This JR/RB/Andrew Sachs thing

Look Katchoo, the issue I've had with your posts is that you seem to be blaming Andres Sachs for being offended, saying you've lost respect for him etc etc. In so far as there is a victim, he's it. Why on earth does he have to check with his granddaughter before he's allowed to say he's been upset by a couple of numpties leaving rude messages on his answerphone? I don;t think he went to the DM to sell his story, tbh he was probably doorstepped by some journos and just gave a comment. I have stated that I agree that it's been blown out of all proportion, but I think blaming AS is a step too far. And his age is relevant. Your mum may not mind, but my stepdad (who's around the same age) certainly would, he'd be horrified, and he's no shrinking violet by any means.

Fair enough. I don't think we're ever going to agree on this, except to say that it has been blown out of all proportion.

Don't get me wrong, I think that broadcasting the skit was ill advised, and it wasn't in the best taste (but not as offensive as is being made out). When I heard it I took it as 2 very stupid overgrown boys messing around, and I did laugh, then forgot about it. Someone really does need to be looking closely at the producer involved in the show for making a bad judgement call.

Of course AS is allowed to say whatever he wants, but what I still don't understand is why he didn't say it in private to the BBC. Yes he was doorstepped, you still don't have to speak. I really don't understand - ever - the need to play matters of this kind out in the press, I really don't. It serves no public interest.

I listen to Radio 2 when I'm in the car and consequently caught the beginning of the answerphone message drama before having to turn over in embarrassment at the behaviour of these two overgrown schoolboys. It was a cringeworthy performance and I hoped at the time that Andrew Sachs would not be too offended by it. Evidently he was and, from the little I heard, I can't really say I blame him. I'm disappointed at the Beeb for allowing these puerile antics to be broadcast but, even had the show been pulled, the damage was already done. I'd like to think that the apologies by Brand and Ross were heartfelt but I rather suspect that they don't see that they overstepped the mark, sensitivity to the feelings of others not being either's particular strong point.

If Ofcom does fine the Beeb, I hope it gets passed on to those responsible - Brand, Ross and the show's producer - and doesn't come straight out of my licence fee.

I absolutely concur that, if this is the outcome, then there is definitely a public interest to this.

There is a whole new debate to be had here. Considering the BBC's role as the national broadcaster, should they really employ someone as edgy as Russell Brand? Through my day job and my acting work I have a lot of knowledge of international TV stations, and I think the BBC is one of, if not the most, liberal public station that there is. Given that they ARE a public station funded by public money, how far is too far?

I could debate that all night, but I have to go to Ikea and buy a shoe rack and a spice rack and eat meatballs.

But surely it was JR and RB who brought in into the public domain by playing it on their radio show, not Sachs.

Fair point. I can't help but feel though that it wouldn't have had the huge attention it has garnered had Sach's agent not gone public about the complaint. I do concede that the Mail contacted him and he did not seek the publicity in the first instance, however I do feel that he has fanned the flames by his actions since. Yes, RB & JR did bring this into the public domain in the first place, now it has escalated to a whole new level of public conciousness. The fact that only 2 complaints were received when the show aired, but thousands once the Mail kicked off, are testimony to that. I do feel that, by speaking to the Mail, AS contributed to the hysteria.

Whatever my personal boundaries of taste/offence, he does have every right to make the complaint and talk to the press if he so chooses. I suppose all I can say is that personally I do not like the way it has been handled, and I would have handled it differently. ?

They probably all wondered at the time (as did I) whether they were alone in being offended by the incident and became more vocal once they realised they were one of many. Strength in numbers and all that...

And, in my experience, the best public TV station going. For the most part I trust their judgement. I think they made a mistake here, but looking at the amazing job they do overall I would hate for this to make them too cautious in the future.

This whole thing is pretty uncomfortable, because it's bullying pure and simple. I actually found the transcript pretty amusing, but that's not the point. Neither is it the point if AS's grandaughter is the town bike. The point, as I see it, is that an innocent person was the victim of offensive phone calls designed to belittle or upset them. Which is bullying.

FWIW, it's exactly the kind of thing we got the police involved with when I worked in schools [shrug] If someone was getting bullying phone calls/texts about a family member the rozzers were pretty interested and took it seriously. I don't see how it makes any difference if the people involved are famous, attractive*, promiscuous or funny.

