Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Don't Throw All the Blame at Ross & Brand

Russell Brand has only one redeeeming feature. He sits a couple of rows away from me at West Ham. I've frnakly never quite 'got' his appeal. Jonathan Ross, on the other hand, I rather like. But the fire being directed at them over Brand's phone call to Andrew Sachs is entirely misdirected.

As I understand it this was a pre recorded show. While the phone calls were distasteful and ill judged, Brand and Ross are not to blame for the fact that they were transmitted. The fault lies entirely with the programme's producer and editor. It is they who should be called to account for this debacle.

UPDATE: People seem to have got the wrong end of the stick here, possibly because I used the word 'entirely'. Of course Ross and Brand are to blame, but as the headline says, the blame needs to be shared around a bit. They were incredibly crass, insulting and stupid to do what they did, but anyone who knows anything about broadcasting will know that the decision to broadcast lies not with them but with the producer, editor and ultimately the station controller. I trust that is clearer.


Anonymous said...

But who left the message on the answer machine?

Alex Folkes said...

er... sort of. But Brand and Ross can't disclaim all responsibility. Both are experiecned and very well paid broadcasters who should have known that this sort of thing was unacceptable in any case and certainly not suitable for broadcast

Anonymous said...

There are two separate issues here:
1) Should the calls have been made?
2) Having been made, should they have been broadcast?

The answer to both is the same - no.

However, Brand and Ross were directly responsible for 1) and should be held to account for that. The producer, etc. were responsible for 2), and should be held to account for that.

There's more than enough blame to go round!

The Military Wing Of The BBC said...

This was on Radio 4 this very afternoon.
A very nice "running away" with Andrew Sachs.


After listening to this there is no doubt in my mind that both Ross and Brand should be sacked.

When you think why Kenny Everett had to leave Radio 1 in the 1970's.

Martin said...

Good to know you are the side of people who make abusive and offensive phone calls, Iain. We should always put the blame fairly on the people who don't cover things up properly. It's the Tory way.

Iain Dale said...

Martin, your comment qualifies for idiotic comment of the day. I haven't defended their despicable calls at all. I just think threat the producers deserve the blame for the fact it was ever transmitted. Read the headline again.

Anonymous said...

Iain you are wrong on this one. The offence is not to the listening public but to a 78 year old man having to hear on his answering machine who his grand-daughter had slept with. This would have happened whether the editor had binned the recording or not, the message being irretrievable. A father or grandfather does not want to hear his grand-daughter spoken off in such a demeaning way and to think such a creature as Brand was the one to have slept with her! I would feel sick to the bottom of my stomach. Some may find him funny but he has a personality disorder and suffers from sex addiction. Why should others have to suffer from his inability to cherish and develop normal intimate relationships?

Jonny Mac said...

Agree that the greatest blame lies with the editor, who deserves to be sacked more than Brand and Ross, though it's perverse to say those two unthinking twits are blameless.

Ted said...

As Fergus says Ross & Bland made obscene phone calls irrespective of whether these were broadcast or not. They probably fall within the remit of the Telecommunications Act and both should be investigated and prosecuted if necessary.

The BBC and its producer/s who decided to broadcast are the subject of an Ofcom investigation and in all probability will be held to account.

Anonymous said...

It's teamwork wot dun it Iain eh?

Anonymous said...

I disagree entirely. It is what they did that was wrong, whether it was broadcasted or not. If I did that I would be spending the night in the cells and would expect to get a criminal record. If someone phoned up my 78 year old grandad and joked about f*cking my sister I would .. Well, you can guess. These people think they can do what they like because they are rich and famous, just like Mandelson and the corrupt bandits at the EU.

Unsworth said...


"Brand and Ross are not to blame for the fact that they were transmitted."

No, but they certainly are to blame for making such offensive calls.

Never mind whether the producer and editors were also wrong, that's really not the point.

'I was only obeying orders'

Anonymous said...

Iain, I think you are right. The level of sanctimonious claptrap from the Mail here is absolutely scandalous.

