That Russell Brand prank phone call thing

[The Doctor]

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7694989.stm

Hmmm, what an utter twat.

-Ralph

[Grand Moff Muffin]

I'd sack Brand, Ross and those who approved it to be broadcast.

Martin

[The Doctor]

Any benefit of the doubt I would have given Brand for a moment of ill-judgement evaporated when he still said it was funny after the actor complained and when he claimed he apologised and the actor said he hadn't.

I think he should be sacked. Ross too. I like his show, usually, but it was a gross error in taste. I mean, phoning up a 78-year old man and claiming to have had had sex with his grandaughter - and then broadcasting it! That's disgusting.

-Ralph

[Dave]

The initial comments were the random inappropriate things he's prone to come out with and had it stopped there no one would have noticed - hell with all he (they) did say it still took the press over a week to notice.
Then the "my guest isn't turning up" factor kicked in and things clearly got out of hand.

What's really baffling though is that the show was prerecorded, someone (producer and/or higher up depending on what you read) thought 'hang on, not sure about this', phoned Andrew Sachs to see if it would be OK to use the phone calls in the show, he said no, then they thought 'sod it' and aired it anyway. Now that's just asking for trouble.

[Hero]

I did'nt recognise Manwell there.

Its amazing what people try to pass as humour these days...

[The Doctor]

Humour is a very relative thing. What makes one person bend over laughing can bore another senseless.

I just don't see how anyone could find it funny to:
A: Phone up a 78 year old man (whoever he is) and make lewd comments - whatever happened to respecting our elders?
B: Broadcast it!

Beggers belief.

-Ralph

[Nigel]

A news report on the radio just now said that 18,000 complaints had been received. Another piece yesterday said that there had only been two complaints after the actual broadcast about ten days ago. It makes me wonder how many (or how few) of the complainants have actually heard the content.

I haven't heard it myself, so can't really pass comment, but I don't find Russell Brand funny at the best of times, so I doubt I'd have found this funny.

...he still said it was funny after the actor complained and when he claimed he apologised and the actor said he hadn't.

There was a clip shown on the news yesterday of Brand singing an apology on the radio. It was out of context, of course, but it came across as completely insincere.

[Bogatan]

Brands funny no doubt about it, but he's no concept of self censorship or he does but doesn't care. This is a guy who on the 12th September 2001 went to host some show on MTV dressed as Bin Laden. If your going to employ him you have to have a producer or someone who will tell him to stop or step in and stop it themselves. So in that respect I blame the BBC. The same goes or Ross and all presenters I suppose.

Andy

[The Doctor]

I didn't hear the original show. I waited until I read the transcript before making a judgement of the affair. I won't be listening to Ross' radio show again though. Not the kind of thing I want to hear on my radio.

If anything, this may prompt a debate on standards of acceptable behaviour on BBC programmes so some good may come of it.

-Ralph

[Andy Turnbull]

I'd sack the pair of them. I have rarely found Brand to be funny he comes across as an arse and Jonathan Ross should know better.

Andy

[grahamthomson]

Both now suspended.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7696714.stm

[Cullen]

They are both twats but really is this news? I'm surprised anyone actually gives a toss. I feel more aggrieved that it takes up valuable space on the BBC news than about the broadcast itself. The words 'storm' and 'teacup' come to mind.

[Hero]

Serves em right for being a couple of dicks.

[grahamthomson]

Oct 29, 2008 13:25:33 GMT Cullen said:

They are both twats but really is this news? I'm surprised anyone actually gives a toss. I feel more aggrieved that it takes up valuable space on the BBC news than about the broadcast itself. The words 'storm' and 'teacup' come to mind.

I think the BBC are secretly glad of the publicity.

What I still don't understand about the whole thing is it was apparently a pre-recording show. Fair enough if it was live as things can sometimes get out of hand. So, if the two presenters are to be suspended, then surely the head of the production team responsible as well?

I agree with you John, it is a storm in a teacup.

[jameso]

I think people are only 'upset' because the media is telling them they should be. I couldn't care less.

[The Doctor]

Only be bothered by it if it bothers you, if that makes sense!

It annoys me as it pushes my buttons regarding how senior citizens should be treated.

-Ralph

[Deleted]

I find it disgusting that an actor has spent his career entertaining the public only reach old age and be insulted by a couple of upstarts who think they are funny.

Would Brand and Wossy still find it funny if they were the elderly victims of a prank phone call by a couple of young 'alternative' comedians?

[legios]

I don't think that it is in any way shape or form a clever thing to do - I'm inclined to say that taking shots at members of folks families in an attempt to bait them is a fairly low sort of thing to do.

That said, I am not actually angry at this per-se - because I did not witness/hear/or otherwise experience the incident. The only reason I know it occured is because secondary and tertiary sources tell me about it. (Frankly, there is enough other stuff going on in the world right now that is making me actually angry that this isn't even a blip on the screen). On the level of an intellectual response I would say that I don't think it is appropriate, funny or civilised. Russell Brand and Johnathan Ross clearly think it is, so on that we will have to agree to differ.

