UK - Jonathan Ross & Russell Brand

[Neil]

What an absolute embarrassment to this country - So they make a somewhat juvenile phone call. It wasn't really offensive, but now we have people resigning and being suspended over it. And it's even being talked about in the House of Commons!

Why? Because too many people in this country are whining sheep all too eager to pander to the nonsense whipped up by a newspaper!

Utter utter nonsense! Makes this country look like a joke! I'm ashamed!

If enough people complain about the Daily Mail, can it be sacked?

[krakenslayer]

Yeah, I was sort of in agreement with the complaints at first - let comedians do what they want as long as they don't physically drag unwilling participants in to it - but now I think it's blown out of all sense of proportion and scale, and I'm sick of hearing about it. Sure, I would have lost my job if I'd done that from my workplace, but on the other hand they wouldn't be asking questions in government about it.

In my opinion, the papers have realised that we're all sick of reading about the looming recession and are desperate to come up with something to distract us from it. And "sleb" gossip usually does the trick for the shambling masses.

[Neil]

How on earth have people lost their jobs over this? It terrorfies me so many people can act like mindless sheep and follow the Daily Mail's stupid vendetta!

[MinionZombie]

My thoughts:

If some chav rang up an old person and left lewd messages on their phone saying they'd f*cked their grand-daughter, that's be a criminal offence - but because it's two bloated egos at the BBC then that's all fine? :rockbrow:

Sachs did not consent to the material being used, but it was used anyway.

Sachs did not request to be involved in the gag, and the man can hardly be considered much of a public figure these days - and certainly not a celebrity in the Heat magazine vein of the term. Public figures are open to ridicule and mockery, some person you've never heard of isn't.

A good comedian knows their targets and chooses them wisely, you attack an institution, an organisation, a religion, or a public figure or politician - this is where Brand and Ross both faltered.

I too, don't find "comedy" at all funny when the public is the butt of the joke, and isn't in on it either.

...

As for the furore, don't be labelling me a Daily Mailer - I hate that rag, like most tabloids, just a bunch of bile-inducing hate machines.

But I think the extent of this fuss goes waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay beyond the central issue, and has become a sort of 'excuse' if you will, for people to organise and level criticism en mass at the BBC, over issues such as:

* BBC's political bias, despite claiming to be impartial.
* The License Fee - which is no longer suitable, this is not the 1930s anymore, there are literally hundreds of channels out there doing the exact same programming, and even doing it better.

I can't be doing with Brand, he was only bearable enough in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. As for Ross, I can't be doing with him either, I only watch Friday Night With... when there's a good guest on, and then it often ends up being Ross blathering over the guest, or somehow managing to circle the topic of conversation back onto him, or somehow descending the chat into a smutty pit that makes no comedic sense - e.g. when he asked David Cameron - the leader of the opposition party here in the UK, if he ever wanked-off to Margaret Thatcher. *sigh* I mean there are far funnier jokes you could ask of a political leader than that, I mean that's 10 year old stuff.

I think both Brand and Ross are two bloated bags of their own self-important wind, ESPECIALLY Ross, but you know what - at least Brand had the chuddies to film an apology that he also seemed to really mean, he even chose to resign from his Radio show, and he seemed to have genuinely owned up and realised he'd just gone that bit too far - so he's done plenty enough, although if he hasn't already (which the rumour is), he needs to apologise (as does Ross), to the grand-daughter in question, not just Andrew Sachs.

As for Ross, I think the BBC should lob him out of Film 2008 and put Mark Kermode in there instead, Kermode is a genuine film critic, not just a trumped up film fan who fawns over every celebrity guest he gets on his show before he either completely loves, or completely loathes a film with his flabby, paint-by-numbers film critique which is just a notch above Paul Ross.

...

As for government involvement - they should have nothing to do with it. Fine, make a passing remark if asked about it, but it shouldn't have any place in the House of Commons, nor should Gordon-bloody-Brown be having any part in it what-so-ever ... no doubt 'his words' on it being put out to the media was down to that absolute evil bastard Alistair Campbell, who's managed to sleek his way back in on the coat-tails of bloody Mandelson.

...

I don't find the content in question offensive, but I also find it to have just gone over the line with an unfair target - like I said, if it was some chav doing it, it'd be lewd harrassment and there'd either be a fine or a suspended sentence, perhaps more.

As for Ross being suspended without pay until a verdict is reached by the BBC (that Mark Thompson is a bit of a twat too, in my opinion), that's enough for me, as it means he loses about one-point-something-million-quid over the 12 week period he's off-air.

And that's another thing - the BBC shouldn't be held to ransom by these ego-fuelled presenters. You know what? Find new, fresh (and cheaper) talent elsewhere and let the bloated egos fight for work elsewhere.

