The BBC's authoritative Today programme on Radio 4 has just confirmed the widely-held suspicion that Richard Marson, the editor of the children's Blue Peter programme at the time of the cat-naming scandal, was sacked as a consequence.
As even the mighty and much-respected news website CNN.com has featured this column's report on the BBC's wilful decision to name the cat Socks despite an overwhelming majority of viewers voting for it to be called Cookie, we know how seriously this issue is being taken around the world.
But the BBC's determination to punish the perpetrators has not been quite as exhaustive as Director General Mark Thompson has led us to believe.
One culprit remains unpunished, despite being at the very centre of the scandal.
I refer, of course, to the cat itself.
While Socks may well not have have had any say in the name the viewers chose for it, the cat certainly did have a choice in whether it answered to the name it was then given by the BBC.
Under BBC editorial guidelines, the cat was complicit in the deception. That's because it went along with it by answering to the name Socks when the cat knew full well it should have ignored it and only responded when addressed - on or off camera - as Cookie.
No doubt the BBC is investigating whether either Mr Marson or other BBC production staff secured the cat's complicity by offering it inducements, widely thought to have been either small slices of chicken breast or a proprietory brand of cat treats.
Jon McKnight
Author of Sort The Bastards!
