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

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



Message

tweedydaddy -> Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 3:13:10 AM)

Am I alone in thinking that the two most self satisfied overpaid talentless brats the BBC have ever spawned have sunk to a new level of peurile behaviour in ringing up elderly actors to brag about having screwed their Grandaughters and recording it live on air? Would they like their Grandparents to have to go through that?
No one wants to pay a fortune for a licence to fund public broadcasting anyway, but to see the obscene salaries these foul mouthed credits earn for this twaddle is infuriating! Sacking them should be only the start.
What would you do with them?



ukromanticmaster -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 3:29:19 AM)

Hear Hear But...... The BBC doesn’t have the balls to do it.. and why should they
The BBC answers to no one, it gets it money from mugs like you and me
Lets take away the license fee and then we will have control



ChainGoddess -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 4:25:16 AM)

I couldn't agree more with you Tweedy.  These two are the most vile self satisfied idiots on tv.
I may be in the minority, but I have never cared for Ross's style of humour.  To me, having to humiliate and insult people in order to gain a laugh, is not my idea of entertainment.  
Sadly, I cannot see the BBC sacking this cretin, he seems to be their golden boy. 
I also think Brand will emerge from all this relatively unscathed. 
It is a sad reflection on the society we live in.



Dnomyar -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 4:27:16 AM)

I thought that this post was going to be about American politicians.



meatcleaver -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 4:27:42 AM)

TV has been turning culture to mush and lowering people's intelligence for decades, why stop now?



seeksfemslave -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 4:35:53 AM)

Much populist broadcasting in the UK has sunk to lower and lower levels  until eventually sewer rats like these two float to the surface.
They are by no means the only perpetrators of a foul mouthed  culture , it can even be heard on Radio 3., not at all a populist channel. Its not rare even on CM. We all know how high brow that is .

You must remember that one reason the BBC executives permit this kind of thing is that they are scared of losing the financial support that provides them with an excellent standard of living. If they go "too public service" no one will listen and it would become ever more difficult to maintain the licence fee.
So...what we see is Liberal middle class professionals giving the plebs. what it is thought they like.
Are the professionals wrong ?
I dont think so. Its just that this time a  boundary was crossed thassal.



susie -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 4:51:29 AM)

I am amazed at how much support they seemed to have had on a couple of news fora. What they did could not be seen as comedy by any stretch of the imagination. Is this really what so called "cutting edge comedy" has come to.



lusciouslips19 -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 5:04:47 AM)

And I thought only the U.S. had obnoxious, stunted adolesencent radio and show hosts.



LadyEllen -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 5:31:06 AM)

I'd hardly call the licence fee a fortune, but then I also hardly see why either of these two should be paid what they are from it.

The problem for the BBC is that if it goes serious and high brow its accused of elitism and not representing the people who pay for it. If it tries to compete with the other channels its accused of chasing ratings with low quality productions and not fulfilling its duty to educate and inform.

And this against a national backdrop where such things as good manners and respect for others is very much out of fashion alongside a similar environment in which the lowest common denominator rules the day and entertainment is the most important aspect of life, at the expense of informed consideration of serious issues. In this, the recruitment and antics of such as these two should be seen for what it is - the BBC desperately trying to represent the majority of the people who fund it, at the expense of its public duties.

Sadly, removing the licensing fee and making the BBC go commercial will not help - it will result in the same sort of banal TV and radio one finds across Europe and in much of the US and UK also being put out by the BBC - its all about ratings and how much advertising one can sell for how much. But at the same time, its not right that everyone should pay the licence fee if they are unable to or unwilling to also support the sort of productions that would arise from the pure fulfilment of the public broadcasting duties that go with it.

E



pahunkboy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 5:39:40 AM)

A word of advice.   If your TV programming gets Americanized,  take it out on the street and smash it.

you might pay a lience fee- but in the USA free tv is maybe 2% of households.  Free tv went away around 1980.

3 months ago- I dumped my tv.  63$ a month was too much for endless soundbooms/distractions.

anyhow-   trashy tv is a huge detriment to a community.   



RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 6:42:32 AM)

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.  I also believe that Mr Sachs was an idiot.  My father knows him and he is a lovely man, but not the brightest button and he should have stopped this before it got this far, believe me he has the power to do it.  He didn't and suffered the consequences.
 
the.dark.



tweedydaddy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 8:21:08 AM)

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.



seeksfemslave -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 8:40:03 AM)

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.  I also believe that Mr Sachs was an idiot.  My father knows him and he is a lovely man, but not the brightest button and he should have stopped this before it got this far, believe me he has the power to do it.  He didn't and suffered the consequences.
 
the.dark.

So lets get this straight. You hold a victim responsible for anything that happens to him. ?
How exactly should he have "stopped it" unless he knew it was going to be broadcast ? I hope someone else will ask you before you actually see this post because frankly your argument seems a little ...err errr  well you might be able to guess ?
 
The issue most certainly is their "antics".
The state this nation has descended to sickens me !!!!



stella41b -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 8:43:41 AM)

Bring back The Magic Roundabout, that's all I say.



philosophy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 10:13:59 AM)

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.  I also believe that Mr Sachs was an idiot.  My father knows him and he is a lovely man, but not the brightest button and he should have stopped this before it got this far, believe me he has the power to do it.  He didn't and suffered the consequences.
 
the.dark.

 
.....i've always found your posts to be nothing but reasonable....until now. Really? An OAP is more responsible for something foisted on him than the two people who did it? Thats the same logic that suggests rape victims were asking for it.

Brand and Ross initiated the event and ought to take responsibility for it. To suggest that the victim......and Sachs was a victim here......was more responsible is, well, irresponsible.



RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 10:41:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

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.  I also believe that Mr Sachs was an idiot.  My father knows him and he is a lovely man, but not the brightest button and he should have stopped this before it got this far, believe me he has the power to do it.  He didn't and suffered the consequences.
 
the.dark.

So lets get this straight. You hold a victim responsible for anything that happens to him. ?
How exactly should he have "stopped it" unless he knew it was going to be broadcast ? I hope someone else will ask you before you actually see this post because frankly your argument seems a little ...err errr  well you might be able to guess ?
 
The issue most certainly is their "antics".
The state this nation has descended to sickens me !!!!


Hello seeks
He did know it was to be broadcast.  He was also told that they were going to broadcast it without his permission.  At that point, he should have gone higher - he has the ability - he isn't a nobody.  He also was not one of the original complainers and did not press a complaint which this was initially brought out.
 
the.dark.

the.dark.



philosophy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 10:54:27 AM)

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?



RCdc -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:09:20 AM)

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.



myotherself -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B****************rds! (10/29/2008 11:13:15 AM)

Jonathan Ross is a sycophantic waste of space, and Russell Brand is a crude tosser.  Ross likes to be 'one of the boys' and is a follower, not a leader.  Brand's 'humour' is usually at the expense of others, or is a boast of his pathetic activities (drugs/sex/drink)

Getting rid of both of them is no great loss.  Let's make way for more intelligent comedy and less malicious and nasty presenters.




philosophy -> RE: Brand and Ross - sack the B@@@@rds! (10/29/2008 11:14:20 AM)

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?



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125