The BBC also needs to wake the f*ck up already and realise that it isn't Channel 4, or even E4. It needs to:

* Produce actually un-biased news.
* Pay their big stars less.
* Produce programming that isn't being produced elsewhere - which is actually impossible, due to the afforementioned variety of channels out there.
* At the very least, REDUCE the license fee significantly, £139 just for the BBC per year is a bloody ludicrous notion, especially as their 'reason for being' is no longer relevant or adhered to.

As for the license fee - I object to it - it's no longer of any point, due to the sheer volume of channels out there that are paying their own way through subscriptions (that you choose to pay) and advertising. It's also a goddamned tax that you are forced to pay for fear of being fined £1,000!!! :eek:

*gasps*

Rant over.

[Neil]

Sachs had agreed to be on the show (I believe).

He agreed to have the material played.

In the day(s) that followed the show there were TWO complains - Sachs being 50% of that figure.

Then the Daily Mail gets it teeth into the story and whips it up...

Apologies were made, Sach accepted...


Now the SINGLE comment everyone is talking about is, 'He f*cked your granddaughter':-
1) This is a fact. He did! It's not a malicious lie. He was stating a fact.
2) Brand could - as happens every week - sell his story to a paper with intimate details and even photos. So Sachs could open a paper and see reems of intimate facts about his granddaughter complete with pictures. How is the juvenile phone call any worse to that?

Surely this is more embarressing to Sachs? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/10/31/exclusive-granddaughter-in-jonathan-ross-russell-brand-prank-call-a-110-per-hour-dominatrix-115875-20855480/

Yes it was Juvenile and personally at most a weeks suspension to those involved. But people losing their jobs? People having to resign? Being being suspended for months? The House of Commons? FFS!



What's interesting is how many people wade into this matter talking about license fees and Jonathan Ross' salary - What the hell does that have to do with applying common sense to a small juvenile act. Seems many other people are grinding other axes here, rather than being sensible.

And BTW - While Jonathan Ross' shows are not made, what's the bet the BBC are not infact losing money (not saving it). I suspect that show is syndicated around the world rather well!


As for the license fee! I'm annoyed the spending of it is being dictated by a mindless mob raised by tabloid gutter press jounalists basically calling for the burning of witches...

[horrormad]

My thoughts:

It was only a prank phone call, they were only having some fun.

I hope Jonathon Ross doesnt get sacked as the guys tv show is hilarious.

[krakenslayer]

While I agree with you on most points, Neil, I must say...


Now the SINGLE comment everyone is talking about is, 'He f*cked your granddaughter':-
1) This is a fact. He did! It's not a malicious lie. He was stating a fact.

That makes it even worse, IMO. That turns it from a stupid, juvenile wind-up into quite a spiteful, arrogant stab

[Neil]

That makes it even worse, IMO. That turns it from a stupid, juvenile wind-up into quite a spiteful, arrogant stab

Possibly so... I think everyone is agree this is the single point of conjecture with this argument.

But none-the-less, it was a single statement, made 'at the moment', which wasn't meant to be 'spiteful'... Maybe it was misplaced, but such mistakes happen.

Do people need to lose jobs over that one statement?


And let's put this into context. I suspect the very press baying for Ross' blood have published articles FAR more hurtful about celebrities (private lives).

[capncnut]

Yeah, this a load of wind over nothing. I don't even think the telephone call was all that offensive to be honest, anyone can see that it was just a laugh - nothing more.

Brand resigning? Wossy suspended for 3 months? If the BBC think this is punishment then they are wrong because they are only punishing themselves in the long run. Brand was a popular radio host and had a lot of people tuning in, the BBC can expect a major loss of listeners now. And do they think ol' Wossy gives a s**t about losing 1.5 mill, personally I would tell the BBC to stick their contract up their arse.

LOL, Andrew Sachs. Not exactly Prince Charles is he? And now his daughter is selling her story to The Sun, talking all about her sexual exploits with Brand, how he kept saying "Que?" when making love, and how he's not all that in the 'sach'. What a joke! :lol:

[Neil]

Yeah, this a load of wind over nothing. I don't even think the telephone call was all that offensive to be honest, anyone can see that it was just a laugh - nothing more.

Brand resigning? Wossy suspended for 3 months? If the BBC think this is punishment then they are wrong because they are only punishing themselves in the long run. Brand was a popular radio host and had a lot of people tuning in, the BBC can expect a major loss of listeners now. And do they think ol' Wossy gives a s**t about losing 1.5 mill, personally I would tell the BBC to stick their contract up their arse.

LOL, Andrew Sachs. Not exactly Prince Charles is he? And now his daughter is selling her story to The Sun, talking all about her sexual exploits with Brand, how he kept saying "Que?" when making love, and how he's not all that in the 'sach'. What a joke! :lol:

The ONLY people who could claim to be offended by this were Sachs, and possibly little miss dominatrix. Sachs accepted the apology - Done! How can anyone else claim to be offended?

