What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

They're blowing the whole Andrew Sachs' thing out of proportion by the way

I wonder if his sperm was from barcelona
 
Man-well!
 
Ross has been suspended for twelves weeks. I wonder if they'll get a replacement in for his chat show like the americans would do?
 
Elvis Costello replaced David Letterman once when Dave had shingles. Elvis is also taping his own chat show, which will begin airing in December on CTV and Sundance Channel.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS MAYBE ELVIS WOULD LIKE TO SUB FOR DICKHEAD ROSS ONCE OR TWICE EH?
 
CaptainWacky said:
Ross has been suspended for twelves weeks. I wonder if they'll get a replacement in for his chat show like the americans would do?
Click to expand...

How about they get somebody built totally different to Ross, wear suits like his, and a wig, and do a horrendous Ross impression? They could get somebody different to do it each week, to the point that no fucker will ever want to watch that shit again.
 
He should just tell them to fuck themselves and move to Channel 4.
 
Gagh said:
How about they get somebody built totally different to Ross, wear suits like his, and a wig, and do a horrendous Ross impression? They could get somebody different to do it each week, to the point that no fucker will ever want to watch that shit again.
Click to expand...
Start with Roseanne, segue into Iggy Pop, Mo'Nique and Bea Arthur, and finish it off with Alexei Sayle bludgeoning Morrissey midway through an interview.
 
I'm in a mood for a Bloggy rant, so here goes.

So it's been a crazy week where two of the BBC's most talented (debatable) performers have been found guilty via a tabloid trial. Ironic given that most tabloids pedal filth and hypocrisy infinitely more crass than anything we've witness. Brand's head has rolled, along with the controller of Radio 2 who allowed this to go to air. The idiot Ross, meanwhile has escaped with a 3 month suspension.

What is society to make of this facile non-story, dominating the news & all British media outlets for 3 days solid? It has blocked out several news stories that should be receiving more coverage: The De Menezes enquiry, overshadowed by another Police shooting in the Capital, the Reece murder trial, and the gradual disintegration of the global markets. Funny how this has been deemed far more important. What's worse, is the papers & all so-called pundits and commentators screeching from their silvered perches that this sort of dribble is yet further evidence of "Broken Britain in Bottler Brown's society."

It will be interesting to see if we can actually pin another 350 teenage stabbings down to Brand & Ross's 'irresponsible behaviour' morally bankrupting our innocent & impressionable yoof. It makes you wonder where the BBC have come also. On Monday, Panorama, once the BBC's jewel in the crown of investigative reporting, and in evident decline for several years, produced another bumbling disgrace of a report.

The report picked up on the recent spate of Data Loss incidents stretching back to November of last year, when Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs (my marvellous employer *sigh*) lost 25 Million individual taxpayer's records. Imagine my incredulity, when the report 'showed how easy it was to gain confidential data' with the following:

- A BBC reporter gives somebody else a number of personal details, that you could only get if somebody was stupid enough to throw them away in the bin, or a rogue employee sold them.
- The potential fraudster / caller is then also given various details about the BBC reporter from the BBC payroll - Works Number, Location, and the sort.
- The caller than passes the HMRC security checks to gain personal and harmful information.

Hardly a surprise when he's been plied with the information from the main source is it? This is not how a potential fraudster would work! It was a piece of insidious & misleading trash from the BBC far more malevolent than the Brand / Ross incident, and if anything advocated identity fraud, by showing how it could be done. Funny how thiswas lost in the facile media storm over that story.

And back to the Brand / Ross story. It's painted a further depressing canvass of behaviour from our newspapers. Always misleading organs at best - finding an honest newspaper is like finding a Unicorn. You just can't do it. The Sun, seizing on this story, has painted Brand / Ross as demons, whilst at the same time decrying Sachs and Baillie as the victims. What a shame for them that Sachs has appeared to only be relatively disinterested & distant, which leaves them with the opportunistic Baillie to pedal their trash-columns with.

If anything is an indication of society, it's this silly little media seeking woman. Sure, she didn't go looking for it, and as far as revenge goes for being called out in public as Ross did (Brand didn't remember, Ross got in there firs), I suppose some women would applaud her. Whereas Sachs has been magnanimous and sat in the background, this woman has amazingly appointed Max Clifford - the leech-like 'publicist' within days. This is amazingly hypocritical of The Sun - but no surprise. She's wounded because the pair invaded her privacy, yet seeks more publicity.

She's wounded because the pair invaded her privacy, yet she is a pole dancer in a burlesque group named 'The Satanic Sluts', who pedals a Goth or Emo's wet-dream cache of images of herself on the Internet in little to nothing, involved in all manner of kinky shenanigans.

