Comedians

[filsgreen]

I apologise for using the Holocaust as an example to highlight my point, this event should not be used to get my point across. However, I was so incensed that people cannot have an opinion just because they did not hear the broadcast. I personally do not listen to either of these presenters so I was not privy to what was broadcast first hand, but once aware of it, I sent an e-mail to the BBC. Once again I am sorry if I offended anyone

If one didn't hear the broadcast or read any transcript then what exactly can one complain about? On the basis of third hand information and mob hysteria generated by the tabloids? No one is denying that people shouldn't have an opinion but I think that it should be based on reasoned judgement and the available facts...not the torrid never-ending stream fuelled in part, I believe, by people objecting to Ross being paid his high salary.

I will repeat myself, it was the content that I was objecting to. It was immaterial that I did not hear it!

Also it doesn't really matter what these people earn, if they are going to use their position to publicly denigrate innocent people then they must accept the consequences.

The image you conjure is of the three monkeys, it's OK if I never saw or heard it.

 

[Digit]

Jenx pointed out that there were just two initial complaints. Not having any time for either of the culprits I didn't hear the programme.
The fact that just two complained might well suggest that the size of the audience isn't as large the Beeb likes to think.
The fact that many more complained afterwards has to be as a result of their being made aware of what happened through the press and other media.
I cannot see that is a problem either, after all, just how many people actually heard Enoch's 'Rivers of blood' speech and how many judged it from the press of the day.
Surely that is what the press is for?

Roy.

 

[newt]

I see Ross is going to lose a considerable amout of money, poor chap, should we have a whip round for him. Running for the door. :twisted:

 

[Digit]

Yes, it's necessary to suffer for your art isn't it? :lol:

Roy.

 

[Jenx]

Surely that is what the press is for?
.

Thats very true, Roy.
I guess the 'problem' (if one can call it that ) with any press report, on any subject is that its seldom truly un-biased in the pure sense of the word. It cant be really.. its always going to be one man's 'take' on something to a certain degree.

I heard an interesting 'side-slant' on Radio Scotland today - in a show thats hosted by Lesley Riddoch and one of todays guests was Stewart Cosgrove ( I appreciate that they may not be all that well known, south of 'the wall' )... Cosgrove is a long-time independent producer, and works a lot for Channel 4 and the Beeb amongst others ... he was making the point that ( to quote approximately ) " These rows which seem to blow up beyond what could be deemed as an acceptable level given their possible lack of true newsworthiness , are generally fuelled by a deeper seated problem concerning the main protagonists", .......

....and went on to highlight in very great detail, that there is a long-running and highly volatile row between OFCOM and the BBC, due in no small part to the Beeb being the only broadcasting company in the UK to be outwith OFCOM's control, and in this instance in particular ( the Brand / Ross debacle ) were continuing to insist that they would be 'carrying out investigations' etc .... which is in conflict with what OFCOM desire, as it is in fact the BBC who are in the dock, so to speak, themselves. --

Does slightly make one wonder about "judge, jury & executioner"... which never seems to be a particularly good concept.

He ( Cosgrove ) went on to highlight that the Mail / Telegraph had today (friday ) somehow managed to 'expand' the subject matter into promoting what was nearing becoming tantamount to encouraging civil revolt against local government regarding poor control of publicly funded expenditure in all areas nationwide .... jumping on the back of the BBC not using its financial resources which are publicly raised, to the 'best ends' :roll:

Interesting to get a 'proper insiders' slant on things !.
It sounds a bit bizarre, but when you heard Stewart Cosgrove putting the points across, it was clear that there was, and is, more to this than us 'ordinary bodkins' realise - and that the chance for both sides ( OFCOM & BEEB ) to milk the respective udders of it are possibly a long way from being finished yet !

Like most things in life... Things are seldom what they initially seem


Never mind ... once this one blows over - I might start another 'heated ruck' going by stating that the Moon landings are utterley fraudulent and man ain't never set foot on the ol' ball of cheese, and never will .........
but thats for another day when we're all bored :wink:

 

[Digit]

Watch some clips of Eric and Ernie last night. Remember them with Andre Previn, Shirley Bassey or Glenda Jackson anyone?
Still hilariously funny IMO and a not a gratuitous swear word anywhere.

Roy.

 

[Paul Chapman]

Remember them with Andre Previn, Shirley Bassey or Glenda Jackson anyone?

Classics

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[RogerS]

I apologise for using the Holocaust as an example to highlight my point, this event should not be used to get my point across. However, I was so incensed that people cannot have an opinion just because they did not hear the broadcast. I personally do not listen to either of these presenters so I was not privy to what was broadcast first hand, but once aware of it, I sent an e-mail to the BBC. Once again I am sorry if I offended anyone

If one didn't hear the broadcast or read any transcript then what exactly can one complain about? On the basis of third hand information and mob hysteria generated by the tabloids? No one is denying that people shouldn't have an opinion but I think that it should be based on reasoned judgement and the available facts...not the torrid never-ending stream fuelled in part, I believe, by people objecting to Ross being paid his high salary.

I will repeat myself, it was the content that I was objecting to. It was immaterial that I did not hear it!

Each to their own, I guess. Can't see the logic somehow.

Also it doesn't really matter what these people earn, if they are going to use their position to publicly denigrate innocent people then they must accept the consequences.

That's not what I said. I believe that a large number of people complaining are only doing so because they want to indirectly have a pop at Ross because of his very large salary.

The image you conjure is of the three monkeys, it's OK if I never saw or heard it.

Don't really understand your point here but anyway, as I said above, each to their own.