Then the Mail decide to get their sales figures up!

I'm so frustrated the BBC have given into those Daily Mail maggots! I bet the journalists behind this are so chuffed how much money/hassle they've dished out to Brand and Ross.

I hope the Mail continue their antics and Ross can sue them for some of the $hit they're stirring up!

They're actually trying to get him sacked from some ITV contracts now!

[capncnut]

Now it's going too far.

Click (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/BBC-Prank-Calls-Jonathan-Ross-Gets-3-Month-Ban-Radio-2-Boss-Lesley-Douglas-Resigns-Russell-Brand/Article/200810415137104?lpos=UK_News_News_Your_Way_Region_ 8&lid=NewsYourWay_ARTICLE_15137104_BBC_Prank_Calls%3 A_Jonathan_Ross_Gets_3-Month_Ban_Radio_2_Boss_Lesley_Douglas_Resigns%2C_R ussell_Brand)

Wossy is being called upon to financially compensate the radio boss who was sacked in the whole debacle. Not only that but apparently one of the conditions of his return in January is that he must not 'bring the BBC into disrepute again'. :lol:


They're actually trying to get him sacked from some ITV contracts now!
Edit: He's now dropped out of the British Comedy Awards, which is an ITV show. The whole thing is bordering on a farce!

[SymphonicX]

I just hate to think I'm paying 139 quid a year to hear two infantile idiots making prank calls....forgetting all the politics, the BBC is meant to be a public service broadcaster - they have no agenda where others do (and is why I am a supporter of the licence fee) and they have a public service mandate, which I'm pretty sure does not involve harassing any members of the public regardless of where and what shows they previously worked on.

[Neil]

I just hate to think I'm paying 139 quid a year to hear two infantile idiots making prank calls....forgetting all the politics, the BBC is meant to be a public service broadcaster - they have no agenda where others do (and is why I am a supporter of the licence fee) and they have a public service mandate, which I'm pretty sure does not involve harassing any members of the public regardless of where and what shows they previously worked on.

Yes! We should have 24/7 news, gardening and documentaries about shire horse!

Some one off messages on an answerphone = harrassement? When he was suppose to be there to take the call anyway (& wasn't)?


Not happy with the careers they've already dented (keep in mind Ross has lost ITV contracts now too), they've realised their onto a good thing, and in an attempt to keep their sales up, they've inventing more news - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081966/Even-Russell-Brand-row-raged-BBC-comedians-insulting-Queen.html


Wossy is being called upon to financially compensate the radio boss who was sacked in the whole debacle. Not only that but apparently one of the conditions of his return in January is that he must not 'bring the BBC into disrepute again'.

I thought she resigned?

Clearly, we need a Daily Mail editor in charge of every Ross program to protect us all!

[SymphonicX]

Yes! We should have 24/7 news, gardening and documentaries about shire horse!

Some one off messages on an answerphone = harrassement? When he was suppose to be there to take the call anyway (& wasn't)?


Not happy with the careers they've already dented (keep in mind Ross has lost ITV contracts now too), they've realised their onto a good thing, and in an attempt to keep their sales up, they've inventing more news - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081966/Even-Russell-Brand-row-raged-BBC-comedians-insulting-Queen.html



I thought she resigned?

Clearly, we need a Daily Mail editor in charge of every Ross program to protect us all!

Yep, Daily Mail is evil bandwagon newspaper from hell....no doubt about it...

But my problem is the infantile way of delivering their comedy - the jokes on Mock the Week are at least intelligent and have a point based on reality....Brand and Ross were just using their egos as a way to exploit some poor guy's private life....it just wasn't funny and didn't need to be aired...

[capncnut]

I thought she resigned?
Yes, silly me!

35,000 complaints and rising. :rolleyes:

[Neil]

Yep, Daily Mail is evil bandwagon newspaper from hell....no doubt about it...

But my problem is the infantile way of delivering their comedy - the jokes on Mock the Week are at least intelligent and have a point based on reality....Brand and Ross were just using their egos as a way to exploit some poor guy's private life....it just wasn't funny and didn't need to be aired...

You forget... In your opinion...

I happen to like them both...

As for Sach's personal life:-
1) He could have said, no don't call me.
2) He could have said, no don't broadcast the messages.

There is no way with any common sense applied people should be losing jobs over this, or indeed be suspended for months! Utter madness!

[capncnut]

There is no way with any common sense applied people should be losing jobs over this, or indeed be suspended for months! Utter madness!
Completely agree, such seriousness over stupidity.

Years ago, the BBC had a programme called The Sunday Show where a mock roving reporter called Dennis Pennis took the piss/insulted celebrities to their face in a much cruder fashion than the way Brand and Woss did and was just as funny. Why the BBC are so up in arms about this incident is totally unfathomable.