*I'm actually really bothered by the implication that somehow it's all OK for RB to use this kind of sexual bullying because he is deemed shagworthy by some.

Anyway, obviously the DM etc's coverage is nonsensical, that goes without saying.

I'm not saying her career makes her fair game but it does put into context RBs (I think) comment about satanic sluts and the swing etc. The granddauaghters sexual life to some extent is already very much out there, I think it would be very much more likely to cause offence to her is she was a teacher or seomthing completely unrelated (though obviously I can't speak for what she finds offensive) I listened to the clip and all that would have seemed much more random if I didn't know she was in a group called that etc. However I'm not sure the average listener at the time would have realised this which may have made it sound potentially even more offensive.

You might be surprised by how... Umm... Prim some of those girls can be when not under the lights. I just think it's dangerous to think that, in this instance, because 'she plays the tart' that you can assume she is. Although somewhere I'm hearing a life skills tutor ask How each individual was responsible for their own part of the drama... Or something.

This is starting to remind me a bit of the Brass Eye Paedo episode.

I actually see this the other way. I think the BBC should be under an obligation to provide innovative and risky programming as part of its output; because it's publicly funded it isn't obliged to keep an eye on the bottom line as commercial broadcasters are. Obviously innovative doesn't necessarily mean outrageous*, but new things are always a risk- whether it's that the new comedy will fall flat, the edgy comedian will go too far, the new quiz will be too confusing...

The BBC is obliged to provide programming for everyone but that doesn't mean that every programme should be suitable for everyone- that's the route to bland, innane rubbish.

* for example, a friend of mine worked on Changing Rooms which, when it started, was a completely new format. The series was eventually cancelled because it was too popular- other broadcasters had started doing their own versions- and so the BBC's no longer fulfilled a role.

I actually see this the other way. I think the BBC should be under an obligation to provide innovative and risky programming as part of its output; because it's publicly funded it isn't obliged to keep an eye on the bottom line as commercial broadcasters are. Obviously innovative doesn't necessarily mean outrageous*, but new things are always a risk- whether it's that the new comedy will fall flat, the edgy comedian will go too far, the new quiz will be too confusing...

The BBC is obliged to provide programming for everyone but that doesn't mean that every programme should be suitable for everyone- that's the route to bland, innane rubbish.

* for example, a friend of mine worked on Changing Rooms which, when it started, was a completely new format. The series was eventually cancelled because it was too popular- other broadcasters had started doing their own versions- and so the BBC's no longer fulfilled a role.

I do wonder if they did do it. RB and Georgina that is. I know it's irrelevant to this discussion.

Did anyone imply this? I think the comments about RB's shaggability were just asides, rather than justifications (just as the comments saying he's grim, needs a good wash etc weren't implying this was relevant to his culpability).

I'm not saying she isn't prim I'm just saying mainly that a) her being referred to something of a satanic slut (as one example) is nowhere near as outrageous as one might intially think given that she actually does indeed belong to group calling themselves that - I think that is a prime example of how her career is a major part of the context that not every listener would be/have been privy to and b) the other references eg to swinging is very unlikely to be as shocking to someone who works in the burlesque industry as opposed to if she worked as a teacher/nun/nurse etc etc etc whether or not she is into that stuff in her own time.

None of this of course justifies why they felt the need to discuss this with her grandfather but I do feel that it can help explain some of the content of what they are talking about which may otherwise seem even more random.

It's implied, whether intentionally or not, in the fact that a discussion re: his shaggability was held in a thread dealing with a somewhat less frivolous matter. Certainly I got the same impression. I.E. Doesn't matter what he does 'cos he's gorgeous.

I didn't take any implication in the fact people were discussing RB's attractiveness as justification for what has happened and even if there were I would have assumed it was very much in a tongue and cheek way.

I think a lot of RB's actual attractiveness is down to his sexual freedom and rogueishness (new word?) which is fairly relevant here. While not justifying it, he has well publicised issues with his sexual issues and I think all of this is pretty intertwined.

It's difficult to quantify but I got a feeling that a couple of comments had a subtext of "it's OK because he's gorgeous" and that bothers me, in the same way as it would if people were saying "he looks like a tramp so he must be really nasty and horrid". I suppose it's a point about the side issues about celebrity, her job, the DM's ludicrous reaction etc. detracting from the real issue.

