Russell Brand, Jonathan Woss and Andrew Sachs

[JoolsToo]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/3263328/Russell-Brand-and-Jonathan-Ross-joke-radio -phone-calls-just-werent-funny.html

Have we not had a discussion about this? I'm surprised.

Seedy, sordid, unfunny little men pad obscene amounts of money to be obscene.

What's your view?

Perhaps Andrew Sachs could do JR's show instead.

WTF should Andrew Sachs do anything to save the career of these two? He owes them nothing!
The argument that you have no right to an opinion on something unless you were actually there at the time is ridiculous.
What is your agenda Beany?

And it wasn't live. It was pre-recorded, which is how Sachs was able to request that it wasn't broadcast.

Everything has a context, Mabanana. The Show had a context, not least one which had started a week before when David baddeil was on and which as far as I can see did not get any complaints. If my OH shouted down the phone, 'he fucked your granddaughter' completely out of context then I would be bermused. This had a context.

I am amused by anyone who thinks that the presentes should be sacked. Particularly by the Guy on the BBC log who thinks they should not only be sacked but also lose pay!

If you read the logs you can truly see how ridiculous a lot of the people complaining are.

sachs was supposed to be appearing on the show but then wasn't in when they called.

'Perhaps Andrew Sachs could do JR's show instead.'

YES PLEASE.

"What is your agenda Beanie"

the opposite of those with an anti-brand, anti-ross, and anti-licence fee.

Comedy is comedy - sometimes it goes to far. In this case it went a bit too far and deserves and apology. A sacking or a double sacking would be a ridiculous response. At the very most there should be something done with the production team who ignored Sach's request that it be pulled. That is all.

the show is always riding close to the wind anyway.

only time i ever clean my kitchen - i must have a thing for 'idiotic morons'. they are very funny.

Even in context, then, was it funny?

Was it not hurtful to an elderly man who had in no way invited it?

Was it not mysogynistic and vile?

Was it right to ignore the fact that Andrew Sachs had asked the BBC not to broadcast it?

There was no 'context' for Andrew Sachs, was there? Just two middle aged celebs shouting 'he fucked your granddaughter' on his answerphone. Lovely. Just lovely.
I love the idea that this is young, cutting edge humour. Jonathan Ross is older than I am, and I'm not young. It's infantile and offensive.

The BBC still has a very strong place in the identity of the country - it represnts us aboad, we rely on it ofr the most accurat reporting we can apparanly get, we all pay towards the licence fee, it was not known as 'auntie' fo nothing.

I think the BBC betrays the trust people have in it if it sanctions bullying behaviour and misogynistic comments as 'entertainment'.

I think there IS a point about bandwagons and people who tune in to get offended and complain, but that in this case what Brand and Ross did stands alone as an assault on Sachs and his gd. As far as I can see, people on this thread have had a view on what they did - from the personal (poor man) to the political (what does it say when men use sex with a woman as a threat or vehicle of ridicule or status?).

They get paid to perform in public - they did something very unprofessional, unkind and sexist - they get well paid to be accountable to the public who pay them. (that goes for the people who decided to proceed with the broadcast, too)

In my point of view, it is the sheer arrogance that both individuals show. They are the "BBC golden boys" and because everyone at BBC stroke their egos constantly they think that they can get away with anything.

This is a very sexist, irresponsable and illegal thing they've done.

If I rob a bank and then apologise it won't stop me being judjed by it, right?

Why are not Brand and Ross then being charged?

I think that sometimes an apology is not enough. It is right but not enough. There you go! Ah, and I have complained to the BBC about it. My second complain ever in my life! !

In my point of view, it is the sheer arrogance that both individuals show. They are the "BBC golden boys" and because everyone at BBC stroke their egos constantly they think that they can get away with anything.

This is a very sexist, irresponsable and illegal thing they've done.

If I rob a bank and then apologise it won't stop me being judjed by it, right?

Why are not Brand and Ross then being charged?

I think that sometimes an apology is not enough. It is right but not enough. There you go! Ah, and I have complained to the BBC about it. My second complain ever in my life! !

I am looking forward to seeing how "have I got news for you" and "mock the week" cover this story any of the regulars on those shows would be more talented than Ross or Brand.

him being elderly IMO makes the offence caused no more or less offensive. Why bring his age into it?

It was wrong to ignore the fact that he had asked for it not to be broadcast. See my post above.

beanni - oh, are your coments more about those on the BBC site than on Mn, then?

what would they be charged with?

Do you know any old people Beany? IME many people over 70 do feel more vulnerable. And that is why most people feel quite protective about elderly relatives. Maybe you don't. Maybe you think anyone is fair game.

I don't have a problem with the licence fee. I've watched Jonathon Ross - mainly on 'They Think It's All Over' - and found him witty and amusing. He also gave the impression to me of being a good father and a caring man - which is why I am so aghast at this incident.

However, with regard to Russell Brand, I have never seen or heard him do or say anything that I have found even remotely amusing - so on that we are going to have to agree to differ, beanie.

I agree that the production team and whoever else approved this segment for broadcast have got a whole lot to answer for. Perhaps Ross and Brand went too far in the heat of the moment, but the producers have no such excuse. I'm not sure how much time they had between recording and broadcast, but imo they should have stopped the item.

Beanie - I would also like to apologise to you for my last post on this thread - I too got a bit carried away in the heat of the moment, and now regret being so blunt.

I think it's entirely possibly that someone of an older generation may find such puerile 'humour' even more offensive and inexplicable (particularly when applied to their grandchild) than a younger person, who may be more inured to it.

Beanie- I think the fact that he is elderly is an important point. I don't think that either of them would have been brave enough to shout crude insults down the phone to a younger man. That is why the bullying and abuse they committed when they made that call is so offensive to so many people.

BBBeeast - they could be charged with harassment or under the telecommunications act. Actually, given the anger about this in real life, I would be very surprised if somebody had not reported them to the police. I guess it would be up to them as to whether it is worth following up.

I think older people do find that kind of humour more threatening.

Exactly Turquoise.
They knew it would be hurtful to him even as they were doing it - you can tell that from the transcript. All the giggly faux apologies.
I think Sachs has been very cool and dignified about the whole thing.
I agree with every word Blu has posted about the importance of the BBC and why this sort of thing reduces that importance, and demeans the corporation.

I think Sachs age was very important to the 'joke' in their minds. They thought it would be fun to shock and upset an 'old codger'.