The backlash [witchhunt?] here just beggars belief. I don't condone the calls, but it is like inviting two dogs into a radio studio, and then complaining when they bark..

If you don't like this sort of radio - don't listen in.

What alarms me about this is one can find offence in many comedy programmes - 'The Thick Of It' is an example. Are we going to start being brow-beaten by the thickos who read the 'Daily Mail' to start banning that as well ??

This is a road which we just don't want to travel down...

Anonymous said...

So the two foul mouthed indivduals, who actually spoke the offending words on an unsuspecting person's (Mr Sach's) answer machine are blameless!!

The one to blame is the Editor!.

You cannot make it up.

Iain, you have sat with the foul mouthed football supporters too long. It is still an offence to use profane language on the telephone. The useage of the F word and worse is becoming standard practice for modern day 'comics' god forbid.

Yet if anyone has the good fortune to see Ken Dodd they can expect hours ofreal laughs without one swear word - plenty of innuendo but no swearing. He and those like Mr Dodd are comics...this lot are just foul mouthed.

I went to see one of these modern day comics a couple of months ago.
I had seen him on Have I got news for you and he made me laugh so I thought I would take the lady wife for a good night out!

He was drunk on the stage and every swear word one can imagine was used, including every sexual deviation. People were amazed.Many walked out. We stayed until the end and he left the stage in silence.

Ross and Brand and the editorial staff should all be sacked.

Iain, come to Leyton Orient. More select!

Old BE said...

Why are the TV payers paying huge sums for these idiots?

Is there any way the TV payers can hold to account the people who make the decisions at the BBC?

I am usually quite open-minded to risque comedy but I totally fail to see any funny element of their joke. Did they think it was funny?

Anonymous said...

entirely literally means entirely

Anonymous said...

result of bbc investigation

1 tea lady accountable (demoted)
2 cleaners responsible (dismissed)
3 'kings of comedy' cutting edge humour, in your face --- etc etc.
4 we must review our proceedures and learn from this unfortunate and much to be regretted incident
5 bonuses and trebles all round !

Anonymous said...

This is from the Evening Standard:

Miss Baillie, (the grand-daughter) who has cut short a European tour with the burlesque dance group the Satanic Sluts, said she did not want to comment until she has spoken with her agent. She is believed to be in discussions to sell her story.

Anonymous said...

I think you should also take into account the way they initially 'apologised' about this incident.

That shows their true colours

Anonymous said...

If you listen to the calls on youtube, they don't seem that bad (with apologies to those who think they do).

I must admit I can't stand Russell Boring but it was only to an answering machine and it was pretty obviously a joke.

Just sack him in any case!

Anonymous said...

As others have said, these two originated these sick messages. The fact that the BBC transmitted this recorded (and I wonder how many thought it was a live programme? - more fakery) means that the producer has his share of the blame.

The solution is simple: sack Ross & Brand.

Anonymous said...

The point is that these two left indecent remarks on an answerphone via BBC telephones whether they were broadcast or not
Are you saying that they have the right to so this even if their remarks are not broadcast/
if you left indecent unsolicited messages,you may well be liable to prosecution

Anonymous said...

Iain, stick to reporting on your Israeli trip. Have you actually listened to what these dickheads left on Sachs' answerphone? Have you heard Brand's sniggeringly insincere apology for an apology?

You blame the BBC androids, but what lowly salaryman is going to dare to blue-pencil the mighty Ross and Brand? Just as no editor dares to cut J. K. Rowling's flatulent prose, so nobody's going to take on the radio 'stars', who have the power to send careers up the metaphorical branch-line to nowhere.

No, the pair of juvenile tossers have to shoulder the blame for their massive misjudgement. Whisky, revolver, library, now.

Anonymous said...

Agreed, Iain. With hindsight, the calls shouldn't have been made, nor should they have been broadcast. Blame to be doled out to all concerned.

This just seems to me like a badly-judged joke misfiring horribly. Comedians are frequently testing boundaries, sometimes with huge success, sometimes without. If we start censoring This Sort Of Thing then comedy would go stale.

What is ironic is that the Daily Mail are always the first to bemoan the PC brigade, but when someone says something they disapprove of they are up in arms!

