Russell Brand and Andrew Sachs's granddaughter

The forum discussing radio
James H
Posts: 1276
Joined: Tue 20 Jul, 2004 14.49
Location: In your endo

DVB Cornwall wrote:Radio Two ... Saturday ....

1000 - Richard Allinson
2100 - Alex Lester

Delighted!
Glad about Alex Lester, but would rather have Lamarr and Jo Brand doing the morning show.

Perhaps Simon Amstell would be an idea for the evening slot?
User avatar
marksi
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed 07 Jan, 2004 05.38
Location: Donaghadee

I heard on Five Live that the 24 year old producer of Russell Brand's programme is an employee of Russell Brand, as it is an independent production of a company owned by Brand and his manager. What 24 year old producer is going to stand up to RB and JR, one of whom also happens to be his boss?
Charlie Wells
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue 02 Nov, 2004 16.23
Location: Cambridgeshire

Some Daily Mail comments are questionable...
Why don't we start repeatedly calling Channel 4's top executives at their homes and leave lewd comments about their daughters and granddaughters on their answering machines.They obviously do not think there is anything wrong with it.

- W.Davis, Heronsgate, UK, 30/10/2008 14:27
Article title: Disgraced Brand's bestiality 'comedy' show to go ahead tonight on C4 despite obscenity storm
Article URL: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... l#comments
"If ass holes could fly then this place would be an airport."
User avatar
Gavin Scott
Admin
Posts: 6442
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

James H wrote: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.
I couldn't agree more - and I said this from the get-go that it's the producer's job to make the call on what pre-recorded material goes out. Worse still that there had been edits to the sequence and "He fucked your granddaughter" was left in. Astonishing.

But if that is the range of Ross' impromptu comedy, you can see why he has a substantial writing team. Hardly worth his salary, in my view.
Stuart*
Banned
Posts: 2150
Joined: Fri 24 Jun, 2005 10.31
Location: Devon

Gavin Scott wrote:I couldn't agree more - and I said this from the get-go that it's the producer's job to make the call on what pre-recorded material goes out. Worse still that there had been edits to the sequence and "He fucked your granddaughter" was left in. Astonishing.

But if that is the range of Ross's impromptu comedy, you can see why he has a substantial writing team. Hardly worth his salary, in my view.
Gav, I couldn't agree more on the material that was broadcast and perhaps the liabilty is with the young Producer who allowed it to go for transmission and those in the 'chain of command' who simply signed it off.

My concern is what happened outside of the broadcast environment. What organisation allows someone to make abusive phone calls in the first place, whether they are deemed humorous or not? I wouldn't want to recieve them, you wouldn't, and I'm damned sure most of the board members here wouldn't want to either.

There is only one person missing from the resignation list so far, and for the sake of decency I hope he joins it very soon.
User removed
User avatar
marksi
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed 07 Jan, 2004 05.38
Location: Donaghadee

How can you possibly say that the liability for this lies with the producer?

As I said a few posts back, it seems the producer was an employee of Brand's production company, and Brand was the presenter. In what circumstances is he going to over-rule his boss?
User avatar
Gavin Scott
Admin
Posts: 6442
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

marksi wrote:How can you possibly say that the liability for this lies with the producer?

As I said a few posts back, it seems the producer was an employee of Brand's production company, and Brand was the presenter. In what circumstances is he going to over-rule his boss?
Would the programme producer be able to sign off the show content, or would there be an internal BBC senior producer who does that?

In any event if you're the show producer then you're supposed to be responsible for what you deliver.

You can't draw the salary then say, "what was I supposed to do?" when it goes wrong.
User avatar
Lorns
Posts: 3149
Joined: Thu 24 Mar, 2005 22.48
Location: A room with a view. 15 Hookey street, the Edge.
Contact:

Well some good has come out of this. Madonna and Kerry Katona are no longer front page news. btwI'm on team Ritchie.
And its a whole lot more fun than reading about the recession. The cynical side of me says that this furore has done wonders for the granddaughter. I think we'll be seeing alot more of her in the future.
Mental anxiety, Mental breakdowns, Menstrual cramps, Menopause... Did you ever notice how all our problems begin with Men?
James H
Posts: 1276
Joined: Tue 20 Jul, 2004 14.49
Location: In your endo

Stuart* wrote:
Gavin Scott wrote:I couldn't agree more - and I said this from the get-go that it's the producer's job to make the call on what pre-recorded material goes out. Worse still that there had been edits to the sequence and "He fucked your granddaughter" was left in. Astonishing.

But if that is the range of Ross's impromptu comedy, you can see why he has a substantial writing team. Hardly worth his salary, in my view.
Gav, I couldn't agree more on the material that was broadcast and perhaps the liabilty is with the young Producer who allowed it to go for transmission and those in the 'chain of command' who simply signed it off.

My concern is what happened outside of the broadcast environment. What organisation allows someone to make abusive phone calls in the first place, whether they are deemed humorous or not? I wouldn't want to recieve them, you wouldn't, and I'm damned sure most of the board members here wouldn't want to either.

There is only one person missing from the resignation list so far, and for the sake of decency I hope he joins it very soon.
Now, hang on a sec here. We need to define what is termed "abusive".
Stuart*
Banned
Posts: 2150
Joined: Fri 24 Jun, 2005 10.31
Location: Devon

James H wrote:Now, hang on a sec here. We need to define what is termed "abusive".
It's probably normally defined (possibly also in law) as:

:arrow: To hurt or injure by maltreatment; ill-use.
:arrow: To force sexual activity on; rape or molest.
:arrow: To assail with contemptuous, coarse, or insulting words; revile.
:arrow: Obsolete: To deceive or trick.

(c) The Free English Dictionary
User removed
James H
Posts: 1276
Joined: Tue 20 Jul, 2004 14.49
Location: In your endo

Now, from the portion that was broadcast, none of the language used directly towards Sachs was abusive. In fact, Jonathan Ross merely stated fact. Russell Brand had indeed fucked his daughter.
Please Respond