What has been so disgraceful about the BBC's treatment of the alleged corruption of the Brexit referendum is that it puts journalism last.
Instead of using its resources -- which are far larger than any other news organisation -- to report and investigate, its reporters and editors pontificate about the consequences of the journalism of others.
Here @bbclaurak opines about that the National Crime Agency investigation into Leave.EU is "unlikely now to have a material effect". It's not just that she has no possible way of knowing this -- BBC journalists can no more see the future than you or I can.
Proper journalists put the story first and worry about the consequences last - if at all. The BBC won't use its vast resources to cover the Brexit story because all it thinks about is consequences.
I and @carolecadwalla have banged on about the reasons for this until we are sick of the sound of our own voices. The govt and Labour support Brexit. Investigating alleged corruption in the referendum upsets them both. This, of course, is exactly why you should investigate it.
Perhaps one day the BBC will look back and be thoroughly ashamed. Perhaps Buzzfeed and the other hacks who bought Arron Banks' propaganda that @carolecadwalla was a mad woman, rather than a reporter doing the work they refused to do, and be ashamed too. They certainly should be
