RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds!

RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:14:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark He was also told that they were going to broadcast it without his permission. ......and shouldn't Ross and Brand take any responsibility for that? They're grown men not kids. At what point should they be held responsible for their actions? By it not being aired. By recieving an offical warning, just like any job or position. Yes they went in my mind too far - however if their superiors are okaying their behaviour and allowing them to air such crass banter, which was pre-recorded - as much as I would see Brand and Ross disciplined for their behaviour, they should not IMO take the blame for all the fallout. They recorded a session that is submitted - the producers chose to air or not - the producer telephoned Sachs and was told he was unhappy - sachs did not make an offical complaint but voiced his disapproval.(This is all alleged). It was asked not to be aired, but was anyway. Personally, I see the producer to blame and as Philps is as big an asshole you can get, he is the boss and decision maker. He should take the fallout. the.dark.

philosophy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:15:54 AM)
...ah, we cross posted. Thanks for addressing, at least partially, my point.

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:17:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark As I said before Phil, I don't see why he did not make a complaint in the first place. I just don't. Usually, the producer of the programme involved would be the ones deciding whether the item would be broadcast. If the producer did allegedly tell Mr Sachs that he was going to air anyway despite the concerns of Sachs, then Mr Sach should have gone higher. If he wasn't informed, then he should have made an offical complaint initially. From what I heared, the BBC said they recieved three complaints initially, none of them from Mr Sachs. the.dark. ...all well and good, but you have side stepped my point. So i'll ask it again. What responsibility do Brand and Ross have for their actions? Any? Some? None? If the latter, then how come they get a free ride? Sorry Phil - I am a post behind. I didn't side step, I answered above, but I am answering a post at a time. the.dark.

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:19:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ...ah, we cross posted. Thanks for addressing, at least partially, my point. No worries(I had a phone call in between posting). If I didn't fully answer your point and you feel I left something out, please let me know and I will endeavour to respond. the.dark.

philosophy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:25:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ...ah, we cross posted. Thanks for addressing, at least partially, my point. No worries(I had a phone call in between posting). If I didn't fully answer your point and you feel I left something out, please let me know and I will endeavour to respond. the.dark. ....i fully accept your point that the producers bear some responsibility for the situation. However, i also feel that Ross and Brand also have to take some responsibility too. The alternative is to suggest that those who police a situation are more responsible for errors than those who make the errors. Apply that to crime, and it seems to me that your logic suggests that the police are more responsible for, say, the murder of Stephen Lawrence than the murderers themselves. Now, i know you wouldn't support that, so i can only assume that some special circumstance exists in your mind that absolves Ross and Brand......what is it?

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:26:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweedydaddy I don't think that any old age pensioner, regardless of intellect should be required to stop a state funded media figure boasting on air about having sex with his grandaughter and then suggesting the old man hang himself with shame, maybe I'm old fashioned. Well, call me hard arsed. I don't see what age has to do with it. I would be just as disappointed had it occured to a 30something. I find it pretty pathetic using age as a factor - as though people of a younger age would not be equally upset. It's sensationalist and classic tabloid. Fortunately not everyone follows tabloid mentality. the.dark.

LadyEllen -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 11:29:11 AM)
I dont get the argument that Sachs could have/ should have gone higher to get it stopped? If they'd made a programme including a prank call to me (a nobody) and broadcast to the country that they'd had sex with my grand daughter, what the hell would I have been able to do about it? And the idea that the producer called Sachs to tell him that regardless of his concerns it would be broadcast anyway - what was the point of that exactly? To attempt to humiliate him privately, prior to the attempted public humiliation? And whilst the producer should take a lot of heat for this, the fact remains that these two infantile dolts were at the centre of the whole thing - had either of them any degree of maturity, good sense, manners, respect for themselves or others, they should have flat out refused to participate, but they didnt. This is the sort of thing I might have considered amusing when I was in primary school; that this gang of boys appears to remain at that level of socialisation yet are rewarded with huge salaries for it is bad enough - that so many of the population found it amusing and not in the least bit questionable is simply awful testament to the state of our nation. E

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:38:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....i fully accept your point that the producers bear some responsibility for the situation. However, i also feel that Ross and Brand also have to take some responsibility too. The alternative is to suggest that those who police a situation are more responsible for errors than those who make the errors. Apply that to crime, and it seems to me that your logic suggests that the police are more responsible for, say, the murder of Stephen Lawrence than the murderers themselves. Now, i know you wouldn't support that, so i can only assume that some special circumstance exists in your mind that absolves Ross and Brand......what is it? Yes they fucked up and made a mistake. A big one. I am a fan of both these men sure - but I also get that what they did was not only an error of judgement but a mistake on their career. I do believe that this is going to effect their career and there is nothing they can do about that now particularly. Brand, I doubt it will matter - he has a short career life. Again, they took him on knowing what he was like having been already sacked from the likes of MTV for similar behaviour. Whilst I don't support the behaviour, the actions of the BBC etc - do. Ross is the one who will suffer the most out of this - do I believe he should face a consequence? Absolutely. Paycut? yes. Less air time? I don't believe that helps nor solves anything. Contract alterations? Probably, but then I have no idea what his contract contains so that's a harder one to define. But I do believe it is classic media hype to start shouting 'off with their heads' when the reality is that some tosspot producer didn't take into consideration the requests of Sachs and put it out there for the thrill factor. I don't believe Sachs helped the issue because as far as I have followed this story, he was supposed to answer the call (I can't confirm that) and it had been pre arranged. Whilst that does not make their behaviour more acceptable, I can also understand why they might have been pissed off if they were 'stood up' and let down y someone who made an obligation to a programme. the.dark.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 11:40:36 AM)
Can Darcy tell us how he knows what information was passed on to Sachs. Note we are hearing the usual codswallop. Lessons will be learned. An error of judgement has been made. Comedy must challenge the bounderies of taste. That road leads to the sewer where these two manic morons lurk. I hope this episode can be used to clean up the airwaves in the UK. Wont hold my breath tho.

