The events of the last two weeks happened on my watch. I believe it is right that I take responsibility for what has happened, says Lesley Douglas, which strikes me as admirably straight-forward, so no criticism from me.
I had to go to Sky to get that quote, though.
i will gladly repost the entire mp3 if DA wants to have a listen..
like most folks, i downloaded it before they got rid of it.
Devil’s Advocate 8:59 pm
Your political line is as per that of ex-BBC chairman, Sir Christopher Bland, and as demolished by Melanie Phillips here:
[Extract]:
“And so what did Sir Christopher Bland, himself a former chairman of the BBC’s governors, say on Today just now? He blamed the press • specifically the Daily Mail, for which I write and which has merely reflected public anger — for creating that anger! By repeating what had actually been said on the offending broadcast, he said, the Mail had compounded the offence and whipped up a storm by telling people what they otherwise wouldn’t have heard! So if the Mail hadn’t drawn attention to this abuse of Andrew Sachs, public money, the public itself and the negation of the BBC’s public interest purpose, that would apparently have been perfectly ok in Sir Christopher’s book!
“Indeed, he actually went a long way towards justifying this abusive behaviour by saying the BBC had to take risks and sometimes would inevitably go too far. Its only fault, he said, was that it had not apologised sooner • and thus allowed the wicked Mail to create a firestorm. As for any long-term damage to the BBC, no, there was none, he said dismissively. All a storm in a teacup.
“Astounding. In any other sphere of life, after such a gross abuse, Ross and Bland would have been sacked instantly.”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2560951/what-planet-is-sir-christopher-living-on.thtml
Many posters on this site and elsewhere have testified how difficult it is to complain to the BBC, and how often their complaints are fobbed off or made to disappear.
The wider publicity given to this particular case has given more people an opportunity to express their views, which even the BBC has been obliged to take some notice of.
But all of this is relatively minor compared to the leftist, multi-cultural, Euro-toady propaganda that the BBC has been pumping out for years. That can only be disposed of by the abolition of the TV license tax, and with it the BBC itself.
Devils advocate wrote;
“But what the tabloid media do is far, far worse than anything the BBC has [intentionally] aired.”
Actually I beg to differ. The tabloid press doesn’t get funded by a tax. The bBC on the other hand does. On that note alone it has to be whiter than white.
The main clarifying difference here is that while people like yourself have no problem pointing the finger of blame at the gutter press we find that they actually have a system of honour in place which insists that people are fired, sacked or made to resign for crossing the line. In fact let’s be honest here the bBC could have acted as swift as it did with Kilroy, but didn’t. It was that rumination by the bBC which inflamed the many people who complained. You know those people who feel that while they are forced to fund the bBC, they in turn have no say in what they receive. You know like the Christians who felt offended by ‘The Jerry Springer Opera”, how about those (like myself) who are fed a diet of ant British armed forces propaganda which they try to pass off as the news. Lets not forget its somewhat biased reporting of the American elections. They’ve been pushing Obama as the man since Jan 08 and you know what. I don’t give a shit. I’m English, not a Yank who ever gets in power will just carry on as before. Yet the left wing ideological mindset at the Beeb insists that we are forced fed a diet of Obama,Obama,Obama.
In otherwords DA the bBC has lost sight of its mission statement. I think you will find that the vast majority of those who have complained are doing so, because at any other time the bBC has shown it will not listen to those who fund it. But this time the bBC has to listen.
P.S
While on the subject. Brand has resigned. He did the decent thing, Ross on the otherhand hasn’t.
That on its own just shows you how the so called political elites of the Uk are not held accountable for their actions.
Be it Blunkett,2 shags, Mandy the gay blade or an idot of a TV presenter.Tthey not only refuse to resign, but if they do they are soon found another well paid (Tax payer funded) job in which to stick 2 fingers up at us all.
The last I looked no newspaper is funded by a tax.(Unless you can class the radio times as one)
The authentic voice of the BBC,Rod McKenzie,editor of Radio !’s Newsbeat,claimed,”The public only complained about the presenter’s behaviour because they were jealous of their huge salaries”.
So next time you complain about Dick Turpin pulling a “prank”,remember it is only,”salary envy and schadenfreude”.
Next!
sawtooth: Really big important issues are too difficult to handle – too much wriggle room. Organisations can only be brought down by little things. Litytle things that are unimportant in the big scheme of things but can’t be wriggled out of. Rigged phone votes. The Queen walking in or walking out.