Anonymous said...

I am not sure that this is an issue that our senior politicians should be getting involved with.

The Tories have obvious reason to want to attack the bbc for their pro labour stance.

But why is Gordon Brown getting involved?

Anonymous said...

The criminal offence is by Brand and Ross.

The moral offence is by the Editor.

"The backlash [witchhunt?] here just beggars belief." Anon 5.10pm

I think the road we don't want to travel, as you put it, is to allow people in the public eye to get away with criminal offences. And that includes Mandelson!!

If you want to see a real witchhunt look at the Osbourne case. Or how about the Jady Goody affair and the Indian Actress - oh how 'sanctimonious', the left were over that!!

The BBC are making more fuss over supposed 'racist' voting on their dancing programme, than admitting that they are totally out of order with this. Their double standards are BLATENT.

Anonymous said...

Strikes me that this story has gone way OTT. Even Brown has stuck his oar in! Yes R&B deserve serious reprimand and the Editor does as well. Certainly a suspension & fine.

However this strikes me as a "Oh goody another opportunity to kick the BBC" - by the likes of the Mail, Express and Rupert's rags. It's the faux rage that really irritates me.

The complaints are now up to 10,000. So people read the papers, got themselves wound up and phoned the BBC to complain. Am I the only one to see how ridiculous this all is?!?!

Anonymous said...

Wossie and Boring abused a private phone number given in good faith after Mr. Sachs was unable to appear on the show at the last minute - an abuse of trust at the very least.

To shout lewd filth down the phone as part of a show is tasteless and an abuse of the company's assets.

To allow the pre-recorded show on air shows contempt for any listener with a grain of public decency standards, let alone a gentleman of Mr. Sachs' years.

Not being a Mail reader, I agree with the majority view that these 2 overpaid presenters are beyond the pale and should have their contracts revoked forthwith, denote at least 6 months pay each to a charity of Mr. Sachs' choice, and the Beeb have a root and branch deep cleansing operation to bring back some decent standards in broadcasting, let alone unbiased ones.

Seems Al Beeba have managed to trigger an avalanche... ordinary, decent people feel that things have gone downhill too far lately and are disenfranchised. If a commercial radio station/sat tv want these 2 morons and their delightful sense of humour, then let them go - a few thousand off a few viewing figures might be the least of Al Beeba's worries...

That Mr. Sachs' grandaughter is not a Victorian simpering rose is not the point; the boys have done wrong, failed miserably to show proper remorse, the production crew/producer are hiding in a broom closet and the Beeb has a big elephant in the Boardroom... about time there was a cull from the top down, and a bit less paid for 'stars' such as these two contemptible wastrels.

Anonymous said...

The way you defend these 2 you should be ashamed you should join the Guardianistas
They both should be sacked immediately to show a nation who are suffering financially that taxpayers money is no longer being wasted on these two
I am disgusted with your comments thank goodness for Guido

Anonymous said...

Broadcasting it was bad; being so uncouth on the phone wasn't too good either.
What did this pair of adolescents think they were playing at?

Perhaps six months looking for a job would make them grow up a bit.

Martin said...

entirely literally means entirely


Anonymous said...

With so many city boys losing their jobs, times are hard enough for honest London coke dealers without sacking two of their best customers.

Anonymous said...

According to Sky News Gordon Brown is now getting himself involved in this. (It's good to know he's solved the credit crunch problem.)

Anonymous said...

The simple fact is that if Ross and Brand had been employees of any other organisation, private or public, they would have been instantly sacked. The chief ececutive would have issued an immediate apology without any caveats.
But we are talking of the BBC, a thoroughly disfunctional organisation, and one which has long lost its moral compass. Those two foul people and the editor should certainly be sacked, but they won't be. After an interval, the BBC will resume where it left off, and continue to pollute the airways with smut and coarseness.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the insight Ian.

I have absolutely no knowledge of broadcasting and if you say it is the producer's fault then who am I to argue?