[Danny]

the whole things a ****nig farce, they made a dick move and apologized. there, thats called ending a matter. but as usual the british public loves nothing more than to be brewed into a hate fervor over whatever the ****ing tabloids say is the hot topic of the week.
i dont like brand, ross is hit and miss, but they shouldn't even be suspended, they apologized for a lewd joke they made which offended the only person they should apologize to and that should have been that. but nowadays in this country everyones scared of everything so you cant bloody win no matter what they both do.

[SymphonicX]

You forget... In your opinion...

I happen to like them both...

As for Sach's personal life:-
1) He could have said, no don't call me.
2) He could have said, no don't broadcast the messages.

There is no way with any common sense applied people should be losing jobs over this, or indeed be suspended for months! Utter madness!

If this was ITV, yes....

But it's the BBC...it's public service broadcasting...so to keep some level of decorum is nice, when they don't and it's thrown back in their faces they have to be seen to do something - besides, I am gleeful that these idiots are getting lambasted by the press, they deserve it...it's just a shame they're not off the telly forever.

[MinionZombie]

Yep, Daily Mail is evil bandwagon newspaper from hell....no doubt about it...

But my problem is the infantile way of delivering their comedy - the jokes on Mock the Week are at least intelligent and have a point based on reality....Brand and Ross were just using their egos as a way to exploit some poor guy's private life....it just wasn't funny and didn't need to be aired...
Woohoo for Mock The Week!

As for that Queen gag, lay off it Daily Mail yeah? Stop being losers, MTW is f*cking hilarious with a whole raft of intelligent, quick-witted comedians on it. The Queen is a public figure, and like religion, institutions, organisations and political figures and celebrities, is open to a whole raft of mockery ... ... some guy who used to be on Fawlty Towers playing a bumbling waiter, and a struggling goth-ish model aren't public figures of note and are therefore not fair targets - which is essentially what's at fault here.

I wasn't offended by either comment now being chatted about, but I still stand by my statement that as the involved Sachs' can't really be considered well-known media personalities (either anymore, or currently - BEFORE this crap all started), it's unfair to target them - they're essentially a normal everyday person.

He's out of the spotlight these days, she's only in the spotlight of niche markets ... and would you want your grandparent getting told in a rather lewd fashion what you get up to? No you wouldn't, because it's not necessary - I don't care if she's in the "Satanic Sluts" or does a bit of Dominatrixing on the side - fair play to her, but she also needs to shut up and stop throwing stones in The Sun, another hideous tabloid rag that should be ashamed of itself on a daily basis.

The vengeance has gotten out of hand now though, if Ross should suffer any job losses, it should be on the BBC, rather than ITV - which is a totally different network, who actually pay their own way ... not like the BBC who force £139 out of you every year, and then make a mint from merchandising and international sales (both shows and formats), which is a huge lump of arrogance in itself.

I'd much prefer this issue to be cast aside, and for the real issues to be set out - the license fee, and the political bias of the BBC for two - far more serious issues that need rectifying immediately. :mad:

But back to this Brand/Ross stuff, yet again, if some chav rang up an old guy and said stuff like 'I've been shagging your grand-daughter, the dirty slag', or what have you (not trying to quote or misquote Brand/Ross there, so calm down :rolleyes:), then that'd be a criminal offence ... but because it's two bloated ego's at the BBC it's okay?

So in summary, I'm somewhere in the middle ... I certainly don't think it's the worst of humanity on show, but I certainly don't think that everyone can strut around like arrogant pricks who reckon their turd doesn't stink of sh*t.

*gasps*

Rant over ... again. :D

[Tricky]

Regardless of this incident,brand & ross are both a pair of smug arrogant tw*ts & if this gets them off my screen im all for it!Im definitely not a comedy prude either,i was at a chubby brown concert last night!Chubby is crude & some people find him hard to swallow (he gets branded racist,yet there was a lot of coloured faces in the audience last night who bought tickets knowing full well what he's like & were laughing their heads off!) ,but theres no way even he would pull a stunt like this because he's an old school comedian with respect believe it or not,yet he's been banned from tv since the 80's!
If one of my sisters ex boyfriends rang my grandparents & started telling them he'd shagged their grand daughter i would personally go round & knock seven shades out of him!

[SymphonicX]

Regardless of this incident,brand & ross are both a pair of smug arrogant tw*ts & if this gets them off my screen im all for it!Im definitely not a comedy prude either,i was at a chubby brown concert last night!Chubby is crude & some people find him hard to swallow (he gets branded racist,yet there was a lot of coloured faces in the audience last night who bought tickets knowing full well what he's like & were laughing their heads off!) ,but theres no way even he would pull a stunt like this because he's an old school comedian with respect believe it or not,yet he's been banned from tv since the 80's!
If one of my sisters ex boyfriends rang my grandparents & started telling them he'd shagged their grand daughter i would personally go round & knock seven shades out of him!


agreed, but I think chubby brown is a wanker and deserves death, rather like Bernard Manning...

