A blow for decency

Ben Elford

Why did the BBC management take so long even to begin to act? It appears they have been pushed by growing awareness of public outrage, rather than being conscious themselves that the offending broadcast should never have been made, and having been transmitted, the most serious steps need to be taken.

Chingford Man

One down, one to go.

Pete, Scotland

I cannot believe that my hard earned money, extracted from me by a Government enforced tax, is funding this rubbish.

Can I have a refund!

Better still can I stop paying this licence fee!

Campbell Martin

wow. i cant help to think that this article may be ever so slightly bias.

the real question should be why the show was allowed to be aired. it was afterall prerecorded and looked over by management who contacted Sachs and asked if the section could be broadcast to which he strongly declined. so who allowed it to be aired, thats the main question that needs to be answered.

These people are comedians, take it with a pinch of salt.

Dixon

Should not the pair of them receive an ASBO?

Water

One it is, though we still have Gordon even if they both go.

Conlige suspectos semper habitos

Chingford Man - more like one down, several hundred more smart-a**e pinkoes in Broadcasting House to go.

david skinner

That's why your in the position you are in Melanie . Keep manning the post.

hadrian

Dear Mr Sachs in all this has been a paragon of patience and dignity. Still, even he could not refrain from bemoaning the sheer crudity and 'extremity' of what passes for 'wit' nowadays.
Sadly some of us have to teach a generation reared on this filth from nonentities promoted as role models. The deleterious results are glaringly obvious. We have a generation inured to vicious disrespect as 'funny'. The BBC are a major part of this national disaster whose full bitter fruits are still to be felt, I fear. Never mind- as you say, Melanie, at least one blow for common decency. Maybe the execrable Brand will be chastened by this- but I doubt it. Oh for Dad's Army, Open All Hours,the classic Carry Ons and good old fashioned farces, Two Ronnies, Morecombe and Wise, Les Dawson etc.,etc. Satire, if clever, is fine in its place but warm, quirky, wry, fond humour is the tonic!

Gregory Spawton

Yes, they were wrong and acted stupidly. Yes, there are issues over BBC editorial judgements.

But the hounding of these two men is now getting completely out of proportion with the offence.

Alcuin

In view of what in any other organisation would be called gross professional misconduct, I hope Wossy's contract will be terminated without privilege, i.e. no golden handshake, no pay beyond the termination date, and no pension rights - as would pertain for all the rest of us. And then there should be a file sent to the CPS with a view to prosecution for criminal harrassment and abuse.

Stephen Fowler

James Whale was sacked from Talksport (late night talk show) recently for suggesting that listeners should vote for Boris Johnson in the London Mayor election.
Ofcom seems to be far more vigilant towards the independent radio.(Although I don't know if they were involved on that particular occasion).

Fearless Frank

A worrying feature about this whole affair is the way defenders of this programme think that objectors "have no sense of humour".
Somebody on Radio 4 just now was arguing that people who tune into this show should know what to expect, and if they don't like, don't listen.
Missing the point!
You might as well say, if you don't like to see people getting mugged, look the other way.
Apparently the bbc think it is vitally important to "connect" with the audience who like this stuff...in the same way, presumably, that Roman emperors liked to connect with plebs in the Colosseum by throwing Christians to the lions.

Huw Thornton

Yes, great news. This could be the start of much better broadcasting - anything is possible.

Dave M

Wossy has always tried to cultivate an element of shock appeal. I thought he was very much in danger of having his face slapped by Madonna, for example, when he cracked a joke about her adoption in public. She just laughed it off. I do think he's a talented interviewer but just went a step too far on this occasion and miscalculated. The crack he made about Lady T., for example, was nothing more than an attempt to make David Cameron squirm and push a few boundaries. Granted he does go a bit far but we still need to be careful not to lose our sense of humour when comics and journalists simply put their foot in it big time - a trait they all share. To illustrate that very point, do we all remember what happened when Billy Connoly goofed and made the most stupid comment you could imagine? There was a British hostage being held by a group of Islamic fanatics and Connoly made an off-the-cuff joke over the situation. "Don't you find yourself wishing they'd just get on with it?", I think he said to gasps from the audience. That is, get on with beheading the guy. It wasn't intended to be serious, didn't reflect Connoly's genuine opinion but was just a very stupid joke to make. For a time, the man was in serious trouble and had to apologise. It may be the case when we laugh at vulgarities as an audience, these celebrities come to believe they can get away with virtually anything in the name of humour and then come unstuck. All in all, I think they should apologise and we should all just move on.