Now can you explain, when I have to pay a licence fee to receive the British Broadcasting Corporation's output (or even be capabale of receiving) that I should go to jail for refusing to pay for such uttter rubbish from messers Ross and brand?

word verification..payast

Anonymous said...

SO, a representative of the BBC cold calls an elderly man and says he has had a sexual relationship with his grand daughter, and what is more the BBC thinks this is funny???

Anonymous said...

ian,i have not "invited" these two idiots into my liveing room for some years...i turn off the radio or tv as soon as i know they are takeing part in a show,so i am unable to comment on the broadcast,suffice to say, the bbc should take into account the 10,000 complants they have received (to date) and sack these two foul mouthed (comdians ???) as soon as possable,michael.

Windsor Tripehound said...

Anonymous @ 5:10 pm

If you don't like this sort of radio - don't listen in

Trouble is, like it or not, listen to it or not, I'm still forced to pay for it!

In a sane world Ross and Brand would be dropped by the BBC and the controller of Radio 2 would be fired.

But then, when a twice-disgraced sleazeball is elevated to the Lords and given high government office, why should we expect higher standards from the BBC?

Anonymous said...

Of course in the old days when politicians wanted to distract attention from their domestic failings, they started wars. Now that has been proven not to work it seems they attack the BBC.

Anonymous said...

Come back and comment when you have a daughter or granddaughter. Ross and Brand are offensive and commited a potentially criminal offence (broadcast or not). Now the BBC tries to cloud the issue with investigations of the processes that led to broadcast. Both should be suspended. When the investigation is complete both, along with whoever sanctioned broadcasting should be sacked.

Anonymous said...

Two separate issues here: 1) overpaid adolescent idiots behave very badly and ought to be sacked; 2) Beeb management let it through and ought to be sacked.

The Beeb response was pathetic but its lack of decisive action symptomatic of the way it has been going for years - dumbing-down, coarsening, increasing crudity passing as wit, pandering to slebs (as well as NuLab politicos* but don't get me started on that!).

A really good response would be the D-G's resignation, not only because of this frightful infraction but because he and his gang are ruining what was once a national asset. Dream on, eh?

*Oh well, all right then. McNulty and Ken Clarke on Newsnight last night, Gavin Essler in the chair. Clarke talking pure common sense (Broon overborrowed, borrowing grossly understated, figures fiddled, borrowing = deferred taxation, someone will have to pay eventually) and constantly interrupted. McNulty doing standard NuLab bore stuff and not interrupted.

The Daily Pundit said...

Famous last words: "People seem to have got the wrong end of the stick here..."

Anonymous said...

Yes the blame lies with the producers for broadcasting the tape but the damage was done by then anyway.
Aired or not Andrew Sachs should never have suffered those cruel calls in the first place.
Personally speaking I would like to see the pair of them get a good hiding rather than the sack.

Anonymous said...

I find Ross usually 'very funny' and Brand 'occasionally funny' and I would give each a lot of leeway - but this skit really went beyond decency. I believe sacking them is OTT, but very significant fines should be imposed on them.

And the BBC editor/producer should be severely reprimanded, or demoted for not having the sense to leave the skit on the cutting room floor. Unless, of course - if Ross and/or Brand threw a 'creative paddy' and demanded that their skit be broadcast ....well, if this happened then frankly Brand & Ross should be fired. Sorry.

Anonymous said...

Iain, you are lucky to be in Israel and not hearing the inane excuses the BBC is broadcasting. This morning on the BBC news channel, a couple of announcers were discussing if the granddaughter had any grounds at all for complaining, given that her group is called the Satanic Sluts. A disgusting perpetuation of the threatening idea that if a girl steps out of the good little, pretty little, quiet little good girl box then people are entitled to do whatever they like to her.

And they tried the line that because few complaints were made immediately, all the others are second hand and can be discounted. I think the volume of discontented licence payers may be getting through to them -- but then again, when did they last show signs of caring?

Anonymous said...

Iain - you are wrong. Although the producer was responsible for including the piece in the broadcast, the presenters were responsible for the bang-out-of-order phone messages. If you or I used an employer's resources to make such a call, we would be given our P45 and shown the door. We'd be lucky to be given time to collect our things.