[Neil]

If this was ITV, yes....

But it's the BBC...it's public service broadcasting...so to keep some level of decorum is nice, when they don't and it's thrown back in their faces they have to be seen to do something - besides, I am gleeful that these idiots are getting lambasted by the press, they deserve it...it's just a shame they're not off the telly forever.

Not at all... I pay my license fee for some decent edgy comedy...

I suspect if you had your way we'd have Terry and June all evening...

[SymphonicX]

Not at all... I pay my license fee for some decent edgy comedy...

I suspect if you had your way we'd have Terry and June all evening...

Not at all, we'd have intelligent edgy comedy...if we're gonna do phone harassment why not Fonejacker? That's totally spot on, edgy, funny, and doesn't once involve someone bragging about who they've had sex with....

Brand and Ross = infantile...my licence fee shouldn't go to pay their wages - if I want Jerry Springer humour I'll turn on Dave or G.O.L.D or something.

[Neil]

Not at all, we'd have intelligent edgy comedy...if we're gonna do phone harassment why not Fonejacker? That's totally spot on, edgy, funny, and doesn't once involve someone bragging about who they've had sex with....

Brand and Ross = infantile...my licence fee shouldn't go to pay their wages - if I want Jerry Springer humour I'll turn on Dave or G.O.L.D or something.

Get a grip man... 'Phone harrassment?'
- Was this an habitual activity for them? Or a single one off case?
- Was the phone call out of the blue? Or had Sachs actually agree to it?
- Were any slanderous insulting references made about Sachs? Was he subject to a torrent of abuse?
- How many of nearly half a million listeners of the program were offended? How many complained over the following seven days? TWO.

For goodness sake!

There are too many parish council curtain twitchers getting carried away here? Was is slightly out of order? Possibly? But an apology was more than enough. Far far more offensive acts take place regularly within comic bounderies, but because these are two high profile individuals they have been 'targeted' but people who have other axes to grind.

It's frankly pathetic... And The House of Commons indeed! :annoyed:

The people of this country are idiots at times. Two wars, a huge credit crunch, and the most important thing people can thing of kicking off on is a silly phone prank? Joyless sheep!

I've not been so infuriated about anything this much since we invaded Iraq. Seriously! Makes this country look utterly bafoonish!

[SymphonicX]

Not at all, we'd have intelligent edgy comedy...if we're gonna do phone harassment why not Fonejacker? That's totally spot on, edgy, funny, and doesn't once involve someone bragging about who they've had sex with....

Brand and Ross = infantile...my licence fee shouldn't go to pay their wages - if I want Jerry Springer humour I'll turn on Dave or G.O.L.D or something.

Get a grip man... 'Phone harrassment?'
- Was this an habitual activity for them? Or a single one off case?
- Was the phone call out of the blue? Or had Sachs actually agree to it?
- Were any slanderous insulting references made about Sachs? Was he subject to a torrent of abuse?
- How many of nearly half a million listeners of the program were offended? How many complained over the following seven days? TWO.

For goodness sake!

There are too many parish council curtain twitchers getting carried away here? Was is slightly out of order? Possibly? But an apology was more than enough. Far far more offensive acts take place regularly within comic bounderies, but because these are two high profile individuals they have been 'targeted' but people who have other axes to grind.

It's frankly pathetic... And The House of Commons indeed! :annoyed:

The people of this country are idiots at times. Two wars, a huge credit crunch, and the most important thing people can thing of kicking off on is a silly phone prank? Joyless sheep!

I've not been so infuriated about anything this much since we invaded Iraq. Seriously! Makes this country look utterly bafoonish!

It doesn't need to be habitual. I'm all for a laugh and a joke but I'd rather not directly pay for it with a crippling tax that I could do without every year...as I said, on any other channel this is fine - but this **** is the further americanisation of the BBC and dumbing down of it's output. I think offensive things are great and in context are brilliant, but this stupid act was context-less and inane, and I dont see why I should have to pay for it. I'm the furthest you could ever get from conservative, but the bottom line is the BBC is meant to be an institution that we can rely on not to pander to that "baying for blood" attitude and teenie bobbing rubbish - even on BBC3 this would've been a bit of a push, and they are aiming for that audience...

[MinionZombie]

Nobody's debating or disagreeing that it's beyond preposterous for the politicians to be getting involved, and nor is anyone really disagreeing that it's all gotten out of hand now.

But I say yet again - if some chav rang up an old person and left lewd messages (I've heard that Brand/Ross left four such messages?), that'd be a criminal offence, but because it's two self-important twats off the telly it's alright? :rockbrow:

I do wonder if Sachs really knew what he was getting into, or what have you ... but anyway, I'm fed up of talking about this thing now, the news has paid way too much attention to it rather than FAR MORE IMPORTANT things - such as, who knew the 42-day detention bill had been rejected by The Lords and then completely dropped in Parliament when it bounced back?