What is more indicative of a 'Broken Britain' here? A rapid pack of newspapers & talentless hacks baying for celebrity blood, two grown men on millions of Pounds a year who should know better, a vast national Media corporation who appear to be declining with every passing day, or an opportunistic gold-digging Goth-slut who is playing victim? Out of all of this, Brand & Ross have less to answer for than anyone else!

However, Ross doesn't get off so easily. Brand & the Radio 2 controller have gone, yet this self-important, talentless & overpaid 'performer' remains in position, with a 3 month holiday to boot. Whilst this will cost Ross £1m in wages, the question remains as to why the BBC are paying people like this so much salary in the first instance. This is all Licence Payer's money, and there is no justification to pay any host or presenter this much. This of course was another issue fudged over by the holier-than-tho Beeb earlier in the year.

This is a man who is approaching 50, continues to behave like a smacked up 14 year old invading a brothel every week. This is a man who has repeatedly set his lawyers onto media outlets to 'protect his privacy' whilst at the same time, invading the privacy of Baillie, and setting this whole non-story into motion. Hopefully time will catch up with this idiot.

Then we get onto the politician. Brown, who is proving to be Britain’s worst Prime Minister in 30 years, if not longer, firstly seizes on the story. This was not a story for politicians to be involved in, when there were greater issues at hand. Then 'Call me Dave' Cameron passes judgement. All well and fine, when you consider that both men had bigger issues to deal with, and effectively buried them in the media by further whipping the storm, rather than aiding it.

Brown, the failing economy - largely his own legacy. The revelation that Northern Rock bosses will be getting BIGGER bonuses and end-of-year parties this year than last, though the bank is now state owned, and the bill will be footed by the taxpayer. Cameron the George Osborne story - the shadow Chancellor admitting schmoozing with a Russian Oligarch, on the billionaire's yacht & asking for a party donation. Funny how this, and a litany of other sleaze has conveniently been pushed into nowhere by both men's decision to prioritize this Brand / Ross story.

Now onto the Crown Jewel of this week. Charlie Brooker's Dead Set had aired before this story had snowballed, but let's face it - for an apparent empty-headed Zombie series, it's actually far more cleverer than it looks. Anyone who reads Brooker's articles, or watches his TV series will know this is one of the funniest, most caustically observant men in Britain. The show has taken the success of the recent Shaun of the Dead, combined it with the ironic look at modern society that Dario Argento gave us in Dawn of the Dead, and produced a little gem.

This is satire in its own right, but if it were a weekly produced studio show, surely Brooker could give us an episode based on this whole sorry story, but with the pop-culture element of Zombie intervention. Perhaps Brooker would have placed Ross in that room with the former BB contestants being eaten by the Zombie Davina to Mika’s Grace Kelly!

If only that was allowed to happen. As it is, I will sink further into this show, and be glad to put this week to bed.
 
Last year I bought a house for £100,000, its now worth £85,000, this is more important to me than Ross and Brand upsetting Manwel.
 
Gagh, you should be a BLOGBOT or something.
 
www.mailwatch.co.uk

Good site.
 
So I guess we can all stop wondering who will present friday night with Johnathon Ross, they are showing Speed instead.
 
This is an interesting article about the Slut

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/30/rewriting_history_cached/

Also, the Facebook group Wacky linked to earlier now has almost 19,000 members, compared to the 30,000 complaints the BBC has received (although we don't know how many of those complaints may have been in favour of Ross and Brand).
 
Yes, but joining a Facebook group is easier than making a complaint. Firstly, most will be members already, and it's merely a case of accepting an invite, or clicking join. There are also so many Facebook groups, joining a protest group has no meaning.

By joining the BBC forums and registering a complaint that way, you are taking it direct to the source. You become a statistic that counts, instead of a mundane five bar gate tally. The average type-and-submit punter on the net is far more likely to join a Facebook, Bebo or MySpace group that the latter.

Alas, as convenient as it may be, one avenue carries weight, the other is easily dismissed as the vacuous voice of 'yoof'.
 
Plus, this reference to licence payers as 'taxpayers' is hilarious. The use of the term 'taxpayer' is far more emotive than 'licence payer'.

The fact is, the two are completely different. There are far fewer licence payers than taxpayers, and taxpayers do not foot the bill of BBC presenters.

Remember, every time you see a newspaper, or hear a report using the work 'taxpayer' in this context, they are merely often doing so to promote their own view, and increase the cause & effect put into motion by the accused. They are using this term to further villify Brand & Ross. More depressingly, is that even your average hack is smart enough to know this, and so is your muck rating, cursing, coffee swilling editor (they're all like JJ Jameson, BTW).

It's just more depressingly irresponsible tabloid hackery foisted onto an all too easy to mislead British society. No country is better than being brainwashed in the space of a week by such mash that this Country. The Americans have worse content, they just have a larger population swamped with more media outlets & organs to avoid the impace this trash has here.

Is it any wonder your average celebrity loathes the UK tabloids more than any other?
 
The Express is about 50% worse than The Mail.
 
I actually can't believe what I just saw on ITV news as the headline: the press camped outside Ross's home, where he's having his annual Halloween party for local CHILDREN, the reporter says "Ross obviously showing no remorse!" or something to that effect.

So, what, they're saying he should have told the kids "sorry, no party this year, I swore on Manuel's answer phone two weeks ago!"
 
During an episode of The Young Ones there was a scene in which Vyvyan tries to impress some girls at a party by doing some press-ups. As it was a comedy show I felt I ought to make the press-ups as funny as possible.


With a huge effort that belied my 40 fags a day at the time, I managed to effect some kind of wiggly-lizard-on-hot-sand-type press-ups that got a pretty good laugh. Much later, after the show was broadcast, our producer was hauled into the controller's office and asked why he'd allowed images of Vyvyan "fecking" the floor to go out – they'd had complaints.

Bad taste is in the eye of the beholder. Well, mostly. As Michael Palin once said, "One 'wank' and the BBC switch board is flooded".

I'm not a fan of the word "edgy", especially when it's describing comedy. "Edgy comedy" usually means "not recorded in front of an audience because we were frightened it wouldn't get a laugh". "Dark and edgy" is even worse – it usually means "The Emperor's New Clothes".

I don't think of Russell Brand as edgy, I think he's just really, really funny. Like most good comics he uses the shock of the unexpected to get laughs. This is different from trying to shock people. At the MTV Awards recently he described George Bush as "that retarded cowboy fella". That's funny, not because it's actually shocking, (it's obviously fairly accurate), but because it's not the sort of thing you expect the usually anodyne presenter of such an event to say. He's clever, sharp, surprising, and charming with it. If a little cocky... and that's what this little "scandal" is really about. It's a little witch hunt.

When it was broadcast the show in question apparently got two complaints. The media, tired of trying to find new angles on the current financial meltdown, have leapt at the opportunity to whip it up into something huge. And of course the BBC have taken it up bigger and better than anyone else, because there's no other organisation that enjoys self-flagellation quite as much. The number of complaints grows by the minute. When I started writing this it was somewhere around the 30,000 mark. By the time I finish it may be around a quarter of a million. Most of those complaining didn't listen to the original show. Soon the number of complaints will outstrip the number of people who were tuned in.

I didn't listen to the show either, but I have read the transcripts of the messages left on Andrew Sachs's phone. I understand entirely why Andrew Sachs is upset. But he and his grandaughter are the only people who should be really upset about this. In the transcripts you can hear Brand and Ross getting overexcited in each others company. Or perhaps, to put it less kindly, you can hear Ross trying to keep up with someone much funnier than he is.

This isn't a dig. Ross doesn't particularly pretend he's a comedian. He's a charming, affable, if slightly over-exposed chat show host. But the peer pressure is pretty obvious. In a year or two Brand will probably have Ross's chat show slot on Friday nights.

But back to the show. They get overexcited and forget that by ringing a real human's phone they're suddenly in the real world rather than the beautifully surreal world that Brand usually creates around himself, and they go slightly over the edge. Not too far over the edge, but enough to elicit two complaints. Though the complaints were about Ross using the F-word, rather than about telling an old man that his new best friend had slept with his grandaughter (again, as the grandaughter makes clear in the tabloids, it turns out Brand was at least being accurate). Perhaps their only crime is that it just wasn't particularly funny.

What the millions are really complaining about is Brand's success with women, and Ross's extraordinary salary. They're fed up with how good Brand looks in his skinny jeans with his crazy hair, how his life seems such effortless good fun, a whirlwind of humour and debauchery, how he managed to sleep with Andrew Sachs's grand-daughter. I mean, have you seen her? And I don't know anyone who isn't incredibly jealous of Ross's 6 million a year.

The noise about BBC editorial procedure is a smokescreen, but a dangerous one. Once we start passing all jokes through endless "taste" controls we'll cripple people's ability to make jokes. If we'd had the kind of controls people are talking about implementing I wouldn't have been able to do my silly wiggly press-ups – not the high point of comedy history perhaps, but a pointer as to where we might end up - in some kind of puritanical Britain where they start putting underpants on church spires because they look a bit phallic.

Mind you, strange that Ross hasn't offered to resign. Wonder why?
Click to expand...

Ade Edmonson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top