Anonymous said...

It was not good taste, but Andrew sachs had chance to edit it and was ok with it.
For gods aske would that people would make as much fuss over children being abused and people dying of hunger.
PC gone mad

Anonymous said...

Jonathan Ross is just a yob. I had never heard of Russell Brand until today, but he seems an even bigger job because he has not apologised and seems to be treating the whole thing as a joke. Andrew Sachs is a national treasure and has far more talent than these overpaid nobodies.

Anonymous said...

One of the papers had a story earlier that a producer was told to call Sachs and check that it was OK to broadcast the message. He did not do so but told Brand and Ross that he had done.

Still a stupid thing to do but they could have believed that it was a stint agreed by Sachs.

It has given every nutcase with a grudge against the BBC an excuse to attack the BBC. I think more people have complained to the BBC than probably listened to the programme, I certainly doubt whether many actually heard it.

The Murdoch press are of course enjoying a chance to have a go at the BBC but I can imagine Skye signing up Brand and/or Ross if they get the chance.

Anonymous said...

" Valleys Mam said...
It was not good taste, but Andrew sachs had chance to edit it and was ok with it.
For gods aske would that people would make as much fuss over children being abused and people dying of hunger.
PC gone mad"


It was a recorded program and Andrew Sacs asked the BBC not to broadcast it.

Anonymous said...

this story has gone global - it appeared as an extended item on breakfast tv in Australia. Good grief arent there bigger issues in the world to focus on.

Anonymous said...

As a grandfather to seven granddaughters, this matter has been discussed at length within my family.

Initial thoughts suggested that Ross and Brand should be dismissed.

Further discussion determined that the best solution, if I were to be in Andrew Sachs' position, would be to send my youngest son, a substantial chap, around to their respective houses to apply a judicious slap to the offenders.

Yes, I mean a slap, right accross the face, preferably in front of their fawning sychophants.

This we believe, would be the most appropriate and just outcome for this sorry case.

Hopefully Messrs. Ross and Brand would then appreciate the meaning of real humiliation.

Anonymous said...

Two separate issues here: 1) overpaid adolescent idiots behave very badly and ought to be sacked; 2) Beeb management let it through and ought to be sacked.

Actually, the overpaid adolescent idiots should be prosecuted, and the Beeb management should be fined by Ofcom.

The BBC is "governed" by "trustees", and they and the Director General should be accountable for this drivel. And this isn't one isolated case; remember Blue Peter conning children with fake phone-ins.

If Ofcom decides to fine the BBC, that fine should come not from the license payers, but from the pockets of the trustees and the paypacket of the DG. If they realize they can be held personally liable for disreputable broadcasting they would be way more diligent in preventing it from occuring.

Anonymous said...

"But the fire being directed at them over Brand's phone call to Andrew Sachs is entirely misdirected."

Iain, you suffer the same personality disorder as the BBC. You cannot, never, admit you are wrong.

How can you write the above statement saying 'entirely' and then claim your readers have got 'the wong end of the stick'?

Please, admit you are wrong. You have been soundly battered by your readers.

However, I have noticed you often betray a childish petulance when you are contradicted.

Anonymous said...

BBC 2 are filming "the speaker" at speakers corner this saturday 1.30pm. This is your chance to heckle the BBC!

Wrinkled Weasel said...

Iain, the fact that you like Jonathan Ross more or less proves that comedy, for lack of a better word, is in the eye of the beholder. You also have strange tastes in music, but I don't mind - I don't live with you or near you or accidentally borrow your Ipod.

I have no reason to complain. I am not a satanic slut, I am not Andrew Sachs, I do not pay a licence fee and I do not have or watch a television. I am also tired of moralists (including the PM) who think it is any of their business to pass judgement, mainly, it seems, because these two zanies of sorrow make an awful lot of money by being obnoxious.

I am obnoxious and don't make a lot of money so I suppose I should be as jealous as the rest of you, but I can't be arsed, really, for life has other, bigger issues that interest me at the moment.

word verification: gessess

Anonymous said...