Twatface Brown makes such a spectacle about it a few months back, making himself look like a hard man - when in reality he's playing with the lives of potentially innocent people (I would like to know how many of these detained people really are guilty), and then when it's swept under the rug the news refuses to report it - sickening - and in more than one way, because clearly Alistair Campbell - one of the most disgusting, vile, fetid people existing within the political system today (even worse than Mandelson!) - has deliberately snuck this out under the cover of other news, and no doubt bullied the newscasters into not reporting on it.

Absolutely vile. :mad:

[Neil]

It doesn't need to be habitual. I'm all for a laugh and a joke but I'd rather not directly pay for it with a crippling tax that I could do without every year...as I said, on any other channel this is fine - but this **** is the further americanisation of the BBC and dumbing down of it's output. I think offensive things are great and in context are brilliant, but this stupid act was context-less and inane, and I dont see why I should have to pay for it. I'm the furthest you could ever get from conservative, but the bottom line is the BBC is meant to be an institution that we can rely on not to pander to that "baying for blood" attitude and teenie bobbing rubbish - even on BBC3 this would've been a bit of a push, and they are aiming for that audience...

So infact you're not particularly offended by the act? Just the fact you taxes pay the people involved? Fair enough.

But the taxes pay for a massive cross section of entertainment, much of which would not get produced otherwise. You cannot keep all the people happy all the time. I don't watch Songs of Praise - I would rather not pay for it. I think Speed is a diabolical movie, yet my taxes paid for that to be on instead of Jonathan Ross, a program I look forward to each week.

As I said, too many people are using this matter as a topic to cash in other issues, which frankly is just unfair.

The phone call(s) themselves were in reality pretty harmless, yet we have people losing jobs, millions of pounds be affected, the House of Commons talking about it. And why? In reality just because a couple of journalists want a witch hunt. If the Mail had not jumped on this story, would the world be a worse place? No, quite the opposite. I suspect Sachs would have been more than happy with the apology. Although I suspect his granddaughter would have been anoyed at the loss of pay outs she's received!


But I say yet again - if some chav rang up an old person and left lewd messages (I've heard that Brand/Ross left four such messages?), that'd be a criminal offence, but because it's two self-important twats off the telly it's alright? :rockbrow:

1) This was not a call out of the blue, it was pre-arranged, and infact Sachs should have been there to answer.
2) Stop listening to second-hand opinions and just listen to it :rolleyes: - Here are the parts of the show pertaining to the calls spliced togethor. Now listen carefully! Is this the most offensive thing you've ever heard? Should people deserve to lose jobs? zrUZ2N8x2GI - I find it funny!

[SymphonicX]

So infact you're not particularly offended by the act? Just the fact you taxes pay the people involved? Fair enough.

But the taxes pay for a massive cross section of entertainment, much of which would not get produced otherwise. You cannot keep all the people happy all the time. I don't watch Songs of Praise - I would rather not pay for it. I think Speed is a diabolical movie, yet my taxes paid for that to be on instead of Jonathan Ross, a program I look forward to each week.

As I said, too many people are using this matter as a topic to cash in other issues, which frankly is just unfair.

The phone call(s) themselves were in reality pretty harmless, yet we have people losing jobs, millions of pounds be affected, the House of Commons talking about it. And why? In reality just because a couple of journalists want a witch hunt. If the Mail had not jumped on this story, would the world be a worse place? No, quite the opposite. I suspect Sachs would have been more than happy with the apology. Although I suspect his granddaughter would have been anoyed at the loss of pay outs she's received!



1) This was not a call out of the blue, it was pre-arranged, and infact Sachs should have been there to answer.
2) Stop listening to second-hand opinions and just listen to it :rolleyes: - Here are the parts of the show pertaining to the calls spliced togethor. Now listen carefully! Is this the most offensive thing you've ever heard? Should people deserve to lose jobs? zrUZ2N8x2GI - I find it funny!

Not offended exactly, but bemused at it's inanity and disappointed that it's part of the BBC mandate to be a prick to people over the phone....

I take onboard your point about offering a cross-section of entertainment, and I refer you to my original point that this cross section now involves the dumbing down of our nationalised TV/Radio service to the point where it's not offering anything that other channels don't offer, and in fact is proving itself to be just as dumb and heavy handed as some other channels around...

[MinionZombie]

I never said I ever considered it offensive, my reason for disliking it has been laid out over and over again in this thread.

Somehow I doubt Sachs was agreeing to be phoned up about Brand f*cking his grand-daughter, far from it - clearly it was about a documentary, which is no wonder he agreed to it - and I do wonder, did he give consent PRIOR or AFTER the messages?