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 11:44:31 AM)
I agree. I do believe it is testiment to society when it is ok that a man who is 'respected' lets down an obligation he made and everyone thinks that is ok and he should not be held accountable for his actions. Yes - they were stupid arses and behaved in an appalling manner. But I do not find that Sachs behaved in any better way. the.dark.

RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 11:50:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Can Darcy tell us how he knows what information was passed on to Sachs. It's not Darcy, it's dark.[;)] BBC news item (BBC 24) and Daily Mail(spokesman for Sachs). quote: Note we are hearing the usual codswallop. Lessons will be learned. An error of judgement has been made. Comedy must challenge the bounderies of taste. That road leads to the sewer where these two manic morons lurk. I hope this episode can be used to clean up the airwaves in the UK. Wont hold my breath tho. I do agree with you there. I hope people also learn/realise that when they are either under contract or make a promise to appear and don't for some unknown reason with no information (as far as I understood it from the news item when this first broke) then you have to take the fallout also. the.dark.

meatcleaver -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 11:51:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: myotherself Getting rid of both of them is no great loss. Let's make way for more intelligent comedy and less malicious and nasty presenters. I can't see what the big deal is, BBC has been heading down the toilet for a long time, Ross and Brand are just a symptom of what is wrong with TV and radio. At one time the BBC used to get complaints for putting on brilliant biting, complex, sophisticated and satirical dramas that were the envy of the Europe if not rhe world, now they get complaints for delivering shit that the masses want. Everyone is enjoying this outrage, the outrage is all part of the same shitty culture that demanded such juvenile tosh in the first place.

softness -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 12:10:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I like them both and I believe they should stay. I am happy that my fee is used to fund them and many others. The issue isn't their antics, but the reactions and behaviour of those higher up in the BBC who allowed this to be broadcast. yep .. what she said. The problem is not the pair of hosts involved (though I don't find the prank calls amusing and think they are childish that's my personal taste and I am sure than just as many people found it hilarious as didn't) ... but the fact that the "jape" was broadcast should be questioned. The BBC as a state funded corporation should be held responsible for its content ... that means that if Ross and Brand are witch hunted in a mass bray of hysteria then so should the writers, producers, editors, sound man, director, script editor, sound bite technician and anyone else who played a part in getting those minutes of misplaced comedy broadcast. Brand and Ross are not Satan's minions on earth and despite what people may have you believe getting something "on the air" is not child's play ... So before we all get damp around the knickers ... calm down, take a sip of tea ... and rethink the hysteria a little. and ps ... i think the price we pay for the TV licence is ridiculously low for what we get in return ... but then thats just me, an impoverished school teacher who lives off beans on toast - what would I know about value for money. If we obliterated from the face of the earth anything that people found offensive, unsavoury or disrespectful ... well we would be left with the televisual equivolent of Bran Flakes.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 12:28:16 PM)
FR: You know, if someone called my grandmother or my mother and said this vile shit....I'd be down at the studio with a fucking baseball bat. I've never liked shock jocks, and I don't understand why anyone over the age of 16 finds pranks like this funny.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 1:16:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: softness so should the writers, producers, editors, sound man, director, script editor, sound bite technician and anyone else who played a part in getting those minutes of misplaced comedy broadcast. You mean they had a script? I knew my licence fee was being spent well on such excellent minds that could come up with such intellectual comedy. If someone rang up your grandparents to tell them they were fucking you and you were easy, would you find it funny? Hopefully we can save a great deal of money for the BBC if what’s his name is on half pay. The worst part of this whole affair is: in the end two people will be even more sought after for being controversial. We put great value on the wrong things.

LadyEllen -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 1:18:42 PM)
I'm sorry - wasnt paying attention - but I think it was just reported that Brand had resigned and Ross had been suspended? I'm off out now (I do have a life, so there!) so wont look it up but maybe someone else can do the honours? E

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 1:28:59 PM)
Also this odd logic that other people should be responsible for your actions is what is wrong with the world. If I run someone over drink driving shall we charge the bar staff that sold me the drink or the car manufacturer that sold me the car or perhaps the people that put the car together? Get real and realise that people are responsible for their own actions and also try opposing an ego such as Ross if you are one of those other staffers mentioned, see how long you keep your job.

myotherself -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 1:32:19 PM)
I have to agree - the decline is there, and becoming ever more obvious. But maybe this is one of those landmark events that makes more people sit up and think 'this is not what WE want'. I doubt it will effect a change for the better in and of itself, but maybe it will act as a catalyst for change in the longer term. We've noticed a lack in standards, now let's do something about addressing them. The only viable option we have (that won't get us fined or locked up) is to voice our concerns to the BBC and their (toothless) watchdogs, so long may it continue.

MiLadyDiane -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 1:59:01 PM)
"You know, if someone called my grandmother or my mother and said this vile shit....I'd be down at the studio with a fucking baseball bat. I've never liked shock jocks, and I don't understand why anyone over the age of 16 finds pranks like this funny. " Hear ! Hear ! My sentiments exactly . Many a time I was stuck in freeway traffic and forced to put in a tape because Howard Stearn ( sp ? ) was the only thing on the radio for an un-godly amount of time , day in and day out , EVERY day ! May his mouth rot in his head and render him speechless for the rest of his days , even as his fines and worthless promises to " be good " add up to the quintillions . [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m19.gif[/image]

philosophy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B**************rds! (10/29/2008 2:13:24 PM)
FR http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7698417.stm ......update

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625