What genuinely horrified me was the broadcast comments tonight by young members of the audience of Never Mind the Buzzcocks:

"I thought it was funny", "people are over-reacting/have lost their sense of humour".

This is the generation that has been bred of the vulgar cretins that run our MSM.

Would someone ask Ross how he would feel about such a broadcast were it to refer to one of his daughters?

ps. I am not a Daily Mail reader.

Anonymous said...

no Iain they left terrible messages on an old man's telephone

imagine if some guy had phoned a grand parent of yours about you

Anonymous said...


Obviously you don't know as you are out of the country but this story has moved on somewhat there are apprently now over 10,000 complaints to the BBC the public are outraged Iain.

However there seems to be a pattern developing here you back Obama and you have got on the wrong side of this argument too oh dear............

Ben Gray said...

At least the decision to broadcast has the one redeeming feature left the public under no illusion as to what complete and utter sh*ts Brand and Ross are.

Had this been done in private it would be considered bullying and probably harassment. There would be no justification whatsoever. Do it in public and all of a sudden it's "testing the boundaries" or edgy comedy.

It would only be testing the boundaries if it were done with the Sachs family's consent. As it was it wasn't so it isn't.

It really makes no difference that the Daily Mail were the main paper to run with the story.

Anonymous said...

It is inexplicable that senior editors of the BBC could have considered this broadcast acceptable. Those concerned should be demoted, as they clearly do not have the judgement needed for the position they hold.

But Ross and Brand were the authors of the vile messagesthat they had already left on Sach's answerphone. They are casual, vile bullies and should be sacked.

Anonymous said...

Never mind Ross and that scruffy tosser whatever his name Jo Brand is it, what about George Osborne? I really think that Cameron missed a real opportunity to grab the momentumn away from Brown.

He should have got rid of Osborne and brought in Hague thereby gaining the moral high ground and placing huge pressure on Brown to get rid of Mandelson showing up their lack of morality.

Now that opportunity is gone and Brown will continue to make in roads to the heartland again Labour will win Glenrothes the media will love it and the Tories will fall away.

Does the Tory party employ any strategic planners and thinkers or do they just bungle along waitng for Labour to fall.

To be leaders you have to have courage and dynamism you have to be brave and take chances that come along the Tories missed those chances and the public knows it - what a shame what a real shame.

Anonymous said...

I despise the BBC almost as much as I do Ross, Brand and that other moron, Chris Evans - all examples of 'lads' - so 90's. They are not funny or clever and I bitterly resent my licence money being spent to pay those tossers.

Johnny Norfolk said...

You are off the money here Iain.

This latest episode tells you all you need to know about the BBC.
Ross and Brand are out of control just like the BBC.

To think we are paying for people like this is just sickening to me.

They have at the very least committed an act of gross misconduct. In any other business they would have been sacked

Display Name said...

They're both "on the edge" performers and on this occassion, yes, it would seem that they have gone over the edge (I, probably like most people, haven't actually heard the recording/broadcast).

However, all this BBC-bashing and "Brand / Ross must be sacked" outrage is so completely over the top.

Chastise them; fine them; but don't sack them. They're both popular broadcasters, Ross in particular (while not appealing to all here) is in my view a great broadcaster carrying a wide range of interesting shows.

Yes, they've gone too far, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Anonymous said...

Can I just say...Andrew Sachs grandaughter is a member of the "satanic sluts". She is hardly a beacon of innocense and respectability.

Anonymous said...

Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross = Two cheeks of the same....

Anonymous said...

Iain. Stick to politics. You've got your head up your arse on this subject. If I made a call like that from where I work, i'd be hung out to dry.

Anonymous said...

Your argument doesn't make much sense, Iain.

Broadcasting the offensive material was bad - and was the producers' fault.

But leaving an offensive and upsetting message on the answering machine of a decent, dignified and blameless 78-year old man was, in itself, also bad - whether anyone broadcast the material or not. And the fact remains that in any other context this sort of bullying, abusive behaviour would not be sanctioned - let alone subsidized to the tune of many millions of £££ per year.