Ross - who clearly STARTED the whole thing with that childish and completely un-necessary comment (I mean who with any respect or common sense would blurt out "I F*CKED YOUR GRAND-DAUGHTER" when talking to a senior generation, or indeed someone you claim to admire and respect?) I mean come on now.

Then clearly the whole thing went into a territory that Sachs would never have wanted it to go - a territory that seems to have arisen out of frustration that Sachs wasn't there to answer his phone, which isn't exactly fair retribution.

Brand going into details about condoms and consent - well, GOOD on both parts, but I'm sure that's just rubbing salt into a wound. THEN the impromptu song comes forth - including stuff like 'she wasn't menstrual' - I mean again, you've made a crass and unnecessary crap joke even more unnecessary and tasteless and unrequested, and is clearly a phone call that has strayed deep into phone prank territory (rather than the INTENDED phone call interview about a documentary), and not even a good phone prank as it's been taken too far and gotten too silly and out of control.

The two of them should have had more common sense and paused for breath for a moment, and could have easily rectified it all by simply leaving a genuinely honest appology (not a 'comedy' one), but they didn't and made it worse and more graphic for the poor old bugger who never intended to be subjected to gory details about Brand shagging his way through his grand-daughter.

But likewise, this Georgina shouldn't be throwing any stones in her glass house, running off to The Sun to spill beans in a desperate attempt to acquire fame - fame she didn't have, thus making her uneligable as a target for 'edgy' humour (I've previously laid out which targets are suitable).

Actual edgy humour straddles the edge, but doesn't cross it - I'm not saying you can't cross the line, and heck I have crossed the line in jokes with the lads - but only with the lads who are in on the joke, and it's never gone beyond - certainly not into a public sphere of national broadcast.

Occasionally you do get a bit purile when egged on, but these two ninnies should realise they're on public national radio, and with the responsibility that comes with being paid vast sums of money, should have thought - you know what, let's not - or at the very least, leave a genuine appology, rather than make it way worse and then lead to a huge amount of kerfuffle (which is too much for the crime).

A genuine appology on air and in person to all involved, and a fine would be plenty enough.

As for the behind the scenes people getting fired, they'll walk into another job just fine, in this biz it's all about who you know and they'll be more than fine I'm sure, even if it is a bit extreme to be resigning - something which, come to think of it, politicians should do MORE of when they've done something rather wrong, WAY WORSE than these two purile idiots full of their own importance ... not just Mandelson resigning on behalf of the entire political class seemingly. :lol:

...

*gasps*

Can't really say much more on the subject, I've exhausted my points, and these new points enough and am officially sick of the subject, in fact I find the continued reporting of it almost offensive. :p

[Neil]

A genuine appology on air and in person to all involved, and a fine would be plenty enough.
I concur... But The Daily Mail have taken it upon themselves to protect the country and cynically do as much damage to these individuals careers as possible.

30,000 were not offended by the program. They were rounded up by a paper on a low-brow campaign... Diabolical!

[Tricky]

agreed, but I think chubby brown is a wanker and deserves death, rather like Bernard Manning...

For what reason exactly?

Oh and gordon browns involvement in this whole thing clearly is an attempt to divert headlines away from the fact he's financially f*cked the country & indeed the entire nations grand kids

[SymphonicX]

For what reason exactly?

The disgusting racist remarks, propogating stupid rumours about ethnic groups and generally contributing to more gash in the world. He's a bigot, mysoginistic prick...

When he does battle of the sexes comedy, he gets laughs...

When he does racist stuff...he gets cheered....

says a lot.

[kidgloves]

This whole episode is complete nonsense and a perfect example of the media telling the public what they should be offended about. They then hammer home the point.
I used to like Brand but he very quickly became a one trick pony and i could take him or leave him.
Ross will always be a legend in my eyes because of his love of cult movies but recently his act has grown very tired and has turned into a chat on the sofa with his mates.
I can only assume someone somewhere had it in for these two and pushed the story to its conclusion. I don't care how much Ross earns its the going rate for someone of his status within the biz and if the beeb don't pay him it, someone else will.

[Tricky]

The disgusting racist remarks, propogating stupid rumours about ethnic groups and generally contributing to more gash in the world. He's a bigot, mysoginistic prick...

When he does battle of the sexes comedy, he gets laughs...

When he does racist stuff...he gets cheered....

says a lot.


He was getting big laughs from the people of various races who were sat in the audience which also says a lot,the black girl sat in front of me was laughing her head off through his entire routine!he tells crude jokes & sings daft songs,its been his act for 30 or more years,people who buy tickets know exactly what they are going to get.He's actually less crude than most of whats on TV post 9pm by modern standards anyway

[SymphonicX]

He was getting big laughs from the people of various races who were sat in the audience which also says a lot,the black girl sat in front of me was laughing her head off through his entire routine!he tells crude jokes & sings daft songs,its been his act for 30 or more years,people who buy tickets know exactly what they are going to get.He's actually less crude than most of whats on TV post 9pm by modern standards anyway

I've heard his stuff, many times...you'll never get me to think well of this guy.

