Another example of the things government gets away with while the economy is good. The BBC is an arm of the government, let's not pretend otherwise. A couple of years ago Britain wouldn't really latch onto a story like this but right now, Britain is interested. So much so that the BBC had to suspend their two franchise faces. You don't know how much this is hurting them right now. They basically managed to sweep the fake calls/competitions scandal under the rug without any on air talent losing their jobs. In many ways this is worse, in most ways though, this is nowhere near as bad, but the British people can only take so much. Without being too righteous, this is fully deserved. I'm glad it's being taken seriously.
LINK: BBC.co.uk
Posts
5 comments:
I'm gonna play devils advocate and offer a disenting view.
Do you think that with thier comedy Richard Pryor, George Carlin or Eddie Murphy (in the 80s) shhould have had thier gigs pulled 'cos they said some of the sh*t they said was off the wall!
There is an argument that they shouldn't be doing this kinda stuff on the License payers dime so I guess it's fair enough that Russell Brand had fallen on his sword and resigned (or fired, who knows).
I do believe there is a place for his Brand of comedy (pardon the pun) particularly on commercial media. Not to mention that he's getting exposure you cant buy with no amount of money!! Surely as an artist you can understand that reality. With a TV show on channel 4 next Thursday night and a new book coming out, I think Russell will be just fine.
I may not approve of what he said, as long as he wasn't misrepresenting (which he wasn't) I've got to defend his right to say it.
I think it comes down to the issue of license payers money. He made £200k for a job he did one day a week? No exclusivity from the BBC at all? I also think it's an issue that the BBC's standards have slipped so much in the last few years and for some reason they've become more invincible. For a publicly funded organisation they are very insular on every level. I don't think it's acceptable (on Radio 2 no less) for grown men to terrorise a man at home getting on with his life. If you look at the specifics of the case you could argue that each sentence was worse than the last. I don't really think it's Brand's fault. I think there are producers on the show, I think there are directors at Radio 2. I think somebody as experienced as Jonathan Ross should shoulder a lot of the blame but ultimately it was a prerecorded show. Should Brand be gone for his behaviour? Yes I believe he should. As should a few people up the ladder at the BBC. Should Ross go? Probably not for that, but for being a general twat? I wish.
My thing is, they stole our money a year back. They faked competitions and no on-air talent lost their jobs. Rightly or wrongly, but it comes a point when the BBC can't justify it's bullshit anymore and hopefully we're reaching that point. They've been indestructible too long and it's time they remembered what their remit actually is. Why isn't Brand on Absolute? Or Capital? Or any number of commercial stations? Because they want him and only they will pay him those wages. That's not how the publicly funded media should be behaving.
You're the man Olu!
Marvin, I love your new mixtape, live shows and everything but I have to take exception to a few things youve said. Sorry but with facts as baseless as this you should work for Murdoch ;-)
'My thing is, they stole our money a year back'
No youre getting mixed up with itv who did steal more than 8 million pounds through faked phone in competitions. If that had been the BBC it wouldnt exist anymore. Not a single ITV employee got fired, and the Murdoch press hardly made a fuss.
The BBC doesnt make a penny from phone ins. The only one where money was made was the Children In Need competition where some charitys wrongly made money through a phone in. The Blue Peter cat phone in didnt make money (not that Im defending what they did). BBC employees lost their job and every single employee now is under pressure everyday to get things exactly right in a manner that just doesnt exist anywhere else other than the BBC.
"A couple of years ago Britain wouldn't really latch onto a story like this"
While I think Ross and Brands actions were indefensible Britain didnt latch onto the story until prodded into indignation by The Dailky Mail and Sun. For the first week only 2-100 complaints were made.
The Sun & Mail publish more lies a month than the BBC has in its entire lifetime. From Hillsborough to supporting the Nazi's their standards are lower and hypocricy boundless. Not one person on the Sun lost their job when they accused Liverpool fans of urinating and robbing the dead at Hillborough and they havent apologised properly yet.
The BBC has quite rightly live by different standards because its owned by and paid for by the people. People always lose their jobs over any error, which simply doesnt happen at commercial organisations.
'The BBC is an arm of the government'
No its an arm of the people. The government doesnt dictate what the BBC says other than its charter which stipulates the need for a certain range and quality of programming.
The whole sorry David Kelly affair proved that the BBC is not a bed fellow of the government. It made a one word mistake at 6am (the essential dodgy dossier claim was 100% correct) and the director general himself paid with his job. The BBC is obsessivly independant of the government.
Anyway Im getting off my high horse to chill out listening to your brilliant mixtape, partcularly London City (Loving that).
All the best
musiclikedirt
I appreciate everything you've said and I welcome the debate absolutely. I will retort with what I think to be the truth, I don't think either of us has said much that can be proven 100% but I will say this, we're not talking about ITV, we're talking about the BBC. There is a huge, huge difference in that fact alone.
The BBC ran fake competitions and phone-ins on radio and television. In no world is that acceptable. The fact of the matter is that viewers/listeners/callers lost money by phoning into a poll/competition with no hope of winning, viewers/listeners/callers were completely mislead by the programing. That is totally unacceptable. You can compare that to ITV if you want, I choose not to. The idea that the pressure to do your job properly doesn't exist to that extent anywhere outside the BBC is ludicrous. For the first time in a long time they actually have to be careful with the way they mislead us. That's not pressure, that's public service broadcasting. In my opinion (the main one I was trying to get across in my post) the BBC have been "Getting away with it" for entirely too long.
I personally don't read The Daily Mail or The Sun. But the fact of the matter is that Russel Brand fans will listen to Russel Brand's radio show, once the show is broadcast to people outside of his "Wacky" comfort zone people are bound to take offense. They have every right to be. How can we be offended by something we did not see? When I tuned into Radio 5 Live this morning and heard the transcript then heard the audio I have to say I was shocked. My point, if you like, was that The Daily Mail and The Sun now have the power the stir these emotions in people, they've introduced a moral compass to mainstream Britain (probably not the people to do so, but that's neither here nor there). My point is that people were (to an extent) willing to look the other way with the phone in scandal, but now, with a bad economy (as a peak to people's frustration) they're choosing to act out against the negligence of the British Broadcast Corporation which they pay for. Don't get me wrong, I love 90% of the BBC, their website is literally the greatest thing on the internet and I'm happy to pay for it, but there are things I'm not happy to pay for, audio terrorism from overpaid celebretants is one of them.
I think the growth of the BBC fairly consistently parallels the growth of the government in the last decade (not a good thing in my opinion). I don't think "The BBC work for the government" but I believe there are direct correlations and I believe that the BBC thinks it has the right to behave in exactly the same way the government do, with segregating media and job creation. With no regard for what the country wants or needs. You can claim to stand in a neutral position of the government but you're judged by your actions and in my opinion, they act like the government. This government in particular. I also believe there are strong ties between higher ups at the BBC and this Labour government that extend further than should be necessary but that's neither here nor there. If it smells like a dog, looks like a dog and barks like a dog...
I appreciate the love man. I'm glad we can disagree but the music remains it's own thing. That's what I want. I don't over politicise my music, I try to remove agenda.
have a look at this..
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QkBgw8vdIp0
Well worth watching!!
Post a Comment