stever

Was this really the correct 'fight 'for decency to have its waterloo? It would be hard to imagine there being a bigger fuss over anything even remotely similar but I cant help think it wasn't the right battle and that it will be looked back on as all rather pointless. Maybe all the outrage has been wasted on the wrong target - this was, after all, two comedian famed for puerile humour, doing their thing on a show that is famed for it. I cant help think there are bigger game but that the bolt has now been shot. Brand will be the day's sacrificial lamb (or possibly a martyr for the many who thought this was all a storm in a tea cup)

There's all mannner of offensive material on TV, much, even most of it on cable and satellite broadcasts on a daily day. I think a lot of the routine violence, exploitative marketing, gambling, and objectification of women is far more offensive and insidious than one rather pathetic ill judged phone prank.

It could end up being a pyrrhic victory.

Terry

Campbell Martin

I do hope that if these a******s ever get to broadcast again, that you are their next victim. We'll all just take it with a pinch of salt.

Ed Whitmore

Interesting that there were only two complaints initially. I doubt the vast majority of the people who’ve complained subsequently have even heard the original broadcast, but are simply jumping on a bandwagon driven by the Daily Mail. Jonathan Ross can be a bit full of himself but he's undoubtedly a talented, witty interviewer and it would be a shame if this signals the end of his career at the Beeb. A slapped wrist is in order but no more.

JohnW

Stephen Fowler,

Yes, OFCOM were involved in the James Whale incident following a number of listeners' complaints.

That said, it is interesting to read OFCOM's charter, such as it is. For example, I was amazed to learn that their remit does not extend to ensuring that the BBC excrcises political impartiality in its reporting! This explains why the BBC has been polluting the airwaves with their left wing views for so long.

Verity

Gregory Spawton who thinks it is all getting a bit much.

I don't know where he gets his quaint little notion from, but no.

It is not nearly enough. Wimpy. Excuses ... "I was just ..." like a child.

Hatchet time. I'm available.

Verity

Gregory Spawnton or whatever, writes: "But the hounding of these two men is now getting completely out of proportion with the offence."

(That should be "to" the offence, by the way. Not to weaken your argument by suggesting that you're ignorant in any way. Just sayin' ...)

Did Mr Sachs tell you this directly? Or pass it on through a friend?

Excuse me? Someone who doesn't know Mr Sachs is now adjudicating how much in the way of official reprimand is "conmpletely out of proportion".

We all look forward to your opinion on this type of offence after you have climbed the talent ladder for years, done hard graft and been accorded a world famous role in a world famous comedy. And have a name recognised around the Anglosphere.

When it happens, let us know.

John May

Thank You, Ms Phillips. You hit 'th nail on the head!

pete woodhouse

i'm sorry, have i stumbled upon a mary whitehouse/grannies convention

Marin

About Russell Brand's Ponderland which is to be shown tonight on C4 (from this week's Radio Times, p.98) : 'The first episode in the new series is a disappointment (next week's looks much better), though it has its-mainly gleefully filthy-moments). And Brand is always a compelling figure, with his rooster hair and arabesque delivery'. Any wonder then why the infamous Radio 2 broadcast was allowed to go ahead?

Ronnie

Hadrian, I agree wholeheartedly with you. There is nothing funny about self-indulgent bullying no matter how large the perpetrator's salary. I think it is an issue large enough for a Waterloo given all the issues involved.

And you are so right about Ronnie Barker, 'Fourcandles...'. And Dad's Army, 'I am making a list and your name vill be ze first, vot is it?' 'Don't tell him Pike!'

Now, that's humour.

Hereford

Campbell: The airing, or not of the show is actually irrelevant. The call made and was, of itself, obscene, threatening, harrassing and therefore illegal. A criminal act.

Even if it had never been broadcast its illegality and inappropriateness would subsist.

David Raynes

If one listens carefully to the broadcast on YouTube it is plain that the Ross output was premeditated-and by him. The BBC is in terminal moral decline, of course Ross should go, is there anyone in the Licence paying public who thinks him worth his ridiculous fee? I have not met such a person, I doubt they exist. The deeper question is about the management and governership of the BBC AND about what WE ask it to do. BBC management seems to be so desperate to keep its "yoof" audience on board that it has lost sight of the objectives of what used to be a glorious example of public sector broadcasting. We used to be proud of it. Are we now? Really? The time has come to cut it down to size. If silly ramblings of people like Ross and Brand( and sadly there is it would appear). It should be provided by the private sector. The BBC should contract to a core public service, some of what it does is still glorious. I suggest two "free" TV channels and two "free" Radio channels, the licence fee should be massively reduced. If the BBC runs other TV channels the technology exists to make them "pay per view". Given an appropriate transition period, that is the way to go.

