Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
britain, you are a joke.
Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand = BBC's two best presenters. If I were Director General of the BBC, I'd just be like "What, it was just a joke. Pretty funny as well. No biggy."
but still, massive overreaction
If ANYTHING, Andrew Sachs should be suspended for being a twat. Even though I quite like Andrew Sachs. Also, we're not going to get to see J-Ro perving over 15-year-old Miley Cyrus :(
I despise that Georgina though. Happy now with your 'justice'? Robbed the public of two of the Beebs best presenters, sold your story to the Sun, and will probably have whoever closet-fascist shite read the Mail holding your hand.
I am unbelievably angry about this.
and he didn't quit.
i was hoping to never see the fucker again!
Hear me out. Why don't we just accept it was a fairly amusing prank which went a little bit too far, grow the fuck up, and get on with trying to solve those kerr-azy things going on in the world like, y'know, poverty, child abuse, war, famine, recession, inequality, and what not?
I wonder where Georgina Baillie will go next? FHM or Nuts?
The correct answer would be Zoo.
They've had Abi Titmuss featured before so don't really have too many standards.
Is more important than 160 people dying in an Earthquake in Pakistan, or hte shitstorm that's about to be unleashed in eastern DRCongo
Behold and tremble ye before it.
the power of Max Clifford.
Death to anyone who complains about anything they hear on the radio or see on the television, seriously. There's an off button, you deplorable cunts.
i hope some kind of archive is set up with brand's old shows available to download - his was the best on the station, possibly on the whole of the bbc.
sad, sad times. the mail on sunday has won.
fight the power!
Thank you, kind sir
I'm genuinely annoyed by all of this. Why has Lesley Dougas resigned? Why do people high up at the BBC always resign at the slightest crisis? It's sad that Russell Brand resigned considering it was largely Jonathan Ross' contribution that did the damage.
if only matt morgan was there none of this would have happened.
That makes me sad.
For fucks sake. Yet another reason to despise the Mail, and every cunt who reads it
Time of Death - 18:57
a great read and sadly, all too true
completely sums up my view.
But I dislike the precedent this sets
i bet he wont go on NEWSNIGHT.
I sincerely hope he does go on Newsnight!
they'll both have to sign the Sachs Offenders Register...?
deserves more ^
i'd rather it was Ross that left for good rather than Brand and Douglas. He's been peddling an embarrassing presenting technique since forever and although i'm not really that bothered how much he's paid i'd rather the Beeb put their money towards better goods. Brand is someone i find greatly entertaining and amusing and Douglas has done a lot to make Radio 2 a more varied station. It's still largely stuck in the past - Friday night is music night? What the fuck? - but it's doing a lot better than Radio 1 is thanks to her.
I don't care about what happened, and my opinion on the incident is irrelevant.
However I am happy that the Daily Mail brigade won.
Since I've been at university, people seem to have this stock opinion on the media. Its basically that the Mail is very right-wing and everyone that reads it is a fascist.
They've never picked it up in their lives. They're going off what the loudmouth ones in seminars come out with, and in many cases, what the lecturers themselves suggest - and I quote "if you were doing a study on immigration opinions, you could always go and ask all the racist Daily Mail readers what they think,".
In fact, this doesn't really have anything to do with the Mail. They gave their opinion on it, as did every other newspaper. But because its really cool to hate them, and it shows what a cool guy you are, the bandwagon is overflowing with Daily Mail hatred.
My parents read it and i'm pretty sure they're not fascists. They clearly aren't just giving their opinion on this issue though. They've made the most of the opportunity to rile up middle england by appealing to their least attractive qualities and attack the bbc by blowing a minor issue out of all proportion.
The fact that the BBC are funded entirely by the public means that they deserve the utmost scrutiny from the public.
The Daily Mail are more of a right wing body, but it shows that the BBC is at least a little less politically one-sided than previously believed.
The BBC is not entirely funded by the public. At least not entirely by the license fee.
You're a total spud.
just that people tend to generally be arseholes.
that I am glad the 'other side' has triumphed.
