurately."

“ I've been taking this long, stuttering period of moving out. ... I feel like I'm constantly asking them to please stay out of my work life but also to please bring me soup.

The second season of HBO's critically acclaimed series Girls begins Sunday night, but the show about 20-something girls navigating their social and work lives in New York has itself been criticized for not being diverse enough.

By now, most of you have heard the buzz about Girls: It's written by 26-year-old Lena Dunham, and stars a quartet of young women whose plans sometimes crash face-first into life's nasty realities.

The show's smart dialogue attracted writer Allison Samuels, a cultural critic for Newsweek/The Daily Beast.

"I love the writing," she says. "I think it's really well done."

But she doesn't watch Girls regularly.

"At the end of the day, if you don't have someone that represents my reality as well, I don't feel like that's an invitation to come in and watch," she says.

Television

Lena Dunham Addresses Criticism Aimed At 'Girls'

Florida and several other states are wrestling with a decision: whether to expand Medicaid.

When the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act last year, the court said states could opt out of that part of the law. But it's key. It would provide coverage to millions of low-income Americans who currently have no health insurance.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott says he's concerned about how much expanding Medicaid would cost. But others charge the governor is exaggerating.

No governor fought harder against the Affordable Care Act than Scott. With President Obama's re-election, Scott says he now accepts that it is "the law of the land."

But in an interview this week with a Jacksonville TV station, Scott talked about the area that still troubles him: Medicaid expansion.

"Once you put somebody in a program, you can't undo it," he said.

Under the Affordable Care Act, more than 21 million people across the country currently without insurance could be covered by Medicaid. They "could" because the Supreme Court ruled that for states, expanding Medicaid is optional.

The Obama administration worked to make it an attractive option. Under the law, the federal government would pick up the entire cost of insuring new Medicaid recipients for the first three years and 90 percent of the costs after that.

Despite that, some states, like Texas, say they have no plans to expand Medicaid. That's also been Scott's position in Florida. He says that's because of its potential impact on the state's budget.

"The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration put out a report that said it's going to cost $26 billion over 10 years. There's going to be other studies. It's all tied to what assumptions you have," he says. "But here's what we know: It's not free."

But that estimate appears to be greatly inflated. Since the Scott administration first released those numbers last month, they have been panned by health care analysts and economists for ignoring the new, larger share of Medicaid costs being picked up under the Affordable Care Act by the federal government.

The governor's numbers are at least four times higher than estimates compiled by independent health care analysts and the Florida Legislature.

Karen Woodall, who heads the Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, says that rather than costing the state $26 billion, some independent estimates show Medicaid expansion may actually help Florida save money.

"And that's because they are calculating the cost benefit of expansion of Medicaid in that we would be saving money that wouldn't have to be spent taking care of people who don't have insurance," she says.

According to a report this week in Health News Florida, Republicans in the state Legislature last month alerted Scott's staff that his Medicaid expansion numbers were faulty. But Scott continued to use them, even in a meeting this week with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

That's troubling to Rep. Mark Pafford, a Democrat who helps oversee health care spending in the Statehouse.

"To me, it suggests that the governor's not having an honest conversation — not only with the folks who are going to depend on the Affordable Care Act, but also with major officials in Washington, D.C.," he says.

At first, Scott's office stood by his numbers, saying they were one of a set of different cost estimates he would consider going forward. But on Wednesday, the Republican chairman of Florida's House Appropriations Committee joined the criticism. A few hours later, the Scott administration released a new study that downgraded the cost of expanding Medicaid to $3 billion over 10 years — only about one-tenth of his original estimate.

Ultimately, the decision about expanding Medicaid may be made, not by Scott, but the state Legislature. Florida's House and Senate have set up special committees to begin working on the issue.

Woodall says Medicaid expansion would bring $20 billion in federal health care funds to Florida over the next decade — a cash infusion that would help the economy, especially small businesses that rely on low-wage workers.

"So I think, ultimately, the Legislature is going to see that this is a benefit to Florida and they'll move forward with it," she says.

Scott's decision then would be whether to sign it.