Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Stop Witch hunting ross and Brand: by Peter Tatchell

143 replies

morningpaper · 30/10/2008 13:00

Stop Witch hunting Ross and Brand

soooooo totally agree with this article

I am wondering which comedians will be fired next?

I guess people won't be happy until the BBC is running costume dramas 24/7.

OP posts:
SharpMolarBear · 30/10/2008 13:36

Usual argument of there's worse going on so we shouldn't do anything about this
Not even mentioning the it's not as if she's a convent girl comment

throckenholt · 30/10/2008 13:41

it does feel like 30 000 people have jumped on the band wagon and complained so that they can feel part of the whole media circus.

Yes it was crass, yes the producers should have thought better of broadcasting it and need to rethink their approach - but really is it any more than that ?

The relevant parties apologised, and were accepted.

And now the sweet little grandaughter is selling her hurt feelings to the Sun

EBenes · 30/10/2008 13:43

Her attitude is relevant because it contributes to the assessment of how much damage has been caused, which in turn informs what needs to be done to make amends. When her behaviour is perpetuating the exposure of the original wrong, it is relevant. Not her sexual history, her behaviour now.

In my opinion, an apology was all that was necessary for a very stupid and cruel prank - the broadcasters and the producer were both at fault. I think the BBC's investigation should quickly conclude that enough has been done.

Kewcumber · 30/10/2008 13:44

I have a feeling that people are jumping on the anti-conspicuous consumption bandwagon. I think these tow are seen to be showbizzy types and patience with them is noticably lower when you're worried about how to pay your mortgage.

mehgalegs · 30/10/2008 13:47

good article

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 30/10/2008 13:48

Some sense at last. Completely agree reaction has been OTT.

beaniescreamyb · 30/10/2008 14:16

Lets face it... 30,000 people were led to the offending show by the press. Not only that but they listened to it, knowing it would offend them, and then made a complaint. Fools. But then there are probably more than 30,000 people who want to scrap the licence fee. If only they realised that instead of having a go at the BBC they need to be badgering the Government!

Upwind · 30/10/2008 14:42

Even if you think the incident was not such a big deal, and I tend to agree with that, can't you see it is less about that incident now, than the BBC's slow and grudging response. And that it has highlighted the huge amount of licence holder and taxpayers' money that is being used to pay for broadcasting that the general public finds offensive.

Lots of people like porn, there is a market for it. Should it be a part of public service broadcasting? Just because there is a market for something does not mean the BBC should be competing in that market. This kind of "comedy" where they pick on soft targets and get laughs out of humiliating people should not be publicly funded.

This reminds me of an article by Charlie Brooker in the Guardian this week

beaniescreamyb · 30/10/2008 14:54

I think that when the BBC got 2 complaints they probably didn't think it necessary to make a big fuss or issue a response.

As brand made an (admittedly humerous) apology on his last show on Sat 25th I assume they must have spoken to him about it after hearing from Sach's agent.

However the Sunday Mail then went ahead and ran the story on the 26th. At this point the BBC couldn't avoid being slow as they have to follow a procedure when investigating the incident. Unfortunately between the BBC starting this investigation and Brand resigning 30,000 strange people decided to seek out the programme and then complain about something they needn't have really heard and knew would offend them when they put it on.

On Monday 27th the BBC apologised to Sachs.

As I said - if you don't like the licence fee then complain to the people who enforce it, not to the BBC.

Tortington · 30/10/2008 14:56

the whole thing was tedious to listen you ( you tube)

i shall miss fri night with Jonathon Ross.

beaniescreamyb · 30/10/2008 14:56

I shall miss his saturday radio show

Spidermama · 30/10/2008 15:00

The situation is of the BBCs own making. They created a monster by paying JR a ridiculous amount of money and giving him a god like profile no-one, not even his senior producers, dare to question.

People are already angry about the licenece fee, feeliing the pinch with the credit crunch, so conditions are perfect for a good old fashioned British witch hunt, only this time it's highly paid men rather than some unfortunate, usually blonde woman.