Why am I glad? Because the anti-Mail side are hypocrites, it shows everything is not leaning in one direction, as we might have understandably assumed.
shit like this happens alls the time.
that's basically just your neuroses surfacing. You sound like holden caulfield. "Oh these guys think they're SOOOO cool for pretending to be against fascism. Well how do they like it when the fascists WIN! Yeah you thought you were SOOOOO cool"
and it's not as if the daily mail's influence was understated.
My point is that I like a level playing-field. I like the fact this is being regarded as a victory for a body constantly derided as 'wrong, old-fashioned and read by fascists.'
Its a slap in the face for people like yourself. "People who read the Mail are all fascist cunts because their opinion is different to mine. I hate fascism."
The way you adopt a "OMG guess what? Yr GAY" approach to your quotes is really confusing. Are you trying to suggest I'm an American teenager?
I still don't understand your point. You appreciate people who annoy you (because they speak out against the mail) getting beaten? Is that basically it? Even if it's blatantly obvious to anyone with half a mind that the whole situation is fucked up because of the mail and that it's DEFINITELY NOT A GOOD THING that this is happening?
that was supposed to be in response to wrightylew
It pretty much covers all the salient points.
that the BBC and conservatism don't get along very well. This probably stems from Thatcher, but that doesn't matter.
The BBC (and TV media in general) tends to over-react on issues to prove its position on issues is liberal and left-wing. Like, for instance, the Jim Bowen thing. He was on Radio Lancashire, and he accidentally said "nig-nog" because it used to mean "idiot" round here, when referring to an idiot. Within about a day he was gone.
I'm not one of these 'oh here comes the PC brigade on their high horses' lot, but as I've said before, I think this shows the Beeb are willing to listen to old-fashioned busy bodies, as well as young, hip, liberal supermen.
I'm not a hypocrite.
then you're a hypocrite / moron.
Put your fucking chopper away, will you? We get it: you want us to be impressed about how impartial you are. And that you can bandy accusations of hypocrisy around indiscriminately. Get in, wrightylew. You fucking rule.
I'm hell-bent on impressing a 33-year-old from Hackney.
I'm not discussing something that me and others are interested in. I'm trying to get your approval.
Are you one of those people that's always saying "she CLEARLY fancies me", by any chance?
the fuck are you smoking?!
Being a Grown Up 101: if you want to have an intelligent debate, debate intelligently.
Plus, you aren't funny.
The chap who said 'put your fucking chopper away' and 'you fucking rule' is implying that I should grow up a little.
But fuck it. There was nothing not grown up about me losing my rag with you, which is all those remarks reflect.
They were not especially intelligent, however. But as I implied, you don't seem that interested on playing on that level.
My parents both get/got the Mail, and I make a point of reading it whenever I get the chance.
It is everything that's wrong with conservatism. It is reactionary, often bigoted, and its content is so often based on fear and prejudice.
There's a line about how just cos you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you. Well, just cos plenty of people write off the Mail and its herd of readers without picking it up, doesn't mean it isn't an arse rag.
It isn't cool to hate the Mail; indeed, I suspect you are just trying to look clever by taking this stance. Have you read it lately?
I know just as well as you do that the Mail is fundamentally flawed.
However, I don't think that everyone that reads it is a bigot, or a racist. I don't think other people shouldn't read it.
My personal politics don't bide well with certain aspects of The Guardian and The Independent. I'm sure a lot of Mail supporters would agree. But the comments made about those two papers' readerships are few and far between.
Young liberals are the least liberal people in the world. They want to ban everything and stop people doing things. How many times do you hear people insulting, say, Channel 4 news' audience? You don't, because its not acceptable unless their general stance is right as opposed to left.
check out America, where values not a million miles removed from those espoused by the Mail are in the ascendency.
Everything is dictated by moral outrage and judgmentalism. Debate is strangled by exactly the kind of mud-slinging and name-calling you get from Littlejohn, Hitchens, Clarkson and co. The word liberal is used almost exclusively in a perjorative sense. And you get people lapping up what they are told by those they trust sooner than find out for themselves: "Obama is a socialist/ terrorist," for instance.