By all means sack the editors and producers - but let's get rid of Ross and Brand, too.

Catosays said...

Anonymous said...

The simple fact is that if Ross and Brand had been employees of any other organisation, private or public, they would have been instantly sacked. The chief ececutive would have issued an immediate apology without any caveats.

I agree entirely and you, Iain, would have been amongst those baying for blood.

Anonymous said...

Brand acts like scum - we're paying for that scum with our taxes. I want him gone.

Wrinkled Weasel said...

Oh dear oh dear.

We live in a world where everyone is just waiting to be shocked and horrified. We live in a world where minorities, including blacks, homosexuals and muslims just want to suffer for the cause.

We live in a world of moralists and martyrs. All fake and all self regarding.

What really disgusts me, is not the antics of two overpaid tossers who are not worth the shit on their shoes, but the reaction of the righteous; the great and the good and the nobodies who would be burning witches in Salem and Catholics in Rouen today if they could get away with it.

Feck you all and stuff your TV licenses up your arses while you are doing it. You make the world a shit place to live in.

Anonymous said...

FIVE full pages in the Sun today.

It's almost as if they're trying to keep other stories off the front or inside.

Like what was Mr Murdoch doing with Osborne, the Oligarch and Mandelson that day.

I love the line about Brand and Ross being disgusting, quickly followed by Georgine of "Satans Sluts" admitted she's shagged Brand not once, but three times and then expected him to be a gentleman about it.... Brand! I ask you.
She's a page 3 wannabe who's suddenly found a way to get fame, while Wade and co-horts have found another way to bitch-slap the BBC, keep Mr Murdoch out of public view and avoid any more stories about dodgy MPs.

You'd hardly think there was a global recession shitting people up would you, with FIVE FECKING PAGES OF MADE UP GUFF TO FOCUS MIDDLECLASS FAUX OUTRAGE NO, would you?

Carl Eve

Anonymous said...

"anyone who knows anything about broadcasting will know that the decision to broadcast lies not with them but with the producer, editor and ultimately the station controller."

I know a little more than you about broadcasting then.

it's quite commonplace these days for "talent" to have influence over the edit. Not unlikely that it's written into Ross' contract - possibly even an exec credit on his own shows.

This problem stems from a cultural, and systemic fault at the BBC. It's a stalinist monolith full of bully-boiy tactics where real talent either kow-tows or is squashed by bullies.

Montana above had it right.

Anonymous said...

Who cares?!?!!!!?!?!?!

Life must be good in Britain if this is all you've got to worry about.

Anonymous said...

andy c

We all know what the c stands for.

Anonymous said...

No. No. No. You just don't understand the balance of power between celeb presenters on megabux, and the anonymous functionaries who are the editors and producers. If they don't get their way, the big boys can damage, even crush the careers of the producers who stand in their way. It is very hard for some guy on 30 grand to say No to Wossy.

And it would be a travesty if the producer took the blame, while the big names swanned away unscathed from this nasty cruel stunt.

You're just wrong on this Iain.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:54

May I suggest that you learn to spell before you utter bullcrap?

Anonymous said...

Fair enough Anonymous-

"If you don't like this sort of radio - don't listen in."

Pity Mr Sachs wasn't given a similar option when he picked up his telephone.

By the way Mr Anonymous, assuming you have a family would you care to provide us all with your name and telephone number - just for comedic purposes you understand?


Anonymous said...

So a father of 48 with two daughters and a, errr, well, another geezer who should have grown up but hasn't, need the oversight of a 25 year old, pimply, spotty yoof to ensure they don't step out of line.

Iain, you couldn't make it up!

dizzy said...

I just thought I'd post this comment because a certain someone of Australian insanity persuasion thinks that because he keeps repeating I am a nuisance caller I wouldn't dare post anything under this thread for fear of opening a "can of worms". Sorry to upset you Tim, but you know very well that I have never denied calling you at home. I would like to clarify that I have not had sex with your granddaughter (not that I imagine you have one of course, too young you see, unless you came from Chatham of course).