Karl

[Bogatan]

I'm quickly reaching a point were the coverage is more annoying than the event.
The Grandaughter however much she complains seems happy to get her face on TV and in the newspapers.

One of Brands stand up routines is reading a story one of his former partners sold. So that made me think. Brands Grandparents may have seen that (assuming they still live) but there is no media out cry.

So what exactly is the complaint? Talking about his granddaughters sex life? Making a prank call? Foul language on a show broadcast after 9pm? that the person on the receiving end happened to star in a classic sitcom?

I'm not saying its pleasant or right, but all those things happen regularly on any number of shows. I don't pretend to be amused by it (though seeing the performance could change my mind) but it does seem a matter of taste and not a potential sacking offence.

Andy

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Well, the story has led to 27,000 complaints, and excessive media coverage alone can't generate that kind of reaction unless there is something particular about the story that disgusts people.

You can't really call the public's reaction irrational when you consider the following aspects:
- The tastelessness of the prank itself, which may be considered an ugly characteristic of modern society (as opposed to standards of behaviour 50 years ago).
- The age of the victim, which makes people picture their own retired relatives in his place.
- The fact that Jonathan Ross is paid £16,000 a day (even while suspended), out of money paid by the licence fee payer.

I agree that there are things that are more deserving of the public's outrage and media attention - war, poverty, the environment - but at the same time I want the BBC to have high standards, and so I think they should have been sacked straight away, without waiting for the complaints and media coverage to kick it off. Then it wouldn't have been necessary to make a big deal out of it.

Next time it should be antisocial behaviour on air - immediate sackings - move on - no complaints or protracted media coverage.

But this time, since it has got to this point, they might as well have it lead to improvements.

Martin

[Bogatan]

Yes but how many of those 27000 have read a complete transcript or more importantly watched or listened to the original recording.

At this point people seem to be complaining because they have been told how awful it all is.

And again as far as I know the people who decided against Andrew Sachs wishes to broadcast it haven't been suspended. Nothing I've heard from him makes him sound overly bothered by the original prank call after he heard them. He didn't want them broadcast but didn't seem upset by it.

To me the presenters made a mistake but the who ever chose to broadcast it are equally or more to blame.

Andy

[Hero]

Antisocial behavior is broadcasted all the time with people trying to be more outrageous than each other. This thing is something that's gone way too far.

After Martin's points, I can't beleive as a License holder that I am paying Wossy's wages to go and act like a prat distressing elderly people. With £16,000 a day I am sure he's saved up a nice little retirement fund collection out of our pocket, now he can stay off the air and never come back.

[Dave]

Oct 29, 2008 23:09:13 GMT Bogatan said:

The Grandaughter however much she complains seems happy to get her face on TV and in the newspapers.

Yeah I noticed that. Wonder how much ££ she's got from it. The more I read about her, the more I'm surprised she didn't cause embarrassment sooner - though as Andy Bog points out Sachs doesn't seem to be as bothered as people want him to be.
What gets me though is like say... The Sun. They're all outraged and enjoying their exclusive interview to get more readers, but suppose this call hadn't happened. What's the betting that a few months from now they would have run a story with the headline "Manuel's Granddaughter Is A Satanic Slut!!!"
Not that I'm condoning what happened I just don't think the press outrage is remotely genuine (well maybe the Mail).

[grahamthomson]

I see now that said graddaughter is plastered across the tabloids lamenting how rubbish Brand was in bed.

(I imagine he'd leave a lot of hair and not clean it up.)

[Andy Turnbull]

So the controller of Radio 2 has fallen on her sword. I wonder who else will get their knuckles rapped.

Andy

[Hero]

Just wondering what the police have to say on the matter.

===KEN

[karla]

Oct 30, 2008 13:32:05 GMT @grahamthomson said:

I see now that said graddaughter is plastered across the tabloids lamenting how rubbish Brand was in bed.

(I imagine he'd leave a lot of hair and not clean it up.)

I shuddered when I read that, e-e-e-e-eeeeew thats the stuff my nightmares are made of, a hair-bed!
I hate hair around the floor, bed....just ANYWHERE. It makes my sick soooooo sick and mad. Especially when your walking in the house and you get a long hair platted into the stitching in your socks and it doesn't let go, IT DOESN'T LET GO.
Its at times like those I question God, his logic and why he hates me.

[Dark Stranger]

Oct 29, 2008 16:18:55 GMT jameso said:

I think people are only 'upset' because the media is telling them they should be. I couldn't care less.

Spot on. Absolute fuss over nothing.

[Andy Turnbull]

Nov 2, 2008 18:45:20 GMT Dark Stranger said:

Oct 29, 2008 16:18:55 GMT jameso said:

I think people are only 'upset' because the media is telling them they should be. I couldn't care less.

Spot on. Absolute fuss over nothing.

What you have it two famous people making an obscene phone call. Not a prank call, an obscene phone call which is a criminal offence.

While it doesn't deserve the coverage and resulting media shitstorm based on other events going on the pair of them deserved to be reprimanded for it.

Andy

[The Doctor]

Another Radio 2 person falls on a sword:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7716415.stm

-Ralph