Cash for questions. Dodgy donors.
Obscene phone calls have got moral certainty. Brand is a turning point. Getting rid of the license-fee model is the key to overturning an organisation staffed top to bottom from fifty years of Guardian-reader recruitment.
Awesome. Champagne anyone?
Is the BBC’s daily political propaganda for Obama, Labour, Islam and ‘multiculturalism’ to be excused now by Beeboid advocates because such propaganda is claimed by them to be ‘on the edge’ or ‘pushing the boundaries’? How disingenious can the BBC get?
much better with the pic..
this blog should do more of that. looks a lot better if you have a pic with a blogpost.
Lesley Douglas seems to have acted honourably. But together with JR & RB, surely the responsibility for this episode lies with whichever editor cleared the show to air? They were the one who made the decision that this sort of behaviour was OK.
AndrewSouthLondon | 30.10.08 – 9:51 pm
i agree – this could be the turning point that makes folks wake up and wonder why the hell they are paying the license fee..
A radio 2 controller resigned. Big deal. She can expect a big fat back hander for dsoing so, plus an equally big fat important job elsewhere on a bloated salary purely by virtue of her nepotism and social privelidges.
The top brass of the BBC are one big, fat spoiled overpaid happy family. But chop their heads off and they quickly grow back again.
But I’d like to see the grin wiped off that fat tongued Ross. Looks like he’ll have to wipe his arse with real toilet paper tonight, instead of fifty pound notes.
By repeating what had actually been said on the offending broadcast, he said, the Mail had compounded the offence
Total wanker. This hubris is exactly why the BBC should be abolished.
Lets not forget its somewhat biased reporting of the American elections
Somewhat? LOL.
And ALWAYS biased reporting on the ME.
How disingenious can the BBC get?
The term you are looking for is ‘lying bastards’.
Devils advocate wrote:
“Wonder how many of those 30,000 heard the original broadcast and were so incensed by it that they complained? Oh yeah, 2.”
Ah…..I see DA is struggling with the concept of the internet and user generated content. This surprises me as there is a distinct whiff of Beeboid dogma from DA, who should be more than aware of Al Beebs marketing, which positively rejoices in all things technological. The viddy of these two pricks has spread far and wide, so just think of all those punters in the US switching from BBC America to Fox, CBS, NBC, etc
I actually believe that + 30,000 are actually underestimating the scale of discontent. There is an old Customer Services adage that for every 1 person that makes a complaint 10 others feel the same but won’t bother. Potentially that means +300,000 people have strong opinions regarding this sorry episode.
Furthermore seeing that Al Beebs complaints desk operates at the minimum amount of efficiency, God knows how many calls have been “lost” in the system.
What makes me chuckle however is the way Thompson THOUGHT he had a plan to deal with this problem, only to be told by Nu Labours appointed BBC TRUST that he might have to think again.
The 12 week suspension of Woss is a botch compromise. As my learned friend Archduke has pointed out, if anything this is more red meat to those baying for blood. I can’t wait until the Parliamentary debate regarding Al Beeb….
One more thing…..Woss is just a highly paid Muppet….the real target should be Thompson…..
Some leftie Guaridan journalist was on BBC News 24 earlier spouting on about the Daily Mail agenda. They just don’t get it do they? How many of them do we have to get fired?
How long will it take before the police get involved? What Jonathon Ross suggested on the telephone (in explicit detail) was a sex act that the two of them were to perform on Andrew Sachs. It doesn’t get any clearer. Transcript at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081663/Lest-forget-Or-BBC-wont-let-hear.html
(Lest we forget: Or what the BBC won’t let you hear)
Ross: M********e him to say sorry. Make him feel better.
(bursts out laughing)
The sooner this pervert gets put on the sex offenders’ register the better! Presumably that will also stop him from working at the bbc? I guess 3 months is enough time for the CPS to “investigate”?
Lesley Douglas has resigned. Good riddance, I say. She knew what Brand was like and that he had built a “career” on being obsessively, self-aggrandisingly gross, lewd and obnoxious, yet she saw fit to inflict him on Radio 2, which is a popular and successful music station listened to by a wide audience of ordinary people, not necessarily by juveniles. Isn’t Radio 1 for them?
Why would Radio 2 need a stand-up “comic” who has no particular connection with music when it has built its success on a tradition of presenters with a passion and deep knowledge of a particular music genre? Isn’t it that strength that she should have been building on?
I don’t want the fact that she has resigned to obscure what happened and who took what decisions and why.
