After a week of media frenzy, the BBC hopes it has taken action to end the crisis caused by the crude prank call made by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand on the latter’s Radio 2 show.
Brand has quit and Jonathan Ross has been suspended after the presenters left lewd comments on the answerphone of 78-year-old “Fawlty Towers” actor Andrew Sachs. The head of Radio 2 Lesley Douglas has also resigned.
The outcome it would appear has left no one happy. Most commentators feel the BBC took far too long to act on an issue that had clearly angered the public with more than 30,000 people making a complaint.
Many newspapers feel Douglas was unjustly sacrificed, taking the rap for mistakes made by production staff she had little or nothing to do with. The Daily Mirror said she was a “big loss to weak BBC”.
What it means for the BBC is unclear. Its governing body, the BBC Trust, says lessons must be learned and editorial guidelines tightened without jeopardising creativity and “edgy” programmes.
Those like the Daily Mail, a regular critic of the broadcaster, want the corporation to go further, citing other “highly offensive” jokes, including one about the Queen, that have appeared on the BBC since the row erupted.
Others worry that fear of causing offence will make the BBC safe and irrelevant.
Did the BBC get it right? Should Ross have been sacked as an example that the BBC has lost the plot on what is acceptable or has the whole affair just been ridiculously hyped by the media?
Trackback
16 comments so far
do you really think mr ross CAN come back to our bbc after a 3 month holiday ,( i dont think so), it shows how far the bbc management is away from the main stream public opinion,to think we the liecence payers can be fobbed of with this weak smack on the wrist to mr ross ,only done after public pressure ,is enough ,think again . BBC Director-General Mark Thompson and mr ross MUST GO
- Posted by d jonesRoss’s pay packet is outrageous. Auntie should go back to what she does best : finding new talent infront of and behind the scenes. When talent becomes greedy, it should be left to migrate elsehwere … so what if Ross moves to ITV, at least it’s not my money.
- Posted by malcolmHe should have been sacked . Who will watch him now.
- Posted by gavin parkShameful
The BBC gets it wrong again. Jonathan Ross should be sacked. Mark Thompson and those making the decision with him are just as responsible as the Presenters. The BBC Executive should be setting the standards of decency by sacking Ross as an example. The message going out to BBC viewers and listeners is just a rap on the knuckles to Ross and they will welcome him back in 3 months. A weak and outrageous decision by Thompson.
- Posted by Anthony BridgesWhy just a 12 week ban and warning,Ross will take no notice and carry on as before. We have paid far too much for this foul mouthed idiot for too long. Don’t waste time or any more money. Get rid of him now !
- Posted by Trevor Cherrycome back Jonathan!
- Posted by gary ashtonwe all make mistakes!
time to move on.
However stupid Ross and Brand have been, the BBC chose to still broadcast the show, so the bulk of the blame must be with them. They could and should have censored it and dealt with them internally. Sach’s grand daughter did sleep with Brand and knew what the consequences might be, and Sachs himself is famous for a xenophobic portrayal of a Spanish waiter, so no-one in the whole event comes out smelling of roses. As for the complaints, 2 on the night and 20,000 after the Daily Mail starts frothing at the mouth tells me all I need to know, and as for Brown and Cameron, don’t they have more pressing things to deal with, like the economy? It’s all rather pathetic and overblown.
- Posted by paulbCan you imagine how all this looks to the wider world? Boorish, petty but highl-paid presenters cavorting around irresponsibly while the suits make “measured, proportional responses” and are scared of losing the BBC’s cutting edge! Get real! We’ve come a long way from the days when the BBC was an authoritative voice, but I don’t think the direction travelled in light entertainment has really been the right one.
- Posted by Colin NealeNo, the BBC did not get it right. Yes, Ross and Brand should have been sacked before either could resign and Yes, the whole affair has been ridiculously hyped by the media.
No doubt Ross will enjoy his 3 month holiday and make up the lost cash with juicy fees for telling his “story”; Brand will get a job with another “edgy” broadcaster and Douglas will get a golden goodbye at licence payers’ expense, so all’s well with the world.
It’s a pity that Mr Sachs did not immediately declare himself to be a recent convert to Islam and “grossly offended” by the affair. The splutterings of righteous indignation from all sides and the sight of BBC managers ordered to form up in a neat queue to jump from the top of Broadcasting House would have been a nice distraction from the gloomy times in the markets.
- Posted by JasonTotally overhyped and to be honest I’m surprised Reuters has a “Have your say” on it…
Anyhoo, I’ve read the transcript and I don’t think what they said was that bad really.
Sachs is letting it lie, the girl in question is loving the attention and has stated in the Sun what they said was true and the papers are loving another “kick the BBC” story.
The failing was in the editorial side not the performance- unless I’m failing to understand the role of production and editing….
- Posted by AdamNo, the BBC has it wrong. Ross should be sacked outright!
- Posted by JohnI think the BBC has got it right. The whole issue has been blown completely out of proportion and the witch hunt by the media is entirely unnecessary.
Whilst their actions were certainly offensive and questions should be asked as to how and why it happened, it was at the end of the day a lapse in judegment. I wonder whether Mr Sachs has in fact been more upset and harrassed by the continual media attention this has generated than the original incident itself.
- Posted by ChrisRoss and Brand are in strong positions to present as role models to those younger members of society whom both government and society,in general,share concerns regarding irresponsible behaviour. A substantial amount of time, energy and resources are being spent trying to encourage these individuals to develop respect and a healthier attitude towards others. I am very disappointed to hear various celebrities and individuals, in quite powerful positions etc, comment on how funny this incident was. I felt the message being given was that it was fine for famous and well paid people to behave badly and to abuse others. Perhaps Ross and Brand need to be on the receiving end of this bad behaviour to enable them to understand the impact upon the many victims and to have a true understanding of how they have misused their power.
- Posted by Ann JamesHere is a thought experiment:
Suppose an unruly mob gathers outside Mr Ross’s family residence. Each member carries a tin of paint. At a word, the mob proceeds to decorate his house and garden by lobbing that paint at them. (gates would not stop paint being thrown!)
Mr Ross comes out to remonstrate with the angry crowd, but their spokesman simply says that the unruly crowd are trying merely to make the world a brighter place. “But my house, my garden” replies Ross. “Casualties in the cause of art” replies the crowd.
The paint is difficult to remove, some of it outlives Ross and the crowd.
Who could organise such a thing? Why the BBC of course.
- Posted by BrianWell at least one of the ‘ENTERTAINERS’ has been removed from the BBC…..
Pity we’re still stuck with the other. The radio was bliss yesterday, We’ve got 12 weeks to enjoy :o)
…..I’ve been asking my spouse for over a year why the BBC puts up with Ross and his rot, now I know, an £18,000,000 contract!!
- Posted by Kay“who will watch him now” asked Offended of Tunbridge Wells.
Well I will, for one. And so will the millions of people who used to enjoy watching him before the mindless hordes of vacuous Daily Mail readers got onto their blue-rinse bandwagon. Those professionally-offended minority will not dictate to the quiet and sensible majority what we watch or listen to.
Hard as it may be for them to believe, but they speak for nobody but themselves, and I find their presumption that they in some way speak for the country simultaneously insulting and worrying.
Thatcher’s dead, get over it. (You mean she’s not? Ah well, another week or so…)
- Posted by Paul Harper