Just to clarify, I still think he needs a good wash but that has nothing to do with this story or any other story. ?

I don't think anyone implied it was ok because he's attractive. There were comments both ways about his looks (super-shaggable v completely repulsive and in need of a good wash). I'm not sure why one would read a subtext into one set and not the other.

I actually think the DM's reaction is a bigger issue than the original comments- the hypocrisy and vileness of tabloid journalism is far more important to me as an issue than a comedian overstepping the line. I agree her job is irrelevant.

I don't think anyone implied it was ok because he's attractive. There were comments both ways about his looks (super-shaggable v completely repulsive and in need of a good wash). I'm not sure why one would read a subtext into one set and not the other.

I actually think the DM's reaction is a bigger issue than the original comments- the hypocrisy and vileness of tabloid journalism is far more important to me as an issue than a comedian overstepping the line. I agree her job is irrelevant.

KN, you're right that the comments were pretty evenly divided. I'm probably never going to be impartial on this because I don't find him funny and I knocked myself out with big haired, eyelinered men in my teenage slut days so I'm over finding that look attractive ?

I'm relating it in my head to the kinds of bullying I've seen in real life, where often the bullies have got away with repulsive behaviour by being lovable rogue types whereas they'd have been seen through a lot quicker if they were 55 year old gurning champions.

...whereas I spent my TS days lusting after floppy-haired public schoolboys and now find myself fancying Robert Smith ?

Fear not, Gordon Brown is now on the case....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7695951.stm

Appreciate i've had a gin or two since my last post but i've been pondering on this...and i've concluded i'm a bit surprised at JR for this tbh (as most of the focus so far has been on RB and his so-called shaggability. and LP, thank you for your noble act of shagging him on my behalf ?)

but, while this may be a bit IYKYWU, but JR having daughters himself should really have known better. in 10-15 years if the 'celeb' of the moment left a message on JR's answerphone saying 'ive shagged honey or kitten or piggy' or whatever one of his daughters is called, and that was broadcast to the nation, would he think it was a hilarious joke? i doubt it. i bet he would be livid.

so why is AS deemed to be a bit prudish?

"hardly a shrinking violet" - so what? this is not about her, its about andrew sachs and how he felt about the phone messages. in terms of his allowing it go be broadcast, apparently he had requested that the phone messages be cut before broadcast, and they werent. i really dont understand why some people are saying a thing about the girl, this has almost nothing to do with her, and the comments about her life are irrelevant.

Comments about her life AREN'T completely irrelevant here though, as someone else mentioned. The fact that Russell referred to her as 'a Satantic Slut' and how when he first met her she was 'on a swing' can be taken completely differently once you realise she's in a burlesque drance troupe of that name and performs on stage with a swing!
RB actually mentioned her on his show a week or two ago when he said that he'd 'had the Satanic Sluts round' and had had a joke with one about how she was 'Manuel's granddaughter' - i guess that's part of the reason they decided to interview him? The listeners would have been 'in on the joke' about his granddaughter - even if Russell hadn't mentioned he'd slept with her.

The problem was JR's outburst when RB was recording the first message it all got carried away from there. I really don't think JR/RB should losing their jobs over this - although i get why they need to rap the knuckles of the producers/BBC execs who allowed it to air (if AS refused permission).

But comments about her are simply not relevant. andre sachs is an old man - and to hear a voice message about RB shagging his granddaughter i can easily see why he woul dbe upset about it. it is totally irrelevant that she s in a burlesque outfit or whatever else and i really cant see why you and others cant see that.

i dont care what hapens to the two of them. i dont find either funny, esp RB, he s just a manufactured character in my book. the whole thing is now totally ott though.

But it ISN'T about her, it's about Andrew Sachs and his justifiable offence at having his privacy invaded and being the victim of offensive phone calls - which were then broadcast against his wishes, possibly, under the guise of comedy, ie to belittle and ridicule HIM. I don't see how her job impacts on whether he deserves that treatment.

exactly. i m a bit bafled by their stance tbh.

If my grandad had received a phone call like that saying i had been shagged off someone,he too would be devastated.

It does not matter what the ladies job is.She could be a nun/teacher.They still overstepped the mark.

I think they should apologise to all concerned,but also the producer of the show and all people involved not just RB/JR.

I like RB,i think he is funny,but this was not fun it was about humiliating an old man on air.