Not that it's right, but it's sort of inevitable and, as a low paid hard working BBC person, I have trouble feeling much sympathy for JR.

ScareyBitchFeast · 30/10/2008 15:00

woss wont leave - he is their highest paid presenter!
don't like russell brand anyway but it is all a storm in a tea cup and we havent heard mention of the credit crunch/recession, doom and gloom for about a week now!

all reminds me of kenny everett, as i am sure it does others, he went to commercial radio, he was brill

Upwind · 30/10/2008 15:03

Off topic, but all the emphasis on his age has made me wonder what JR would look like if he stopped dyeing his hair....

Spidermama · 30/10/2008 15:05

Having listened to the offending braodcast on youtube I think Ross is the main perpetrator with RB joining in almost slightly reluctantly. I've been uncomfortable about Ross's pervy outbursts many times before. It's put me right off him.

solidgoldskullonastick · 30/10/2008 15:07

The only people entitled to be 'offended' are Andrew Sachs and Georgina Whatsername. He's prepared to let it drop, she's now milking the publicity opportunity. What the fuck it has to do with Gordon Brown I have no idea.

People who get offended by toilet humour or swearing on television radio programmes are utterly fucking stupid and should get out more. It's one of those infallible idiot detectors: would you ring up and complain because someone said 'wank' on the telly? Then you're not really safe to be let out of the house alone, are you? You might see a dog's bollock and pass out.

expatinscotland · 30/10/2008 15:07

RB has a lot on his plate at the moment, anyhow, as far as work goes.

he's got several film projects.

Ross has BBC and that's about it.

over-rated, over-paid, not funny.

mabanana · 30/10/2008 15:08

I used to really admire Peter Tatchell for taking a stand against things that he found unacceptable, yes, even if he didn't actually personally witness them happening. He was, to be honest, a complete hero of mine. But apparently, if I read this right, he won't be taking a stand any more. Unless he actually happens to hear a homophobic song played live, then he won't have any grounds for complaint will he? And if he doesn't like homophobic acts then he just has to avoid them, doesn't he

The other reason I feel so disillusioned by this column is that he has outed himself as a misogynist with his repellent statement - "It is not as if Baille is some innocent convent girl. She admits she slept with Brand." (my italics)
So that's OK. She's a whore and was asking for it, eh Peter? It's fine to snigger over having sex with her and broadcasting it to the nation then, just as long as she wasn't a virgin?

beaniescreamyb · 30/10/2008 15:09

What solidgoldskullonastick said.

beaniescreamyb · 30/10/2008 15:09

expatinscotland - isn't that only because Ross is tied into a deal with the BBC?

TheUnsinkableMB · 30/10/2008 15:10

Good article.

And although I admit what Ross and Brand was stupid and wrong, the finger should be pointed at the BBC not them, the show was pre-recorded, they didn't have to air it!

Spidermama · 30/10/2008 15:10

I totally agree expat.

Solidgold as licence fee payers forking out 18 million for his wages over three years I think we have every right to express our opinion as so many people are choosing to do. Someone has to stop this monster ego as it's already out of contorl and it has become clear the BBC can't or won't.

expatinscotland · 30/10/2008 15:12

'the finger should be pointed at the BBC not them, the show was pre-recorded, they didn't have to air it!'

they are the BBC. they're paid by them to come out with stupid, unimaginative, unoriginal (The Jerky Boys at least had phone conversations with people and not answering machines) things like this?

they should have been sacked just for being jobsworths.

jumpingbeans · 30/10/2008 15:12

I thought the whole thing was pre recorded, and presumably the bbc watched it, thought it was okay and then put it on, then decided to sack jr&rb when everyone complained, is that it in a nutshell... thought so

clam · 30/10/2008 15:18

The thing that mainly offends me in this whole sorry saga is that Jonathan Ross should have been deemed worth 18 million quid in the first place!
Are the BBC really that desperate to be seen as edgy? The guy's a pratt and believes his own hype.

Swipe left for the next trending thread