Jonathan Ross & Russell Brand suspended

I wonder if the BBC has a policy of drug testing its employees. If it doesn’t, it should.

Anybody know the complaints hotline number

quote:

Anybody know the complaints hotline number

Could always ring Andrew Sachs.

I actually feel sorry for Brand. He acted like an idiot because he is an idiot. Ross isn’t an idiot. The whole “disaster” was initiated by Ross. He knew what he was doing,

I agree that Ross was at fault for the initial comment he made about Sachs' grand daughter and I think that both were subsequently caught up in the moment in their inept attempts at making apologies while maintaining the comedic aspect (which they tried but failed miserably to do).

However, I think a lot of you are blowing it completely out of proportion. I've seen far worse, more vindictive and just plain nastier comedy on items such as The Office, Little Britain and - indeed - Fawlty Towers of which Andrew Sachs himself was a major part.

Furthermore, 25000 may have expressed their opinion, but MILLIONS are aware of what happened! All this clamouring is double standard rubbish in my view. So don't give me this 'do gooder' attitude. It was a mistake. Both parties said so at the time. Andrew Sachs accepted their apology and that should be the end of it.

I would not be surprised if the subsequent whimper of outrage was orchestrated by the Radio 4 types against the Radio 2 types in the Beeb as some form of turf war. Perhaps Radio 4 thinks that Radio 2 is getting too much money for what they provide.

Perhaps 555 might comment based on his intimate knowledge of the Beeb

I listen to Jonathan Ross's show every week and love it. He does tend to talk about his favourite subject (himself) most of the time but I do find him entertaining. Russell Brand I find mildly irritating but I think he is aimed at younger folk than me. Was it out of order, clearly yes. It showed very poor judgement. It seems that two comedic talents wound each other to the point of ecstasy and went well past what is acceptable. Should Ross be sacked, of course he shouldn't. The episode was pre recorded and passed by the 25 year old producer as ok for airing. He (or she) will probably have to fall on their sword but I can't imagine Rossy will.

Whether Georgina is in a band called the satanic sluts to me is irrelevant. Brand abused his relationship with her to further his career.

Both of them should have learnt a valuable lesson. Time to move on me thinks

quote:

Andrew Sachs accepted their apology

his granddaughter didn't.

My distaste for the humour of Ross and Brand has been confirmed; the BBC has shot itself in the foot; and vested interests have fanned the flames for their own benefit.

1. Ross and Brand made the calls. These appear to qualify for prosecution, regardless of anything else which happened.
2. The recordings were listened to before being broadcast, and approved. I believe that the BBC has a formal approval authority with escalation channels. Press reports say that the voice messages were edited before broadcast. This indicates that the performers and the BBC were aware of the issue yet still made a conscious and presumably collective decision to broadcast.
3. Show is broadcast, and the audience register 2 (I think) imnmediate complaints. Justified, but not a huge tide yet. If the BBC had issued an immediate apology, things would have been different.
4. A Mail journalist catalyses the press furore - the same newspaper group which has been persistent in campaigning against the BBC and the licence fee.

Whilst I think it correct that Brand and Ross should go/be fired, I feel distaste that it has been driven by tabloids - whose own record regarding the bullying, humiliating and harassing of celebrities is of course exemplary.

The greatest damage, apart from the bullying of Sachs, would seem to have been done to the BBC, whose initial failure of control, followed by an inability to act decisively, has given its critics a whole arsenal of ammunition.

dl1, have you listened to the episode? They were calling Andrew Sachs for a prearranged interview in order to interview him about a book he's promoting. It's only when they got onto his answerphone instead that the malarky started. This was not a call out of the blue.

My understanding is that Sachs had previously withdrawn from the show - the interview had been cancelled. So they had no reason to call his phone.

Well, neither Brand nor Ross were aware of this. Brand starts the first call with something to the effect of "We're meant to be interviewing you with regard to your book", then it descends into a farce as they try to conduct a make believe interview between themselves - and it goes downhill from there...

quote:

Originally posted by Frank Abela:
Well, neither Brand nor Ross were aware of this. Brand starts the first call with something to the effect of "We're meant to be interviewing you with regard to your book", then it descends into a farce as they try to conduct a make believe interview between themselves - and it goes downhill from there...

After after Sachs was consulted about the recording he declined to give his permission to use it -he was ignored. Still funny?

It has been reported that Sachs had previously withdrawn - but even if Brand and Ross were unaware of that, which is not very plausible, it does not excuse the abuse.

No, I'm not amused by that type of "humour" - I'm not in Brand's target demographic. As I said above, the damage caused by an appalling (IMHO) lapse in judgement (consciously approving the broadcast) has been compounded by the BBC's inability to act quickly and decisively. But the initial responsibility lay with the presenters - that it "goes downhill from there" is precisely what shouldn't happen with two professional presenters working on a pre-recorded programme which is edited and approved before broadcast.

brand is an utter prick,ive watched him a few times,i watch in wonderment how anyone could find the utter shit he spouts out of his dirty mouth funny,he just uses the foulest thoughts and language and gets a laugh,and its not a case of being a prude it just aint funny.

