Metropol

Gavin Scott wrote:Well of course you could! Did you witness the Rodney King assault? No - like the rest of society you heard about it after the fact - and that caused riots for exactly the scenario you describe.

By the same token, should I have the right to submit a witness statement for a crime that I didn't see, but saw on the news?

Stuart* wrote:BBC News: 12 weeks without pay for Ross while this is being considered. I suppose that's the best licence-payers could expect at this stage. There is a process to follow.

I think it also helps shut up the Daily Mail as they can no longer moan that he's getting paid whilst suspended. 12 weeks is also a bit too long a time for the tabloids to continue to call for his sacking... ...in theory.

James H wrote:*I DON'T CARE*

As I have previously said in another place, there are far more important things going on in the world than this relatively minor complaint. Are we that obsessed with celebrity that we ignore the REAL suffering of those in Congo at the moment?

If people made this much fuss about real political goings on the country wouldn't be in such a shit state.

Do you really feel this is a "Issue X is a lot more important than issue Y, we aren't we concerned about that?" thing? That's entirely subjective and whilst I agree that this issue is small and that the DRC unrest is important it's very distant to a lot of people and what happens there doesn't affect people's lives directly. Whining about just how this story is somehow a direct corollary to the state of the country is not much better than the windbags who started this off in the first place.

Charlie Wells wrote:I think it also helps shut up the Daily Mail as they can no longer moan that he's getting paid whilst suspended. 12 weeks is also a bit too long a time for the tabloids to continue to call for his sacking... ...in theory.

Indeed, Charlie, everyone would expect the furore to now dissipate and be left in the hands of the agencies responsible for dealing with it. I think Thompson and the BBC Trust have made the right move at last.

With my HR 'hat' on I cannot forget that every employee is entitled to a fair hearing, where all parties have been given the opportunity to prepare and present their case. A fair process has obviously started and should be allowed to conclude without any further external influence.

James H wrote:

Gavin Scott wrote:Well of course you could! Did you witness the Rodney King assault? No - like the rest of society you heard about it after the fact - and that caused riots for exactly the scenario you describe.

By the same token, should I have the right to submit a witness statement for a crime that I didn't see, but saw on the news?

That's hardly the same thing you started off saying, is it?

We're talking about making a complaint - not embarking on a criminal prosecution.

As a consumer of BBC products I feel like I'm being punished. It's gone beyond a joke.

Nini wrote:

James H wrote:*I DON'T CARE*

As I have previously said in another place, there are far more important things going on in the world than this relatively minor complaint. Are we that obsessed with celebrity that we ignore the REAL suffering of those in Congo at the moment?

If people made this much fuss about real political goings on the country wouldn't be in such a shit state.

Do you really feel this is a "Issue X is a lot more important than issue Y, we aren't we concerned about that?" thing? That's entirely subjective and whilst I agree that this issue is small and that the DRC unrest is important it's very distant to a lot of people and what happens there doesn't affect people's lives directly. Whining about just how this story is somehow a direct corollary to the state of the country is not much better than the windbags who started this off in the first place.

But how does this affect our lives directly? If either of them were sacked, or died, would any of us be directly affected? Would we spend sleepless nights over it?

Nini wrote:Whining about just how this story is somehow a direct corollary to the state of the country is not much better than the windbags who started this off in the first place.

*throws a scooby snack* towards Nini at her tether in Metropol's windswept back yard!

James H wrote:But how does this affect our lives directly? If either of them were sacked, or died, would any of us be directly affected? Would we spend sleepless nights over it?

Come on James its no more, or less, worthy a news story as the premier of Quantum of Solace, or the winner of Strictly Come Dancing.

From what I know of you, you could very easily embark on a career in entertainment (which, I think, you stand a better chance than most at making a success of) - so it seems a little po-faced to say you've had enough of a showbiz story - which in essence is all this is.

That said, its the BBC's highest paid entertainer who's at the heart of it, so one can imagine that the licence paying public might feel aggrieved - not to mention involved - as much as their £126.00 allows anyway.

From a performer's point of view, I'm not about to unnecessarily condemn innovative, exciting comedy - but I do believe that performers should have, and stick to, a datum line of decency and taste - beyond which they should not cross. Its not unreasonable to expect the 50 year old Ross to operate within that realm of decency and he didn't.

This incident speaks to a lacking on his part, I think.

Fair enough Gav, perhaps he was way wide of the mark on this instance. The fact that the show was pre-rec'd however must surely mean, though, that WRITTEN permission should have been obtained from Sachs before the show was aired. Not just a half-arsed producer who didn't do his job properly and didn't even bother to call Sachs back later, to make sure he'd said yes or no.

Radio Two ... Saturday ....

1000 - Richard Allinson
2100 - Alex Lester

Delighted!