It is certainly not what I would expect. From anyone.


The trouble here is that the license payer has paid their wages giving them the right to express an opinion and the video interviews show clearly the person in question was neither happy with the message left or the half hearted apology he recieved so is clearly expecting further action. It just happens that the Public supports further action.

Do not really see the relevance of that statement ? You mean sacked like Piers Morgan was ?


True but not relevant to what punishent Wossy and Brand get and still ignores that pestering people with phone calls can be a criminal offence not to mention the extreme bad taste. At some point the BBC has to draw a line of where acceptable behavior is.


Again true but not really relevant to wether Wossy and Brand should still have a job.

My expectations of what to expect from Brand and Ross are clearly very different and somewhat lower than yours then ;)

Interesting point. The licence payer has no option but to fund the BBC - although you do not need a licence to receive radio broadcasts only TV. I'm a licence payer, I'm the public, and I don't support further action against either Ross or Brand (now that I've thought more about this). Andrew Sachs has gone on record, I believe, to say that he does not wish anything more to be done.


The relevance was that its not just Ross and Brand who are "guilty" of such behavior. Morgan's sacking was very much a one off.


I suspect that if Ross and Brand had broken the law, the police would be drawn to act. I agree it was not in good taste, and I agree that the BBC has to draw the line. The BBC, however, did not draw the line here. Perhaps not hiring Brand and Ross in the first place would have been a good plan?

By wait - the flaw in that one, of course, is that irrespective of what a few thousand complainers and a few posters on scoobynet may think, they are both massively popular with that same licence paying public to which you referred earlier. Both could walk into jobs in rival media stations tomorrow. That's why Ross gets paid as much as he does.


Agreed, but without it you and I would probably not even be discussing this :)

I cannot stand either of them. There is humor then there is this kind of 'abusive' humor.

I don't think Ross deserves a £6million salary.. maybe a subtsantial deduction from both Ross & Brands yearly wage to a charity of Andrew Sachs choice may be a nice way of aologising.

They both need bringing down a peg or two.

Just on the news, Brand has 'resigned' from Radio 2 in the last few minutes

Possibly, but then the rest of the population didn't until it was 'aired' by the Daily Wail at which point all the coffin dodgers and affiliated muppets who've nothing better to do jumped on the bandwagon to complain about the comments.

Did they make a mistake? Yes, almost certainly but the indignant stance of others is laughable given that Sachs himself has graciously accepted their apologies which in his own words he didn't ask for.

Needless to say, his actions won't stop a good witch hunt by the small minded amongst us whilst forgetting that the programme was pre-recorded so responsibiliy lies as much with whomever approved the broadcast in the first place.

As for those who don't like either of them, get a life and switch the programme off and stop flaming whingeing.

:cuckoo:

I just so happen to love vulgar humour :)

How ignorant.

At last Brand has made a sincere apology, it's only taken 'til he resigned to do it. If such an apology was forthcoming immediately after the event he'd still have been employed by the BBC. Previously sarcastic non-apologies he's made in the past show how wrong he's played it.

It's no wonder kids have lower and lower respect for anything and anybody when they see prattish behaviour of Brand etc.

Perhaps the guy now will show some humility the next time he opens his mouth to bully and chastise someone and it all goes wrong.

There was a lot in that apology along the lines of "please don't continue to pursue Rossy" i.e. the one the BBC don't want to lose, as an apology per se!

I'm no fan of Brand and I found the "sketch" in poor taste and simply not funny, but I think the resignation was unnecessary and the apology was sufficient.

Interestingly Andrew Sachs has responded in good grace and not bayed for blood, but that's nearly always the way isn't it; the people who get their knickers in a twist the most, are those who weren't involved/affected.

Ns " outraged on behalf of x" 04

It's no surprise that in todays society this is the main news headlines when it really is a nothing story.
The people i am most pissed off with are the BBC, yet again they have buckled under the pressure of the do gooders and pc brigade. I thought the whole thing was hilarious and still cant see why folk (who it has nothing to do with) get so upset?:confused: Can you actualy imagine that people have such a sad life that they waste time and effort calling ofcom to make a complaint.
This reminds me of Chris Morris' Brass Eye, a brilliant piece of comedy television banned by the do gooders :mad:

Brass Eye was fictional.

Spot on, 2 official complaint's were made and then 10,000 followed only after it was highlighted in the Paper.