And of course NONE of this would have happened if BBC Editorial Guidelines had been followed .They are very clear and there were numerous breaches of them in the broadcast as well as potential legal issues re privacy which Sachs and his grandaughter could have followed up.

If the broadcast had been pulled, Brand and Ross's reputations would have remained intact and we may never have known about the recording.

Ha this not been blown out of all proportion? Two people complained at the time (a low for Russell Brand I believe). Everyone who has complained subsequently has, by definition, either not heard the broadcast or has actively sought out something by which to be offended. Which seems at the very least odd behaviour.

A case - I think - of loving to hate some people, whether that be for reasons of wealth, obnoxiouness, envy, reading a newspaper with a not-very-well-hidden agenda or whatever. I should add that I don't know Russell Brand's stuff and I find Jonathan Ross irksome (although on Film XX I always found him more insightful that one might ordinarily imagine).

But I saw Andrew "I'm not collecting apologies" Sach's doorstep interview - he clearly wishes the whole thing would go away now. Which of course is the very last thing that will happen if people keep on complaining about it and it continues to sell newspapers.

I actually think Popbitch summed it up quite well (for a change):
"Is this what the BBC calls entertainment?

A collective madness seems to have seized the country. The news is still fixated on Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand's unfunny prank call. From a programme that elicited just two complaints, tens of thousands of people every day are now queuing up to complain. It's like when Princess Di died - everyone just wants to be involved.

The only person who does seem to come out of it
well though, is the prank's victim, Andrew Sachs.
So desperate is Georgina aka Voluptua, the subject of the prank, to protect her grandfather's privacy and save him from embarrassment that she's signed up with Max Clifford and sold her story exclusively to the Sun. As she says, "What's funny about humiliating a lovely old man?"

"I feel totally and utterly exposed", Georgina
told The Sun. Quite."

quote:

Originally posted by Sister E.:
After after Sachs was consulted about the recording he declined to give his permission to use it -he was ignored. Still funny?

Well, see, here's where things get obscure. The reports I've heard indicate that there was confusion on the subject of the request to Mr. Sachs to use the material. I've heard different reports saying the line was garbled and alternatively that there was a misunderstanding. I haven't heard the call obviously so I can't know what actually happened.

....Bottom line.....Ross and Brand got it wrong.

.....The Daily Mail saw a chance to vent it's spleen at what they see as the Liberal intelligentsia within the BBC.

For all sane people's sakes it is very important that the Mail and it's appalling journalists do not get their way ......I'll support both Ross and Brand to the hilt despite the fact that on this occasion they got it wrong.

Any return to the racist, homophobic "values" of the Mail and it's ilk would be too horrible to contemplate!

Here here !!!

quote:

Originally posted by count.d:
Does anyone have any constructive comments about the latest UK's disaster, without referring to how much they earn(ed) or whether they like the witches or not?

No I don't have any constructive comments - with 5th November coming it would be a good chance to burn them at the stake, now that would be entertaining - it could be live on TV - the ratings would be spectacular and after all what else matters - I'm sure the BBC would be up for it.

quote:

Originally posted by ROTF:

quote:

Originally posted by count.d:
Does anyone have any constructive comments about the latest UK's disaster, without referring to how much they earn(ed) or whether they like the witches or not?

No I don't have any constructive comments - with 5th November coming it would be a good chance to burn them at the stake, now that would be entertaining - it could be live on TV - the ratings would be spectacular and after all what else matters - I'm s
ure the BBC would be up for it.

ROTF -Do you buy the Daily Mail by any chance?

quote:

Originally posted by Jet Johnson:
....Bottom line.....Ross and Brand got it wrong.

.....The Daily Mail saw a chance to vent it's spleen at what they see as the Liberal intelligentsia within the BBC.

For all sane people's sakes it is very important that the Mail and it's appalling journalists do not get their way ......I'll support both Ross and Brand to the hilt despite the fact that on this occasion they got it wrong.

Any return to the racist, homophobic "values" of the Mail and it's ilk would be too horrible to contemplate!

..... and with the Tories jumping on their pompous bandwagons hoping the BBC will return to 'the good old days' and wanting Thompson's head on a spike.

Yup, I'd rather have Ross and Brand than a mug of cocoa and watch with bleedin' mother.

quote:

'the good old days'

The Good Old Days was Leonard Sachs not Andrew Sachs

quote:

than a mug of cocoa and watch with bleedin' mother.

Bring back Bagpuss - brilliant show, just finished my cocoa so it's almost time for bed - just going to watch the magic roundabout first.

quote:

ROTF -Do you buy the Daily Mail by any chance?

Only when they give away a nice CD or DVD - other week I got The complete Mr Benn - brilliant.

Last newspaper I read upset me it said

Unemployment's rising in the Chigley end of town

ATB Rotf

PS Bring back Terry and June.

12 weeks without pay is a no joke.

I wonder if he will be able to sign on.

PS Bring back Terry and June

Now THAT was really offensive!