russell brand - C or D?

"uno, dos, tres... people are getting fired from the Beeb!"

The Sun went with "Que?"

"He put Russell een the microwave??!"

This has to be a spoof comment:

I'm delighted the Mail brought this matter to our attention so soon after it was broadcast so we could take action. I would never have known about the distasteful antics of those two hairy bullies otherwise.

- Doreen, Dorset, 29/10/2008 08:00

microwave is surely wrong, don't know why i thought that (xp)

microwave Ratatoullie

Yeah, it was me (xxp).

Has anyone doing 'Don't Mention The Whore' yet?

heh

CONTROLLER OF RADIO 2 UNAWARE OF STATION POLICY AND GUIDELINES: "I learn it from ee book."

Matt DC needs new job writing tabloid headlines immediately

yeh, him and the thousands of subs facing redundancy over the next few years.

yes, because I was being entirely serious.

are you being entirely serious now?

Piss off :-)

(should have omitted smiley to cast doubt on seriousness of that as well, tbh)

After careful consideration I have decided that this will only do temporary, minor damage to the careers of all concerned and will not prevent Rossy, Brandy, Walliamsy and Gervaisy from becoming our new golfing light entertainment kings in the fullness of time.

(not forgetting their old showbiz chum Gordon Ramsayy, of course)

Ross and Brand will lose their jobs over this, I suspect, now.

And Radio 2 will lose their licence because no one will listen to it any more.

Even the BBC aren't that stupid.

(yes I know, red rag to a bull etc.)

xpost i bet you £1 neither does.

Let's not all forget the real victim in all of this, Miley Cyrus, who is now denied her opportunity to be perved over by Ross in an attempt to drum up publicity for whatever she's trying to drum up publicity for.

Any update on 6Music presenter George Lamb and his disgraceful, insulting, LEWD answerphone messages to much-loved pensioner Ray Davies?

(xpost) Also, David Attenborough misses another chance to try and make a serious point about climate change only to be talked over the top of by Ross.

Full marks to the Telegraph's sports desk subs for this headline:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/dailybung/3278260/Its-official-Joey-Barton-is-more-popular-than-Russell-Brand-and-Jonathan-Ross.html

just complained. you know, for the lulz.

(not forgetting their old showbiz chum Gordon Ramsayy, of course)

Gordon Ramsey is "fucking off" to Dubai in the next couple of years so I read. Not that that would stop him playing golf or anything.

He'll have to settle for a round or two with Michael Jacksony and Jim Davidsony, then.

And Rod Stewart - who's daughter Russell Brand didn't sleep with - the circle is complete!

Given that presenters have been sacked for being found to have taken cocaine in their own time (Bacon, Deayton), and the head of BBC1 went for allowing a program about the Queen to be edited in a controversial manner, I can easily see Brand and Ross going, too.

I don't think people are complaining at this particular instance of Brand and Ross being rude on radio, and I don't think it's right or fair to ay "you're not the target audience of the program and didn't listen anyway so you have no right to complain either". I think people are complaining about the fact that the BBC is not any old broadcasting entity, isn't commercial or private; it's a public service, paid for with what amounts to a tax, and therefore its audience is EVERYONE in this country (who pays said tax), and it has standards to uphold. Radio 2 used to be called "the light program".

I believe in the BBC. I believe in public service broadcasting. I still don't like ITV, never have, and bar X Factor don't watch anything on it and never really have. I also found bits of Brand and Ross' behaviour in this instance amusing. I'm finding it difficult to reconcile that with that I believe the BBC should be doing.

I think the underlying thing to all this is the economic climate; here is, in Ross, an astronomically well-paid individual, a figurehead of a national institution, bellowing "he fucked your granddaughter" into the answerphone of an old man in the name of comedy and public service. What the fuck?

Yeah Ross is the one they're all going for here, Russell Brand is collateral damage really.

Would it have made any difference if Ross has just sat in the studio going "hyuk hyuk, you shagged Andrew Sachs' grand-daughter" and Brand sang some songs about it with Sachs sitting at home listening on the radio? Plenty of things which cause offence to one or more individuals are broadcast every day on the BBC with little or no uproar.

(Angus Deayton still works for the Beeb, btw, he was just removed from HIGNFY)

Bacon's also one of the bigger presenters on Five Live now, isn't he?

BBC wouldn't use Deayton for a couple of years after his sacking

Ross is so much more powerful than Deayton or Bacon tho, whole new level and they could well reason that sacking him would do them far more damage than retaining him

high time they stood up to the tabloids imo, hold ground and just fine Ross heavily

ailsa, it's very different

Ross is powerful because people like him, that's probably not the case any more.

Bacon's on the 11pm-1am slot on 5Live, and occasionalyl fills in for others during the day; but it's taken him ten years to get back to that level.

Deaton got fired from a panel show, yes, but Ross' show is HIMSELF; if its decided he needs to go from that, then he goes from everything, surely.

Yeah, I just thought through my "what's the difference if it wasn't on his answerphone" thing in terms of Nick's earlier argument, and realise that it wasn't a very clever theory at all.

Bacon was presenting the Big Breakfast almost immediately afterwards, so...

From the listener point of view though (as opposed to Sachs, who presumably hasn't complained 18,000 times himself), it's just a different vehicle for randomly abusing a pensioner, which I realise you are taking into account, but do the thousands of Daily Mail bandwagon-jumpers? Or is it just "he's rude, and not very funny", which is what I seem to be picking up from soundbites on the news, rather than the more nuanced argument Nick's put forward.

i see what you mean. When i first heard about this immediately what sprung to mind was a news article not too long ago about bullying via mobile phones - nuisance calls and nasty text messages. I guess I was categorising this into that personally.

But yeah probably a lot of the complainers might not see it that way and would take offence if you took the phone out of the equation.

'tis all a bit silly.

There should be a telepoll of "who should get the sack". I will add the nastier one from Little Britain to the list.

Even if it's just bandwagon-jumping Daily Mail complainers saying "he's rude, he's a millionaire, it's disgusting" that's still a part of the "does the BBC exist to do this?" argument, whether they know it or not.

As a punishment I would like the BBC to take "2 pints of lager" of the air.

off

that would be sweet

at least there will be some good material for Ross' new year eve show.

Given the lack of input we have into an organisation we own, I think a lot of the complaints here come from a desire to exercise control, over anything, within the BBC. With no other outlet, such a 'scandal' becomes a proxy referendum about overpay within the corporation.

ftse up 316 points!