But it was the vulgar content which caused an uproar from those born with no sense of humour.
It was an example i was giving :)

wonder what will happen to the guy who let it air? it was pre- recorded so i assume it would of been listened too before hand?

brand and ross are guilty of a very bad error of judgement but the person who has brought the bbc into ill repute is the producer that said it was ok to air, if they have cut it from the show then all would be fine and ross and brand would of got a carpetting thats all.

will miss brands radio2 show on saturdays as it was quite funny

I'm in agreement, although I thought you were overly nice about the complainers for Brasseye and had to change it. IMHO of course.
These recent complainers seem to possibly be of the same ilk :Whatever_

What Brass Eye wasn't was personal and abusive to a real person who wasn't given the opportunity of defending himself and who wanted the broadcast shelved. I assume you're on about the paedophile episode which was satarical and made a point about paedophelia being blown out of proportion by the general public.They are wholley different situations.

Anyone on here defending these actions I suppose would welcome personal and offensive messages about their family left on their mobile and then publically humiliated?

I was going to type something like this, but don't need to. Completely agree. Why are more and more complaints coming in now?

The BBC knew who they hired with guys like these, they are paid to do this sort of thing. Russell Brand certainly was completely outrageous when on C4, far worse than what was said here IMO. They didn't hire him to become the new Blue Peter presenter or whatever did they?

Hypocrisy and bandwagons are the words that come to mind.

This is not even worth SN time forget the national news and politicians pausing from their daily corruption to sound off about it.

Utterly ridiculous. Turn over if you don't like it, there are thousands of other channels.

Asif

This is the problem yet again. And I think the people who decided to broadcast anyway are the issue (I have to admit I don't know who decided that).
So Woss and Bland went a bit far, did anyone die, any permanent injury?
F's sake, how's about getting as heated about some real problems.
I wonder how many of the persons who complained are as diligent with voting and making sure policy that the public have to adhere to is not too draconian etc. by making their voice heard. :mad:

Storm in a teacup. :Whatever_

Really going around in circles here. What was broadcasted was wrong end of. Failure to apologise in a timely matter with sincerity by all concered is the clincher.

It's a sad society indeed that preys on bullying and personal attack on less influential members of society for its entertainment. Look at reality shows like X factor who regularly belittle members of the public just so some smug self satisfied morons can fell that bit bigger.

I think he comes from Grays. If that's so, he's defo no Toff. ;)

Oh well, I'm sure they've had enough of a raking over coals now.
Or should they be hanged, drawn and quartered? :wonder:
Plenty of people are entertained by them, if ya don't like, don't watch.
Brand is a rich kid whose dad owns an isp, typical type of behaviour for someone who has rarely had to take responsibility for things but he's not actually done any real harm here. Ross has a very successful show on telly and radio with lots of listeners and is known for saying the odd stupid thing and making a bit of a plum of himself, again, what was the actual harm?
They both apologised, one has resigned and they were both to be taken off air for a week. What else exactly are the MINORITY expecting should be done? :Whatever_
I don't think it was big or clever but it doesn't deserve this much attention either, and I'm just adding to it by writing this post :brickwall

Maybe not a toff per se but defo a spoilt rich kid. I believe his brother owns a Veyron ffs!!

Spoilt, no 2 ways about it. Rich - I'm not so sure...

Does his brother really own a Veyron? If someone in Grays had one of those, the local Eastern European population would have nicked it by now. :D

What MINORITY are you on about? What's the UK population, 65 mil? What does Ross get, circa 4 mil? The MINORITY here are the people who feel they are entertained by these clowns. Johnathan Ross's TV shows don't even make the top 30 most watched programmes on BBC1. Even Little Britain USA makes it higher in the chart ffs.

BARB

:Whatever_ So it's the end of the world then?

Off with their heads :lol1:

The complainants are still a minority, in the scale of things.

I'll leave you all to carry on weeeping over it :lol1:

Not worth commenting on as you don't make any sense. :)

Fair do's :thumb:
None of it makes sense to me! :thumb:

I thought I'd had a fair few Stella's!

Good man. :lol1: :thumb:

Christ On A Velocipede.

If the mere act of contributing a few quid via a mandatory licence fee makes conservative middle England think they have the right to dictate what is comedy and what isn't then were all in big trouble. All we'll get is clone after clone of "My Family" until we all top ourselves. :razz:

Ironic that you posted that here..... ;)

lol, sorry didn't see your post.

Yep, I am fairly reliably informed that his bro drives a Veyron but I dunno if he's in Gray's as well. As you say, it wouldn't last long :lol1: