Just listened to the Andrew Sachs phonecall

Jazzy

as the title said.

how sad are the ppl that complained? we can all say the usual about "everyone has their opinion" but in reality - if u took offence, ur a stupid f**kin idiot who is so internetted outta it that uve lost pretty much lost all sense of humanity and that ur vote should be taken from you cos you are far too stupid to use it right.

good god, how have 2 ppl that are funnier then ull ever be (maybe except from pighead) taking so much flak for being funny?

oh deary me, they are making fun of an old person. watch fone jacker? brass eye? anything that will make ur anus bleed from laughing? deary deary. its actually a pretty funny affair but because its from a national institution. apparantly its offensive but tbh, its funny. if u dont like it being funny - then u are wrong... cos it is funny. like it or not - its funny. opinions are like arseh*les.... it just means there are more out there to be wrong.


so if u took offence - HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ur an anal knob who should be put down as ur existence holds back the gene pool and ur a thick f*ck

Cunny-Funt

Jazzy wrote: »

if u took offence, ur a stupid f**kin idiot

Agreed. You didnt need to say anything else and tbh I wasn't arsed reading it.


:pac:

dreamers75

she is an exotic dancer in a group called satanic sluts


tbh if my kids did that would prefer the phonecall than knowing my kid a borderline prossie in a group called satanic sluts

eVeNtInE

This post has been deleted.

Sharpshooter

eVeNtInE wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I know nathing / runs away to avoid a slap on the head.


All will become clear / or maybe not............

emeraldstar

yes...

i am in agreement.

Jazzy

i want more shrill feminist lawyers in here. they are the best to bring down a level or 2. ppls perception of intelligence is so pathetic that its great fun crushing it. YES!!! IF YOU ARE OFFENDED BY THAT (PRANK CALL THEN YOU ARE ON THE LOWER END OF THE GENE POOL!) pm me for further justification of ur sheer inferiority

iPlop

yeah but we all know that but the WHITE KNUCKLE BRIGADE are always waiting to pounce on anything slightly funny

Jazzy

god i love being drunk. and wats better then being drunk and reminding ppl that in reality they are thick ?

Cunny-Funt

sharpshooterH wrote: »

I know nathing / runs away to avoid a slap on the head.


All will become clear / or maybe not............

That comment was out of line, and thus offended me deeply. I think you should be suspended from boards.ie.

The Taoiseach shall hear of this!!! :mad:

zoro

Damn straight Mr Jazzy. Damn straight.

Jet Black

Do NOT reference or discuss any BBC event or venue.

Sticky to follow.

Turd Ferguson

Its all retarted tbh. It got 2 complaints after it first aired...2!!! Then some knob jockey in the Daily Mail wrote about it so over 1800 people decided to either:

A: Actively go and listen to the show to get offended and then complain or
B: Just complain without even listening to it.


Have these people nothing else to do? If I was Ross or Brand I would get the names and addresses of everyone who complained and call to their house and skull fuck them till they begged for mercy.

Tabnabs

It's all a publicity stunt, Georgina Baillie's publicist is Max Clifford ffs. Brand is off to the states to work there anyway and Ross is such a nob-end he probably thinks it will further his career to be linked to the youth :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

controversy = FAIL

Turd Ferguson

Ross is suspended for 12 weeks. He's losing like €1.2 million over this. Doesnt sound like a publicity stunt to me. On the grand-daughters end yes, the bitch is milking it for all its worth but I doubt Ross and Brand are in on it.

You say Brand is off to America, but if this story breaks over there then he can kiss that dream goodbye.


Dyflin....opinion = FAIL

Zillah

Jazzy wrote: »

as the title said.

how sad are the ppl that complained? we can all say the usual about "everyone has their opinion" but in reality - if u took offence, ur a stupid f**kin idiot who is so internetted outta it that uve lost pretty much lost all sense of humanity and that ur vote should be taken from you cos you are far too stupid to use it right.

good god, how have 2 ppl that are funnier then ull ever be (maybe except from pighead) taking so much flak for being funny?

oh deary me, they are making fun of an old person. watch fone jacker? brass eye? anything that will make ur anus bleed from laughing? deary deary. its actually a pretty funny affair but because its from a national institution. apparantly its offensive but tbh, its funny. if u dont like it being funny - then u are wrong... cos it is funny. like it or not - its funny. opinions are like arseh*les.... it just means there are more out there to be wrong.


so if u took offence - HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ur an anal knob who should be put down as ur existence holds back the gene pool and ur a thick f*ck

You have, unlike most of humanity, been blessed with a full keyboard. I'm sure yourself and it can get along fine if only you'd try. There are children in Africa and South East Asia who get keyboards with nothing more than an F, the left arrow and a hyphen.

They still come across as more literate than you.

javaboy

Jazzy wrote: »

oh deary me, they are making fun of an old person. watch fone jacker? brass eye? anything that will make ur anus bleed from laughing? deary deary. its actually a pretty funny affair but because its from a national institution. apparantly its offensive but tbh, its funny. if u dont like it being funny - then u are wrong... cos it is funny. like it or not - its funny. opinions are like arseh*les.... it just means there are more out there to be wrong.


so if u took offence - HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ur an anal knob who should be put down as ur existence holds back the gene pool and ur a thick f*ck

Why is it funny? Because you say so? :rolleyes:

Is there anything you wouldn't find funny out of interest? Where would you draw the line?

Dudess

The stunt sounded pretty nasty to me but I think things have gone too far now. Brand shouldn't have resigned; Georgina was chuffed at the start, then all upset when she realised she had to be - completely hypocritical. Andrew Sachs is even ok about it now after receiving an apology.
It was crap work on the part of the producer. Ross and Brand aren't paid to draw the line, they'll keep pushing it. It's the producer's job to tell them stop.

The BBC seems on the verge of collapse - total storm in a teacup at this stage. The Daily Mail is a scourge on society...

Turd Ferguson

javaboy wrote: »

Why is it funny? Because you say so? :rolleyes:

Is there anything you wouldn't find funny out of interest? Where would you draw the line?

Why should there be a line?

cooperguy

javaboy wrote: »

Why is it funny? Because you say so? :rolleyes:

Is there anything you wouldn't find funny out of interest? Where would you draw the line?

Why should there be a line? No matter what the joke is somebody will be offended. If you dont like a comedian dont listen.

Turd Ferguson

cooperguy wrote: »

Why should there be a line? No matter what the joke is somebody will be offended. If you dont like a comedian dont listen.

:eek:
We should totally sex it up after that!!!!!!

DarkJager

The fact of the matter is that there were originally only 2 complaints, then the Daily Mail (the most irritating pack of morally righteous ***** ever to produce a newspaper) got hold of it, and of course the P.C brigade jumped on the bus. 30000 people with their faux shock horror about the whole thing - 30000 ****ing idiots.

Georgina Baillie proved she is nothing more than an attention and publicity seeking rag even after Sachs accepted the apologies. She is a through and through slut, regardless of how anybody or papers like the sun want to paint her.

cooperguy

And whats even better is neither of the complaints was about the phone calls they were both about Brand slagging Johnathon Ross's speech impediment!! I just heard it on the radio there!

Turd Ferguson

DarkJager wrote: »

She is a through and through slut

She is NOT a slut

javaboy

Turd Ferguson wrote: »

Why should there be a line?

cooperguy wrote: »

Why should there be a line?

Turd's right. Sexing up would be the right thing to do.

Personally very little offends me when it comes to comedy. However if a broadcaster I paid a license fee towards was showing 'funny' pictures from rotten.com or similar, I'd probably be a bit unhappy about it.
If some other private TV channel like TV3 did it, I wouldn't give a flying feck.

No matter what the joke is somebody will be offended. If you dont like a comedian dont listen.

Of course. In fact I made that point about everything offending somebody only a while ago in a post about the whole "Swallow Bitch" affair. I don't like people complaining about a Tommy Tiernan gig or a Billy Connolly gig that had an offensive joke in it if they weren't at it (or even if they were). It's just when a state broadcaster does something you don't like, I think you have every right to complain.

I don't think "If you don't like it, don't listen" cuts it really when it comes to public broadcasters.

Dudess

DarkJager wrote: »

of course the P.C brigade jumped on the bus. 30000 people with their faux shock horror about the whole thing - 30000 ****ing idiots.

I don't think the morally outraged brigade and the PC brigade are one and the same. The morally outraged brigade tends to get outraged by stuff the PC brigade stands up for...

TheBigFella

cooperguy wrote: »

Why should there be a line? No matter what the joke is somebody will be offended. If you dont like a comedian dont listen.

The difference here is that is was broadcasted on the radio.
I watched Ricky Gervais during the week live on stage and he was taking the piss out of kids with cancer. but that was to people who choose to pay and see him or watch on TV knowing what he was like.
The radio show should have been edited before going out. I would hold the BBC more responsible than Brand or Ross.
I am a fan of both but their actions were out of order however i believe apologies would have been enough.

Turd Ferguson

javaboy wrote: »

I don't think "If you don't like it, don't listen" cuts it really when it comes to public broadcasters.

Yeah, but the fact that that 30,000 people went to listen to it for the sole purpose of getting offended and complaining. If the Daily Mail didnt write their shitty little article nobody would have know about it. Andrew Sachs would have been apologised too (if he said something to the BBC) and we can get on with living our lives.

Dudess

It wasn't even "offensive" anyway - what demographic was it offending? It was just a rather mean-spirited thing to do to an old man.

javaboy

Turd Ferguson wrote: »

Yeah, but the fact that that 30,000 people went to listen to it for the sole purpose of getting offended and complaining. If the Daily Mail didnt write their shitty little article nobody would have know about it. Andrew Sachs would have been apologised too (if he said something to the BBC) and we can get on with living our lives.

What difference does it make why or when they listened to it or who publicised it so much? 30,000 (probably) license paying people found it offensive enough to complain.

Dudess wrote: »

It wasn't even "offensive" anyway - what demographic was it offending? It was just a rather mean-spirited thing to do to an old man.

Who says it wasn't offensive? Sure it's probably not offensive to the show's usual demographic but that doesn't mean it's not offensive to some people.

Turd Ferguson

javaboy wrote: »

What difference does it make why or when they listened to it or who publicised it so much? 30,000 (probably) license paying people found it offensive enough to complain.

Because its a show that these people never listen to. They are not the target audience. The people who the show is designed for and who it appeals to did not find it offensive and THEY also pay their licence fees and now THEY cannot listen to Brand or Ross anymore.

Dudess

How do you think it might be offensive, javaboy?

Mark200

Turd Ferguson wrote: »

Why should there be a line?

Well to be fair, the BBC is paid for by tax payers in the UK. It should be a lot more strict about these things than other radio stations that pay for themselves.


It's stupid though. As said a few times already, there were like 2 complaints before the story reached the news. It's like that whole thing with Jade Goody in Big Brother. Although what she did is a lot worse than the prank call, the majority of the complaints about her didn't come in until after it was on the news.

Turd Ferguson

Mark200 wrote: »

It's stupid though. As said a few times already, there were like 2 complaints before the story reached the news. It's like that whole thing with Jade Goody in Big Brother. Although what she did is a lot worse than the prank call, the majority of the complaints about her didn't come in until after it was on the news.

Thats cos nobody gives a shit about BB. Nobody watched it and nobody cared. No harm done, except to the Aisan one but that would have been delt with in its own way without it being an "international scandal".

javaboy

Turd Ferguson wrote: »

Because its a show that these people never listen to. They are not the target audience. The people who the show is designed for and who it appeals to did not find it offensive and THEY also pay their licence fees and now THEY cannot listen to Brand or Ross anymore.

I didn't say they should have been sacked or even suspended. I think the BBC handled it badly tbh. They should have used similar arguments to the one your using about the target demographic not actually being offended.

Personally I don't think the complaints should carry as much weight when coming from people who don't listen to the show but at the same time I don't think they should be ignored either.

Like I said earlier, if RTÉ were showing 'funny' pictures and videos from the likes of rotten.com at 4 in the morning when I don't watch telly, I still have the right to complain about it if I want.

Dudess wrote: »

How do you think it might be offensive, javaboy?

I dunno ask the 30,000 who complained. Seriously though I didn't find it particularly offensive but I can understand how some older people would.

DarkJager

javaboy wrote: »

Like I said earlier, if RTÉ were showing 'funny' pictures and videos from the likes of rotten.com at 4 in the morning when I don't watch telly, I still have the right to complain about it if I want.

No you don't. How can you possibly form a valid complaint against something you didn't see or hear? Just because somebody else tells you about it? This licence payer bull**** is a wafer thin excuse to disguise that 30000 people in Britain consider themselves to be ****ing angels..

Dudess

Nasty and underhanded maybe, but offensive no (imo).

i_love_toast

i am absolutely raging that this has gone so far!!!cop on for f*ck sake i hate the rags and as usually everyone read the papers absolutely blown out story believed it.the daily mail the other day said"arrest them!"...arrest them for f*cking what??
andrew sachs used to work john clease who was a member of the monthy python who in the 70's released"the life of brian"which in its day was majorly blasphemous and do you think many people got sacked for that???
its mad how this is still going on.grand it was bad but jesus christ like.in the papers i read that they said"i hope he kills himself"...total lie!i f*cking hate the rags!!

ART6

Surely there is an issue here? Make such remarks to someone's face if you wish (and possibly get your head punched in for the privalege). Say it in public, during a public show transmission, and it is offensive. If the juvenile Ross had said that about my daughter I wouldn't complain, but I might just punch his b****y head in.

Turd Ferguson

I wonder what would happen if 300,000 people complained to the BBC that they will miss the next 12 weeks of Ross' show and that they pay their money too.

DarkJager

Turd Ferguson wrote: »

I wonder what would happen if 300,000 people complained to the BBC that they will miss the next 12 weeks of Ross' show and that they pay their money too.

30000 people should make complaints about Songs Of Praise for using the word "Christ", which is offensive to atheists. That might make the 30000 who complained about this feel exactly like the whiny little ***** they are. 30000 people with extremely non eventful sad lives...

Turd Ferguson

DarkJager wrote: »

30000 people with extremely non eventful sad lives...

Sounds like Daily Mail readers alright...

Jazzy

Zillah wrote: »

You have, unlike most of humanity, been blessed with a full keyboard. I'm sure yourself and it can get along fine if only you'd try. There are children in Africa and South East Asia who get keyboards with nothing more than an F, the left arrow and a hyphen.

They still come across as more literate than you.

u try typing when u have drank ur own weight in rum. i think i made a bloody valiant effort here considering my state.

i still stand by wat i said tho. the ppl that "took offence" to it should be taken out of the gene pool

ShagNastii

Right, I haven't commented on any of the two millions thread started about this topic.

First things first, I'm an avid viewer of Ross' Friday night show which is always top class and think Russell Brand is one of the funniest comic alive today. And listen to his podcasts alot.

I think the people do have merit in their complaints. We've all ****ed somebodies Granddaugther/son but I wouldn't call their Grandparents on national radio and broadcast it to the masses. I must add if the daily mail didn't publish the article none of this would have been blown out of proportion. And "lady" in question wouldn't have the press she so eagerly courts.

asdasd

don't think the morally outraged brigade and the PC brigade are one and the same. The morally outraged brigade tends to get outraged by stuff the PC brigade stands up for...

Just a different type of moral outrage. Same type of people. I am sure were Sachs black, and the statements were racist you would be in uncontrollable moral outrage right now.

Most people here are missing the point. Had Brand - who is a moron - just made the remarks on air and not on the answering machine of a 73 year old it would have blown over as the typical kind of "funny" Brand gets up to ( I 'ad sex wi' is granddaughter, innit). Sachs was not listening, after all.

However calling up an octogenarian and leaving messages about having sex with his grand-daughter is a form of harassment, and if you don't believe that try a thought experiment where your grandparents are continually getting messages about the sexual activity of their grandchildren. Clearly you would call the police. This thing would be offensive even if not broadcast. Sachs could then have released the tapes from this answering machine.

If Sachs complains he may yet get a criminal case.

phasers

asdasd wrote: »

However calling up an octogenarian and leaving messages about having sex with his grand-daughter is a form of harassment, and if you don't believe that try a thought experiment where your grandparents are continually getting messages about the sexual activity of their grandchildren. Clearly you would call the police. This thing would be offensive even if not broadcast. Sachs could then have released the tapes from this answering machine.

If Sachs complains he may yet get a criminal case.

Sachs has said he isn't taking it further and an apology was all he wanted, which he received. He has moved on, why can't everyone else? He didn't want this attention, even if his media-whore granddaughter is loving it.

asdasd

Sachs has said he isn't taking it further and an apology was all he wanted, which he received. He has moved on, why can't everyone else? He didn't want this attention, even if his media-whore granddaughter is loving it.

Ok, so it is only not going to be a criminal act because the victim did not want to pursue. It still had the potential to be worth a caution, or an ABSO were the perpetrators not rich middle aged guys. Were they poor 15 year olds it would be investigated, surely.

So the moral outrage was justified. The difference between a a joke and bullying is the status of the victim, and the mechanism of delivery. A joke on stage about Irish people is a joke, leaving Irish jokes on a Irish workmates answering machine is harassment.

( if we are in England like Brand et al.)

Obvious stuff.

30txsbzmcu2k9w

Its a true testament to the media setting the agenda. Sky News were like a dog with a bone on this one, rotating the story every 15 minutes. Big chance to put some dirt on the BBC. And people just lap it up.

I was listening to the Moncrieff show on Newstalk yesterday (or thursday) and some wagon was on talkin about it all high and mighty. and she had the gall to call Russell Brand ill-educated! Pretty obvious she's never actuallly listened to the man talk.
A clear example of misinformed tabloid reading drone spewing out nonsense to more of the same.

javaboy

DarkJager wrote: »

No you don't. How can you possibly form a valid complaint against something you didn't see or hear?

That's ridiculous imo. So if I'm paying a TV license and part of that money goes towards funding something I find offensive, I have no right to complain? BBC like getting feedback. They even have a program called points of view just for feedback and complaints.

This licence payer bull**** is a wafer thin excuse to disguise that 30000 people in Britain consider themselves to be ****ing angels..

I can't speak for the motives of the 30,000 who complained and the Daily Hatemail has obviously stirred this shit up but I still defend the right of people to complain about things they find offensive if they are paying to fund it.

Turd Ferguson wrote: »

I wonder what would happen if 300,000 people complained to the BBC that they will miss the next 12 weeks of Ross' show and that they pay their money too.

They should tbh.

asdasd

Pretty obvious she's never actually listened to the man talk.

Quote some marvellous lines from Brand. Of course he is a moron. An inarticulate unfunny moron who appeals to morons.

A clear example of misinformed tabloid reading drone spewing out nonsense to more of the same.

The Guardian, Times and most of the broadsheets were anti-Brand as well. In any case it is clear from this thread that, in general, idiots support Brand.

Count the punctuation errors in this piece.

i am absolutely raging that this has gone so far!!!cop on for f*ck sake i hate the rags and as usually everyone read the papers absolutely blown out story believed it.the daily mail the other day said"arrest them!"...arrest them for f*cking what??
andrew sachs used to work john clease who was a member of the monthy python who in the 70's released"the life of brian"which in its day was majorly blasphemous and do you think many people got sacked for that???
its mad how this is still going on.grand it was bad but jesus christ like.in the papers i read that they said"i hope he kills himself"...total lie!i f*cking hate the rags!!

javaboy

Arian Cool Wage wrote: »

she had the gall to call Russell Brand ill-educated! Pretty obvious she's never actuallly listened to the man talk.
A clear example of misinformed tabloid reading drone spewing out nonsense to more of the same.

But he is ill-educated. It's not that he lacks an education by any means. He definitely knows a lot of big words but often completely misuses them and I don't think it's for comic effect.