Jonathan Ross

[Scottie]

:frown::frown:

Stupid bugg3r.

I think he should be sacked. I liked him and his Friday night show and the banter that's been going on recently between him and Brucie.

[Craig]

nothing more than a loud mouthed to$$er... and remember people, we are paying his multi million pound wages... :frown::frown:

sack him and let manuel kick him in the baws... :thumbs up:

[Gismo]

A prank that sadly went horribly wrong, however, given that there were only 2 actual complaints from folks who listened to the broadcast and then the 18,000 so called do gooders jumping on the bandwagon it's a bit much to save the satanic sluts star image of angelica ness.
Ooh, she does get great media coverage from that :Whistle:

[audrey]

He is a t*t and should be sacked :frown:

[D3 JDA]

I would have sacked both them for there so called prank.I used to like ross but not now and as for brand got no time for the serial sh**ger:argh:

[AndyP & Lenore]

Don't care much for Brand, but I see no reason why Ross should be sacked for one lapse of judgement.

Complaints from two people who were obviously annoyed at what was broadcast, and 18,000 complaints from bandwagon jumpers who never even heard the show in the first place.:frown:

They've apologised for what they said, they accept it was an error of judgement. When did our society begin refusing to accept apologies from people who admit what they did was wrong?:shut up:

Typical media ballooning.:shut up::shut up:

A.:frown:

[john]

What did I miss?

[stoney]

i think it has been taken out of control its stupid it was a joke :laugh: and thats the end of it i found it funny :clap:

and as others have said it peps juping on the band wagon

jhon here you go

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zrUZ2N8x2GI
(http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zrUZ2N8x2GI)

[Big Gordy]

Don't care much for Brand, but I see no reason why Ross should be sacked for one lapse of judgement.

The problem is Andy this is not the first time Mr.Ross has had a lapse of judgement:frown: I think he's lapsed in every job he's had.......he's a serial twit:rolleyes: I'm with Craig on this one as we're all paying for this prat:ragin:

[ianking]

I really enjoy Ross on Fri nights and then again the next morning on radio 2 (whilst cleaning the car). I hope he doesnt get sacked or leave etc. He has said sorry, I bet he now feals like a right prat. The papers have blown it up big time.
We should accept his applogies and let him get on with it. We all make misstakes and no matter how big or small if we regret and are sincerely sorry then just get on with life.

[euan]

There are other motives behind people complaining, and it's a symptom of the society we live in. As others have said, only two people complained at the broadcast. Even Andrew Sachs hadn't complained until a journalist asked him about it, and that was nearly 4 days after the broadcast!

Brand and Ross are characters, you like them or you don't. People are using this incident as an excuse to try and force the BBC to get rid of them, which they have managed in Brands case, but I don't think they will with Ross, he is too valuable to them.

Forget about the money they may or may not earn. Forget about the personalities involved. Base your complaint on what was said and done.

Having read the transcript and listened again, yes, they went over the line. Yes, they said things that would upset a grandfather in his 70s and they shouldn't have done it. Yes, they should be reprimanded for it. Sacked? how does that help anyone?

Put it this way, if we all were sacked for making an error of judgement at work, I think we'd all have a different perspective on what the punishment should be. Would you want that hanging over you?

I really despair at the state of this country when a media witch hunt can get people sacked. They may be on TV, but they are still people at the end of the day. If it was you, or your family, or your friend that had been hounded the way the press have, how would you feel? They've apologised, and are properly remorseful about it, move on...

[Big Gordy]

But Euan you or I wouldn't do what the pair of them have done in the first place to get ourselves in this situation that's what pi$$es me off about it all. They get paid an exobitant amout of money and don't seem to have any common sense to what is acceptable and whats not:frown:

[euan]

But Euan you or I wouldn't do what the pair of them have done in the first place to get ourselves in this situation that's what pi$$es me off about it all. They get paid an exorbitant amout of money and don't seem to have any common sense to what is acceptable and whats not:frown:

Probably not, but you can see how it happened. They are two guys bouncing chat between them and got carried away on a train of conversation. We've all done it in the pub with mates. It's just that they did it on national radio, and they shouldn't have.

Somebody should have pulled it though, if not them then the production team managing it - after all it was a pre-recorded show so they should have thought "hang on a sec, that's a bit far". I've worked at the BBC on a project for World Service radio and sat in studios during broadcasts, you've no idea how many people are there to produce and manage the output. The blame isn't just down to the presenters, but as they are the public face, they'll get the flack.