As far as Ross is concerned, he certainly wasn’t going to resign, with all that money at stake. Not in a million years would he voluntarily give that up. He gets to stand in the corridor for a wee while, then it is straight back on the gravy train as before.
Bodger Thompson really is a piece of work. He tells us he told “Jonathan” it was unacceptable. So what I want to know is what he told “Jonathan” when he humiliated David Cameron and demeaned Mrs Thatcher on his trashy programme with his gross schoolboy sniggering and stupidity or when he made lewd and crude comments to female guests, behaving like any sleazy old lecher weaving around drunk in the street.
Yet again on the news the BBC wheel out some limp writed Guaridan journalist and then some pointless vox pop on the streets with some thick sounding people saying “Ross iz cool you know”
Like I give a shit. The BBC just can’t accept being wrong can they?
I reckon the mood on Hampstead Heath this weekend might be a bit sombre.
Admirable unless she gets a golden handshake…
The whole thing blew up into a real storm because the top management at the BBC did not douse the flames.
There should have been action on Sunday, a few hours after the Mail big front-page headline.
Thomson thought he could carry on swanning around Sicily, no big fuss, BBC is fireproof.
Prat.
It is Thomson who should resign. This incident is merely an extreme example of the crap the BBC pumps out, under his leadership.
And yes- did Lesley Douglas resign of her own volition, or was she taken aside and told that she woud be looked after comfortably ? If she really felt guilty – she should have resigned days ago.
No quarter. Keep kicking them while they are down. Ross MUST be sacked. And Thomson should be forced to go too.
Tomorrow’s headlines will not be much better than today’s. 3 BBC disasters in one year.
The real obscenity in this is that Russel Brand gets 300 grand a year to make lewd phone calls. My ex husband Lionel made offensive phone calls every day for six months and never so much as earned a penny out of it. Just because he wasn’t some hairy alternative comedian who went to eton. He was an active member of the IRA. And never once did he ring up some frail old man and make rude comments about what sexual peversery he’d engaged in with his grand daughter. No. He used to ring up department stores in Oxford Street and make bomb threats in a thick Irish brogue. It used to have us in stitches. Of course a prank like that probaby wouldn’t work as well these days. But at least when he made his calls he wasn’t so stupid as to do it in front of a microphone that was switched on and broadcasting to listeners everywhere. Except for that one time. He was a train announcer at Victoria station for a while. But he didn’t get suspended for 6 weeks so he could come back when it was all blown over and earn millions. He got four years in Parkhurst.
One rule for them and one rule for us. And another for the humourless bastards in Selfridges.
Time for random drug testing at the BBC ?
Brand is not a ‘comedian’. He is a 6-year old prick.
Time for random drug testing at the BBC ?
D | 31.10.08 – 12:29 am
Good point. Since the beginning of this scandal, I’ve been wondering if the behaviour of B & R was affected by chemicals/alcohol.
D | 31.10.08 – 12:29 am
Time for random drug testing at the BBC ?
How about compulsory testing rather than random testing.
Random drug and alcohol testing is very common in many organisations these days. I’d make it compulsory for ALL tax payer funded organisations.
I just wonder how many beeboids would be culled if they had to pass a drugs test?
I also think that any beeboid who has been caught taking drugs should NEVER be allowed to work for the BBC again.
Devil’s Advocate: “Wonder how many of those 30,000 heard the original broadcast and were so incensed by it that they complained? Oh yeah, 2.”
Josef Fritzl, drugged and locked his daughter in a cellar dungeon for 26 year, repeatedly raping her and making her pregnant with six children. How many of you were outraged by all this after you heard of this event, and, not, er, before?
I’m not sure that all 30,000 complaints came from folk who were merely appalled by Ross and Brand. For many of those 30,000 it was an opportunity to let the BBC know what they thought.
That the BBC is an institution where the people who fund it – the taxpayer – are ignored, belittled and treated as 2nd class citizens. That the BBC is an institution that is incapable of admitting that it is wrong. That the BBC is an institution that is happy to waste our hard-earned cash on people like Ross and Brand who no-one finds entertaining other than themselves and the BBC producers.
The British are slow to anger, but once aroused can form a formidable foe. The BBC are realising this now.