Me, I don't want shit banned. I do, though, want the right to bawl out anyone who stands up for what I vehemently disagree with. Spirit o' free speech and all that.
and before I knew any better, so did I. I don't tar its readers with any particular brush, however, because I know that it's a varied readership, as with all papers. However, there are a lot of people who read it and put a lot of stock in what it tells them (as do some, but not all, readers of the Guardian, the Express, whatever); and the difference is with The Mail is that it pumps out a lot of deeply noxious, hateful, unhelpful philosophy wherever it goes. The Mail doesn't just offer its ;opinions' on things; it adopts whatever position is going to whip its readers up into a frenzy, and if that means publishing a story about this Satanic Sluts woman where she calls for 'decency' alongside a picture of her in the near nud, that's what they'll do. Even the right wing should be ashamed of the Mail's practices. I think most of my negative perceptions of the Conservative party actually come from the Mail's relationship with it.
I've had the misfortune to read it. It fosters prejudice. So does the Diana Express. The biggest gubbins was Piers Morgan's column in the Mail having a pop at Jonathan Ross. THIS, from the man who PUBLISHED FAKE PHOTOS OF BRITISH SOLDIERS TORTURING IRAQI POW'S IN A NEWSPAPER. Yeah. Great paper, obviously put a lot of thought into presenting a balanced opinion.
you only have to read it to figure it out.
then again, they have excellent sports coverage.
That doesn't mean I'm a fascist.
"In early 1934, Rothermere and the Mail were sympathetic to Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Rothermere wrote an article, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts", in January 1934, in which he praised Mosley for his "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine""
Case closed. The Mail is clearly run by an invincible Nazi who lives forever.
PIERS FUCKING MORGAN?!
FUCK PIERS FUCKING MORGAN THE FUCKING CUNT SHIT
im actually liking brand more and more
new series of ponderland starting on C4 NOW. Pretty convinient
his live stuff is better
which im watching now
missed the first half though :(
the outtake at the end!
"my microphone's come off. Every time this happens we put all the names of the production team into a hat and whoever gets pulled out is fired. We call it the sack tombola!"
Pretty, fucking, foreshadowing.
not the last bit you were on about
but the bit before that bit
Baroque enthusiasm + grand hand gestures + a bit about fingering a butterfly = Russell Bland
And to think...this boy used to be the apple of my eye.
I still have faith in him
what can only be described as a few annoying quirks
Then it began to die on my doorstep. Now it's just a corpse.
if it's cool or not to hate the Mail.
I just thank Christ for the Guardian for at least giving half of tomorrow's front page away to proper news.
I think it raises some pretty significant questions about broadcasters responsibilities and how they deal with public reaction.
Ross and Brand are bullies who have been reduced to their knees, while Parkinson, Coogan, Wood, Walsh, Scales etc. etc. poke them with tetinus sticks.
they deal with it BADLY.
30000 complaints? Out of what? 6 million? Seems to me like most people don't give a flying fuck.
but i guess i'm not the first person to have the opinion that the world has gone mental.
The conservatives are gonna walk the next election.
can we just all forget about this awful, awful example of well knowns abusing their position to bully poor innocents, and let the weekend roll in so we can settle down to the x factor and just have a bloody good time and a bloody laugh.
oh wait, its friday, what time is jeremy kyle on? that always cheers me up.
Gideon Coe with George Lamb has resigned.
Makes the whole miserable debacle worthwhile.
Perhaps George could resign in support.
is the way that the newspapers and people complaining all claim to be concerned with how humiliating it was for Andrew Sachs to have that on his answerphone but are basically constantly humiliating him further by keeping it as a major issue. I don't doubt for a second he'd rather the whole thing just went away and that it's well-beyond what he orginally intended (he didn't even make an official complaint and I suspect all that happened was a journalist sensed a story, asked him how he felt about it, he said he wasn't happy and it snowballed from there).
The people who are publicising and exploiting a 78 year old man's embarrassment at sex messages left on his answerphone anger and horrify me far more than a couple of people who made a few stupid comments.
just before Christmas. I guess they'll be going without this year.
do you really believe what you've written on this thread or are you just trying to get a reaction out of people? I think it's the latter, and that's fine because it worked, but if it's the former you're going to lead a pretty confused life.
Having a level playing field on everything in life isn't really possible, and there is always the possibility that one side might be better than the other, no? And that's why it's more widely supported? Would you change your vote every election to the underdog, regardless of their policies?
yours, in bewilderment