[Scottie]

It was reported on the news last night by Andrew Sachs himself that the BBC RAdio spoke to him before the show went out and agreed to not run with it but to re do the phone call for the fallowing week. He never heard another thing and the next thing he new the original went out on air.

I just don't get it surely the person/s that decided to put the show out should be in trouble

[mini saltire]

IMO
Ross makes me laugh more often than not so he should stay. Brand is a total waste of space. He was good on Big Brothers Little Brother but after that he did my head in.:argh: All he does is link adjectives and large words out of context..twat

[Craig]

what makes it worse is that this was NOT live. This was recorded and even after thinking about it, it wasn't edited, so Brand and Ross and the folk at the BBC made the concious decision to put the piece out... :frown::frown:

I would have given them a bit of sympathy if it had been live, cos as Euan has says, when your down the pub etc things get said that if you thought about it later you might not have said.. BUT they did have a choice and they chose that this was acceptable to go out on national radio... :argh::argh:

[euan]

what makes it worse is that this was NOT live. This was recorded and even after thinking about it, it wasn't edited, so Brand and Ross and the folk at the BBC made the concious decision to put the piece out... :frown::frown:

I would have given them a bit of sympathy if it had been live, cos as Euan has says, when your down the pub etc things get said that if you thought about it later you might not have said.. BUT they did have a choice and they chose that this was acceptable to go out on national radio... :argh::argh:

Craig, just for clarity, who do you mean by "they"? Brand or the producers? It could be that the producers overruled them, we just don't know.

[euan]

It was reported on the news last night by Andrew Sachs himself that the BBC RAdio spoke to him before the show went out and agreed to not run with it but to re do the phone call for the fallowing week. He never heard another thing and the next thing he new the original went out on air.


I heard a similar but slightly different view that he had been played it and agreed to it going out, but had difficulty hearing it as it was over his mobile (I think one thing we can learn is that he's not great with mobile phones!). He also offered to come in the following week if they wished to reschedule, but it was left as a option which may or may not happen - I'm sure that happens a lot though.

[Craig]

Craig, just for clarity, who do you mean by "they"? Brand or the producers? It could be that the producers overruled them, we just don't know.

well, whoever "they" are (producers, execs etc), brand and ross would have been involved... Ross being the highest paid BBC person isn't going to let something go out on air that he isn't happy with...

[euan]

well, whoever "they" are (producers, execs etc), brand and ross would have been involved... Ross being the highest paid BBC person isn't going to let something go out on air that he isn't happy with...

Quite agree with that statement that he was probably involved in the review, at least at a high level anyway.

It's an interesting thing though. Why is it (not picking on anyone here!) that Jonathon Ross salary is always mentioned in regards of this row? It's all over the press and in peoples justification for their outrage. What has his salary to do it? His position as a senior broadcaster has relevance, his salary doesn't.

[Gismo]

It's an interesting thing though. Why is it (not picking on anyone here!) that Jonathon Ross salary is always mentioned in regards of this row? It's all over the press and in peoples justification for their outrage. What has his salary to do it? His position as a senior broadcaster has relevance, his salary doesn't.I was wondering the same thing

[Big Gordy]

Well in my opinion his salary has a lot to do with it:nag: In accepting it he has also accepted that along with it comes a great deal of resonsibility:ragin:Something that he has shown now and in the past he has no regard for otherwise he wouldn't keep making the gaffs that he does:frown: This is all just IMO obviously:thumbs up: Its not worth falling out over:laugh:

[euan]

Well in my opinion his salary has a lot to do with it:nag: In accepting it he has also accepted that along with it comes a great deal of resonsibility:ragin:Something that he has shown now and in the past he has no regard for otherwise he wouldn't keep making the gaffs that he does:frown: This is all just IMO obviously:thumbs up: Its not worth falling out over:laugh:

I'm not going to fall out with anyone :D However, I disagree - the salary came with a job role - that role being one of the key broadcasters in the BBC. That's what the responsibility comes from, not his salary. Agreed, it's usual that high salary is equal to role that comes with high responsibility, but the salary is compensation for the role being performed and should be considered separately. I mean, I could be manager of Aberdeen (couldn't do a worse job than Jimmy C, let's be honest) and have a level of responsibility for the team and the fans. Equally, Sir Alex does the same job at Man Utd, but is on a vastly greater salary. Is the level of responsibility any different? Not really, just more people care what Sir Alex says and the fallout would be greater as the football club is worth more.

