2)... there are no surprises...
So abuse is ok if you're expecting it?
3) The Savile and RC situations are no longer current...
I'm sure all the alleged victims who allegedly lived with the scars of what he allegedly did for years with nobody interested in what happened to them have got over it by now then. Now then...
I posted my previous comment to play devil's advocate a bit, and I'm still doing that here. You've had a crack at trying to explain it, but when you look at it in the terms I put it you're going to struggle to defend Savile jokes.
I'm not arguing with you, just trying to get my head around what seems like a bit of double standards on the 2 stories. I wouldn't dream of going near a story about the missing Welsh girl but I have commented on at least 3 Savile-based stories in the last couple of days saying that I liked them. I'm questioning my own attitude as much as anybody else's.
I think the difference is that no matter how many people come forward with stories of being abused by Savile, he's the celebrity, so he's the focus of the story and therefore the focus of the joke. Because of that people are comfortable reading/writing jokes about it because the story is about him, so they feel like they're reading/writing a joke about him rather than a joke about abuse.
The April Jones story is very much about her, because there is no bigger personality involved, just a missing little girl. So any attempt to make a joke even vaguely related to the story would come across as a joke about a missing little girl.
Some people will make those jokes anyway and try to defend them by saying everything's fair game or nothing is, or claiming that they're testing the boundaries of comedy, or being edgy, when actually they're just being a twat.
If April Jones had been abducted by Jimmy Savile where would that put the story in terms of the acceptability of joking about it?