Woss and Brand?

[Cycling Naturalist]

At the time of the airing, with 2m listeners, there had been 2 complaints, both for the swearing. 1 week later, it gets into the papers, 30,000 complaints and I bet most of them hadn't even heard it live or at all. They just read it in the Daily Mail. That's ridiculous.

It just shows how influential the Daily Mail is. They've managed to get the government and the opposition to back them and to get over 70% of Guardian website viewers to demand the sacking of Ross and Brand.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I'm sowwy, Woss and Cutting Edge in the same sentence LMFAO

I have mixed emotion with this one. We need 'cutting edge' humour or we would all still be listening to the goon show.

 

[Mr Phoebus]

Please phone up to complain, and automatically get entered into our free prize draw.

 

[Mr Phoebus]

According to the TV listings they're showing the film "Speed" in place of his show tomorrow night.
Well, that'll f**king teach them all for complaining.

 

[Andy in Sig]

At the time of the airing, with 2m listeners, there had been 2 complaints, both for the swearing. 1 week later, it gets into the papers, 30,000 complaints and I bet most of them hadn't even heard it live or at all. They just read it in the Daily Mail. That's ridiculous.

It's not remotely ridiculous if the report in the Daily Mail and subsequently in other newspapers and the internet were factually accurate. As the reports do not seem to have been denied, that would appear to be the case. Therefore it is perfectly legitimate for people to complain to the BBC about the content of the broadcast. You don't have to have witnessed something to be able to express disapproval. The key question is: do you think it is OK or not for someone to:

a. Leave a message claiming to have f****d somebody's daughter.

b. Broadcast that on the radio.

 

[jonesy]

At the time of the airing, with 2m listeners, there had been 2 complaints, both for the swearing. 1 week later, it gets into the papers, 30,000 complaints and I bet most of them hadn't even heard it live or at all. They just read it in the Daily Mail. That's ridiculous.

It isn't ridiculous. You don't have to have heard the detail to feel that this sort of thing isn't what the licence fee should be funding, irrespective of whether the targets of the 'prank' were willing participants or have sordid lifestyles themselves.

 

[KitsuneAndy]

It's not remotely ridiculous if the report in the Daily Mail and subsequently in other newspapers and the internet were factually accurate. As the reports do not seem to have been denied, that would appear to be the case. Therefore it is perfectly legitimate for people to complain to the BBC about the content of the broadcast. You don't have to have witnessed something to be able to express disapproval. The key question is: do you think it is OK or not for someone to:

a. Leave a message claiming to have f****d somebody's daughter.

b. Broadcast that on the radio.

a: he had, she admitted it. She's complaining about being called a 'satanic slut' saying that it will tar her image for life. But she is in fact, in a burlesque dance troupe called 'The Satanic Sluts'. And all evidence points to the fact that no message was actually left.

b: possibly not, but it's the producers who made that call to air it. If anyones heads should be on the line it should be theirs.

 

[cchapman]

Remember Lenny Bruce? He too was a comedian who outraged society. Not only that, but he was a real live heroin addict, (not just an ex-heroin addict).

 

[Tim Bennet.]

There's also a largely positive thread on here about Gerry Sadowitz. Now there's a guy who claims his major comedy influence was the Derek and Clive characters, who could be considered the instigators of the 'offence for offence's sake' school of comedy.

Sadowitz opened an appearance at a Canadian comedy festival with the greeting 'Good Evening Moose ****ers!' Admittedly a member of the audience then jumped on stage and punched him.

But outrage has had a role in comedy for years and I think an off peak minority comedy show on the state broadcaster could well be the place for it.

 

[dodgy]

I have mixed emotion with this one. We need 'cutting edge' humour or we would all still be listening to the goon show. Sometimes, comedians go over that edge, and in this one, they did. But, I do not think it is a hanging offence and believe that this has been developed by the media into a perfect storm to allow them to sell papers and magazines on a nice salacious story; an edgy comedian had sex with a girl in a group with name that suggests she enjoys sex. This is classic Daily Mail territory to allow their readers a little excitement in their otherwise boring lives.

+1

 

[User482]

I have mixed emotion with this one. We need 'cutting edge' humour or we would all still be listening to the goon show. Sometimes, comedians go over that edge, and in this one, they did. But, I do not think it is a hanging offence and believe that this has been developed by the media into a perfect storm to allow them to sell papers and magazines on a nice salacious story; an edgy comedian had sex with a girl in a group with name that suggests she enjoys sex. This is classic Daily Mail territory to allow their readers a little excitement in their otherwise boring lives.

Precisely.

 

[yello]

I don't find statements like 'I ****ed your daughter' to be cutting edge.

 

[dodgy]

I don't find statements like 'I ****ed your daughter' to be cutting edge.

Nobody said that.

 

[Mr Phoebus]

Did he also do his second cousin twice removed?

 

[John the Monkey]

I think the comparison with Sadowitz is an interesting one, Tim - my recollection of him is that he wasn't afraid to offend, but crucially wasn't afraid of the consequences of same either. I'm not a fan of Brand's comedy as stated earlier, but find it harder to defend him because he backs down when called on it (thinking of the Rod Stewart incident in particular). He seems to me to have something of the bully and coward.