On the issue of Brand and Ross, I would just like to say that I don't care :-) Now please excuse me, I lead a busy life, as Tim will tell you, I spend all day posting anonymous comments on the Internet

Anonymous said...

Jake - is that the best you can do?

I'll leave you my telephone number and you can leave me insulting messages. Then I can just hit delete on them like Andrew Sachs should have done.

I'm going back to the US Election...

Iain, shame on you for even pandering to this cr*p at such an important time.

Anonymous said...

Brand is obnoxious, Ross can be mildly amusing. Both performed despicable acts of bullying but you are quite correct to point the finger at other people as well. In fact the chances are that the "producer" was some spotty 24 year old and the real culprit, whom the beeb are trying to protect, was the next person up in their pecking order. S/he would have listened to the program before giving it the thumbs up for broadcast. Either way the blame should be shared.

Wrinkled Weasel said...

It suddenly occurred to me that I havn't witnessed such an outpouring of specious collective emotion since the death of Princess Di and, oh poo, I have run out of sick bags.

Anonymous said...

The whole incident shows the inadequacy of management at the BBC. To let a couple of arrested adolescents like Wossy and Brand pull a stunt like this at a time when the Corporation's future is uncertain shows a complete lack of judgement.

I must declare an interest here: I've never forgiven Wossy since he nicked all my jokes after I had done a local radio show promoting a book a few years ago. Never even gave me a mention.

So my message to the babbling fool is: C.U. Next Tuesday, Ross.

King Athelstan said...

Sorry to say I'm a regular listener,but hearing this made me squirm, I can't for the life of Me think what They found funny. But this it turns out, after a week, was recorded and furthermore Mr Sachs had already objected to this being broadcast. That is the problem. My big beef now is that Mr Clunking Mouth Has had His say in the matter. Whatever takes the attention away from the country He destroyed I suppose. You see whenever Jocky opens His great pie-hole I suddenly need to defend whatever He attacks, I just can't put up with His grotesque, festering, pious, pontificating, pompous blether. He should be explaining how his education system has turned out so many cretins who not only don't have a clue what the fuss was about but actually thought it was funny. Perhaps like Wossy they would be dense enough to vote for the English~baiting baboon.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, thanks for that Dizzy.

Not really sure what that confirms. Wossy and Brand's innocence, Tim's lack of a shaggable grand-daughter or your ability to faux-jump on a bandwagon for personal gain?

Don't answer, I'd had to interrupt your busy schedule of baiting left-wingers...

Carl Eve

Alex said...

Iain, I think you miss one big point. Whether or not the programme or that portion of the programme was broadcast, Ross and Brand left the message on Andrew Sachs' recording machine during the recording of the programme.

Whatever may have been broadcast, the offence was already made and however powerful editors and producers may be, they can't change what is on the Mr Sachs' tape.

Anonymous said...

These things happen because of the culture at the BBC,i.e.crude ,vulgar ignorant,subversive,bullying,dumbed down etc. etc.The culture comes from the top of the organisation and results from the policies they adopt.Eg all recruits from the liberal left only.As a result the BBC is run by a bunch of drug taking perverts -thats the problem.

Anonymous said...

Many of us find Ross completely unfunny or even amusing. He seems to have got stuck in his teens.

Kenneth Horne could be quite outrageous but it was always in a witty sophisticated way -Ross is just playground shock tactics.

Many, many of us have switched off every time he comes on and object strongly to our licence money beening used for obscene payments to this arragant man with arrested development.

The BBC treat licence payers with contempt -the time has come to re arrange funding.

Anonymous said...

These bounders should be given a sound thrashing, and the Commie Al-beeb should be closed and all its buildings razed to the ground.

Anonymous said...

There are some comedians who hit the nail on the head though, such as this video about the power of the internet, which can be seen as a very funny take on why so many people have complained

Gadger said...

i think jonathan ross's big problem now has nothing to do with the phone-call.
it's more to do with the fact that he got lesley douglas sacked. (and yeah, i know that she resigned -- but she didn't want to). everyone loved her and now they're blaming him for it. he's public enemy number one at radio 2. he's the only one who can waltz back into work after christmas.