Just because there was an idiot girl laughing at jokes he's making doesn't mean his stuff is needed in the world, sorry but he attracts a certain type of person which means a certain type of humour, and it's toilet stuff...no offence.... Him, Jim Davidson, Bernard Manning....ugh.

[Neil]

...sent to Ofcom:-

I would like to complain about the conduct of Mark Thompson over the Brand/Ross incident, and in general with the way the BBC has handled the issue.

I think that while it can be agreed that the phone call made to Andrew Sachs was regretful, both Ross & Brand issued apologies to Andrew Sachs, and these apologies were accepted. What occurred subsequently was in effect a media run witch hunt which has made scapegoats of these two well loved presenters, and has allowed Mark Thompson to hide failings in management and editorial policy behind a public lynching.

There is a ground swell of support for both Ross and Brand by people who feel that the way these two have been pilloried is appalling.

The BBC employed both presenters precisely because of their anarchic and irreverent style and has enjoyed significant ratings thanks to the programme’s broadcast by both. To employ such presenters requires strong editorial policy to ensure that while the best of their output is captured, incidents such as the Andrew Sachs phone call are caught editorially and not broadcast.

It is beyond contempt to find that in the event of this editorial policy failing, it is the presenters themselves who are made an example of, and to find the DG capitulating to complaints made by people who are not fans of the broadcasters in question, rather than standing by the talent recruited is baffling in the extreme.

As part of the your investigation I would urge you look closely at these aspects of the incident, listeners/viewers of shows by Ross & Brand are fully aware of their style of content and given the viewing figures for their programme’s, it is clear there is indeed an audience for such content.

The license paying audience is extreme in its diversity and while these types of programmes may not be to everyone’s taste, there are license payers who appreciate programmes of this nature.

In essence, why are license payers who do not form part of this audience being allowed to dictate the broadcast policy of the BBC via a tabloid instigated moral crusade, and yet the license payer who actually watches/listens to these programmes are silenced?

I would urge you as part of your investigation to fully explore the role Mark Thompson and senior management of the BBC have played, especially with regard to support that has been voiced by license payers to the presenters in question which has clearly been ignored.

[MinionZombie]

I almost went to "Have Your Say", this BBC site where you can apparently 'have you say', but I've heard that:

1) You cannot start new threads, only suggest a new one and then a moderator chooses if it's good enough. :eek:

2) You've got a very limited amount of words to use.

Geez, censorship much? Make it hard much? No doubt they've been getting tips from the bloody gubment, the sneaky pieces of crap. :mad:

[Neil]

Good read IMHO - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/03/jonathan-ross-russell-brand

There's a documentary on Wed night on Ch5 about the whole thing - However, Max Clifford and Georgina are on it, so I fear it's a Max Clifford production... So I greatly fear for its content!

[MinionZombie]

"As his closing joke, he performs a graphic mime of sexual acts on a butterfly."

Funniest. Daily Mail sentence. Ever.
:lol::lol::lol:

I think Brooker's hit it on the nose with this article, essentially saying that over-reaction to it was just that - that went too far - similar to the 'joke' that started it all (which was birthed from Ross' 'should-have-grown-up-by-now' mouth, the man should realise his age and stick to it, he's not twenty-five anymore), which did step into unnecessary territory.

But I've exhausted my reasons as to why it was wrong, but I've also said that the reaction has gotten out of hand - but then I've also said that no doubt this has become an 'excuse' to bitch about the License Fee (rightly so) and to bitch about the Beeb's blatant political bias (rightly so).

It's just a shame that those two issues aren't being talked about separately, rather than exerting that anger under the guise of something else.

...

Also - guess who got in trouble again? Yep, Jeremy Clarkson on "Top Gear", what offended less than 200-out-of-7-million? A joke about lorry drivers murdering prostitutes.

:rolleyes:

[Neil]

Also - guess who got in trouble again? Yep, Jeremy Clarkson on "Top Gear", what offended less than 200-out-of-7-million? A joke about lorry drivers murdering prostitutes.

:rolleyes:
Better hope The Daily Mail's renta-mob doesn't get their pitch forks out again, or it could be taken off the air!

[MinionZombie]

Better hope The Daily Mail's renta-mob doesn't get their pitch forks out again, or it could be taken off the air!
Somehow I doubt it. :D

Top Gear's got waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more fans than Wossy and Bookie Wook, over a quarter of a billion world wide.

Plus, it's not that crude, and he's said plenty of similar remarks that have been whinged about but forgotten - e.g. there was a fuss when he said to Hammond in 9x01 - "Are you now a mental?"