[Big Gordy]

Maybe I'm old school:Whistle: but I recon if your prepared to take the money you should act accordingly:rolleyes: I also don't think anyone who does what he does is worth anywhere near that amount of money:p Its not that great a skill after all is it:thumbs up: Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree then:moonie:

[Gismo]

Maybe I'm old school:Whistle: but I recon if your prepared to take the money you should act accordingly :rolleyes:How do you quantify what level of accordance goes with what amount of salary you get.
I'm with Euan on this one, his salary makes no odds to what he did or how accountable he should be :moonie:

[The Dogfather]

Ross's is paid to be an entertainer not a moral crusader, his act is to shock, say things that people find funny because its on the limit of what's acceptable. This time they seem to have crossed that limit, not for the first time I hasten to add, but thats their job to push boundaries. The only difference this time is the press are milking it for all that its worth to make a story. ******s!

Ross should stay, he'll continue to entertain, the BBC just need to tighten their editorial controls to ensure this doesn't happen again.

[Alex from NM]

I think they knew what they were getting when they signed Russell Brand as he's been pretty much fired from every other job he's had for being controversial. The BBC were quite happy to let him get on with it. He would've gotten away with it if the newspapers hadn't picked up on it and created hell.

I personally didn't find it in too bad taste, even found parts of it quite funny :rolleyes:.

[illegalhunter]

Who gives a monkies about this . Too much Points Of View

[The Dogfather]

I suspect everyone who posted gives a monkies or there wouldn't be a thread.

[N12 JLK]

I say good on Rossey and brandy boy, love there shows:clap:, just goes to show the press are fed up talking about the credit crunch, they have been dieing for something like this to come along. There are loads of things on the telly more degrading and much more offensive than whats been happening. Ross and brand are there on telly to shock, if they don't like it don't watch or listen. Look forward to seeing and hearing them again. they will apear on other channels or radio stations who will be jumping hoops to sign them.

[AndyP & Lenore]

Well, looks like the end of JR on the BEEB. 12 week suspension amounts to a sacking with a little less sting.:frown:

He'll be forced to terminate his contract and move on to ITV or C4 or something.:frown:

I think this is a terrible outcome, and just goes to show all the huff and flutter the BBC put up about being accountable, and that it's tax payers money and the BBC trust etc., etc. but what it comes down to is when a tabloid paper gets hold of a minor story from a fairly major household name, they can and will ruin that persons career - albeit probably only temporarily. But the fact remains Ross being suspended is like swatting a flea with a frying pan - complete overkill.:frown::frown:

Pissed.:ragin:

A.:sad:

[Crombers]

Well, looks like the end of JR on the BEEB. 12 week suspension amounts to a sacking with a little less sting.:frown:



12 week holiday one hopes. Let the thing die down & here's hoping JR will be back on screen & air asap. Yeah they were pushing the boundaries, as has been mentioned before & ain't hindsight a p!shy thing,, but hey we all make mistakes.

[Scottie]

I know Jonathan is a bad boy yes his thing is to try and shock TBH mainly with his sex-innuendos.

The thing is though I still believe he should be sacked.

Yes he made a mistake

but he was getting a little c0cky:hand: pardon the pun:Whistle:

what better way to rap his knuckles hit him where it hurts in his pocket and sack him.

Is it just me but was his humour really worth 6 million big ones, I don't think so.

jeez when you I think back to things like Open All Hours now that was side bursting laughter/humour what do we have today Little Britain :frown::frown:

[Sheilz]

Wouldn't mind getting paid £1600 per day of licence payers money to sit at home on my butt doing sod all. Other than wishing I got paid the same I'm indifferent to the fate of either of them. Pair of overpaid mediocrities whose contribution to entertainment is dubious.

[euan]

Wouldn't mind getting paid £1600 per day of licence payers money to sit at home on my butt doing sod all. Other than wishing I got paid the same I'm indifferent to the fate of either of them. Pair of overpaid mediocrities whose contribution to entertainment is dubious.

He's suspended on no pay, so he's sitting on his butt not earning any money.

[audrey]

This wont worry him too much coz hes minted anyway :p