Chris

Blimey, a post from Mel that's not twice as long as it needs to be to make its point.

Ronnie

David Raynes, I absolutely agree with everything you say and I have not seen it so well put.

The BBC tries to do too much and is quite obviously doing a lot of it badly, chasing every market segment like a headless chicken. All they are doing is contributing to the appalling scrum of broadcast mediocrity (at best) that a very large proportion of the audience could do without.

Much less would be very much more in this case and, in those circumstances, a new case for the license could be made.

woody

Oh, my, but the BBC is very quick not to offend when it comes to jokes about Muslims.

logdon

Actually power of the people. The Mail which is universally derided by the uberhip BBC (or so they think!) facilitated this, their readers responded and a cross media tsunami followed. Thank god for the democracy of the internet! That Brown and Straw are now adding twopenneths is quite typical of these gross opportunists. Wait until they see which way the wind blows then dive in. But I think this is a tip of the hidden iceberg as to how how our nation is thinking. Fed up with PC nannying. Sick to death with that strange new anomaly, authoritarian libertarians. Alternatively bored and aggrieved by a BBC which rather than reflecting the mindset of it's viewers almost willfully challenges the views of the masses who pay it's wages. They in attempting this so called 'cutting edge' stuff, fall between two impossible and conflicting stools which exposes the hypocrisy of this bloated organisation. So right on when dealing with Islam, black rights, womens issues, disability and dare I say it, Labour, yet as sensitive as an SS guard when they try on the 'edgy'. Andrew Sachs fled Nazi Germany when he was eight. He is Jewish. Had he stayed there's not much chance that he'd be around now. Had his name been Mohammed Patel there is not one scintilla of doubt that this would not have occurred. So much for ethnic sensitivity and the bias shown by our national broadcaster. It has to end! We've had enough! Our general public are not idiots and they pick up on this but bludgeoned by New Labour Stalinistic edict mainly stay quiet. This time they decided enough is enough and this quite extraordinary outburst is evidence of a groundswell of revolt. The worm is turning and hopefully this quite extraordinary episode is the first warning shot across the bows of what is basically the broadcasting wing of Labour and it's marxist cohorts. I for one am uplifted. Power to the people!

Verity

logdon brings up an interesting point. There would have been no apology - just sneering dismissiveness - had it not been for the bracing air of democracy blowing around the blogs.

Obviously, Melanie's column got the flame crackling, but people who read her column grabbed it and commented on the blogs, and people who would otherwise not have seen the column became aware of the offence, and added their voices.

Thank God for blogs and the internet!

Gregory Spawton

Verity writes:

'Gregory Spawnton or whatever, writes: "But the hounding of these two men is now getting completely out of proportion with the offence."

(That should be "to" the offence, by the way. Not to weaken your argument by suggesting that you're ignorant in any way. Just sayin' ...)

Did Mr Sachs tell you this directly? Or pass it on through a friend?

Excuse me? Someone who doesn't know Mr Sachs is now adjudicating how much in the way of official reprimand is "conmpletely out of proportion".

We all look forward to your opinion on this type of offence after you have climbed the talent ladder for years, done hard graft and been accorded a world famous role in a world famous comedy. And have a name recognised around the Anglosphere.

When it happens, let us know.'

Sorry, Verity, I should have realised that I needed to be famous around the world before I was able to express an opinion.

And, by the way, it's 'completely' not 'conmpletely',( not suggesting that you're ignorant in any way. Just sayin' ...)

Rob-NY

Brand is vile and vicious.

Stephen

Interesting photo of Brand in the Metro paper today. Behind him was a portrait of Stalin.

Ian G

Obscene phone calls are illegal. Full stop! So when are they going to be arrested and charged? The law exists to protect ordinary people from juvenile, sex-obsessed creeps who like harassing other people. Apparently, if you are rich enough and/or work for the BBC, it's just a prank that's got out of proportion. Or is that, one law for the rich...?

Rob-NY

Hey Brand, Apologise to the Palin family as well!
So sincere, isn't he?
Good riddence. What a sleeze.