There will be different motivations behind the complainants. For some it is the constant anti-American and anti-Israeli propaganda and half-truths. For others it is the constant lecturing on the unproven myth that is climate change. For others, it is the BBC’s refusal to acknowledge how god-awful Alan Shearer and Mark Lawrenson are on MOTD (and believe me, many have complained about them), or that 9 out of ever 10 BBC football pundits seem to be Liverpool fans. Some people will genuinely be appalled at Ross and Brand’s idiocy – though I fail to see how anyone could be surprised. Others are just fed up of paying through their nose for barely talented individuals.
The one thing that all these 30,000 have in common is that they are fed up of the BBC taking their licence fee and then ignoring them. It is about time the BBC started to listen to what its viewers and listeners want.
And if the BBC feel that this is a minor incident blown up out of all proportion – then good!! They will now know how Caroline Spelman, Michael Howard and Sarah Palin feel as they drag up utterly irrelevant, and often false, stories about them out of nothing but old-fashioned spite.
It couldn’t have happened to a more arrogant, self-aggrandising bunch of tossers.
LITTLEJOHN is excellent:
“We’re as mad as hell and we DON’T have to take it any more!”
[Extract]:
“This was always about much, much more than the fate of a couple of presenters and the ‘systemic’ failures that allowed them to bully and ridicule an old man and his granddaughter in the name of ‘entertainment’.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081927/LITTLEJOHN-Were-mad-hell-DONT-more.html
(Litlejohn’s title may be inspired by this: Peter Finch in film, ‘Network’):
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dib2-HBsF08
Jeff 1:43
Sorry, but I don’t get your point. What is the connection ?
You don’t think his Lesley Douglas individual was persuaded to walk the plank in some way that may have contained mentions of money, pensions and referrals to “a good friend of mine who works in a quango”?
“only in america can some black guy from a broken family home rise from the dregs of chicago politics to have a shot at the white house.” … spotted by a terrorist white guy (death toll, 13 human beings) who intuited how hungry and not too bright this black guy was. And how, with enough flattery and training, he could serve a purpose …
“The last I looked no newspaper is funded by a tax.(Unless you can class the radio times as one)”
And The Guardian of course. State funded by proxy through its advertising
Anybody notice how Thompson spent an entire interview with his head stuck to one side? I wonder what that means in body language.
On Newsnight, La Maitlis referred to the licence payers as “shareholders”. If only…
It couldn’t have happened to a more arrogant, self-aggrandising bunch of tossers
And it couldn’t have been expressed better.
Anybody notice how Thompson spent an entire interview with his head stuck to one side? I wonder what that means in body language…
RR | 31.10.08 – 10:42
———————————–
Heh heh… dodging bullets or blows?
RR | 31.10.08 – 10:42
Anybody notice how Thompson spent an entire interview with his head stuck to one side? I wonder what that means in body language…
It means –
I am so very, very clever I have the cranial capacity of a warehouse and a brain so heavy that I’d need the neck muscles of a bull to keep my head erect….
What else could it mean?
Did you notice whether it leans to the Left or to the right?
Or is that a silly question? 🙂
Tilting
Tilting the head sideways can be a sign of interest, which may be in what is said or happening. It can also be a flirting signal as it says ‘I am interested in you!’
Tilting can similarly indicate curiosity, uncertainty or query, particularly if the head is pushed forward, as if the person was trying to look at the subject in a different way in the hope of seeing something new. The greater the tilt, the greater the uncertainty or the greater the intent to send this signal.
A tilted head pulled back tends to indicate suspicion, as the uncertainty of the tilt is combined with a defensive pulling back.
This is quite amusing:
The tilted head exposes the carotid artery on the side of the neck and may be a sign of submission and feelings of vulnerability.
If the head is propped up by the hand, it may be tiredness or an expectation of continued interest (‘This is so interesting!’).
PS: The above piece about tilting the head is not by me but is lifted from something brought up by a Google search.
Heron I think that sums up the situation very well. This is I think more than a reaction to the Ross/Brand issue but a method by which the public can actually let the BBC know their feelings.
I read quite recently, that if you laid all the zips in the world, end to end, they would stretch to the moon and back.
Well that’s just silly. Firstly, most of those zips would burn up in the earths outer atmosphere, and those outside of it would just drift off into space.
What would be needed would be some kind of powerful ‘anti space’ adhesive that would hold all the zips together so they didn’t drift apart. But that wouldn’t solve the burning up in the atmosphere problem.
Hopefully science will be able to solve that part of the problem sometime in the distant future.
That there were only two complaints originally tells us a lot about the type of people that would not switch off or over as soon as either Ross or Brand came on air.