LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Kavar's Corner (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=698)
-   -   BBC Radio Prank - was it too much? (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=193390)

Astor 10-28-2008 04:56 PM

BBC Radio Prank - was it too much?
 
I'm sure that those of us in the UK are well aware of the storm developing over a phone prank played by two radio presenters the other week:

BBC Apologises over Prank
Ofcom to launch investigation

Indeed, this has been such a large issues that the Prime Minister has even spoken about it.

It certainly raises questions that the show's editors felt that it was acceptable to put on the air in the first place, as this has obviously caused distress to the victims, who, in my opinion does not deserve to be humiliated in such a way, on a national Radio Station.

It seems to be a pretty divisive issue as well - many see it as 'harmless fun', but on the other side many see it as a 'step too far'.

My question is this:

Is it right that media hosts (be they TV or radio) should do such things in the name of entertainment?

Did they indeed go too far in the name of comedy?

And, what actions, if any should the BBC take? Should the people involved be punished?

jrrtoken 10-28-2008 05:12 PM

How dare they do that to Manuel!

El Sitherino 10-28-2008 06:46 PM

As someone that loves Fawlty Towers and hates Russel Brand, the BBC must decapitate this waste of breathable air.

Jae Onasi 10-30-2008 03:26 PM

It's unbelievably poor taste at least. It might violate some harassment laws if UK has those for phone calls. Unfortunately, it'll probably give Brand more attention.

Astor 10-30-2008 03:32 PM

Well, Brand's now resigned from the BBC, and it's causing a major scandal over here.

The Boss of Radio 2 has now resigned as a result - story

Many people are taking issue with that fact that the complaints aren't from regular listeners to the show - but that shouldn't matter - they clearly crossed the line, and have offended and distressed many people in the name of 'comedy'.

The second most important issue here, I feel is that it was done with license fee money - which is often a sticking point in the first place, and many people don't like having to pay millions in wages for these 'cutting edge comedians' as they're called.

EDIT: We do have relevant harassment laws, but Mr. Sachs' family has yet to decide whether to press charges.

El Sitherino 10-30-2008 03:38 PM

I don't think there should be this much hub-bub, but Brand resigning was definitely a fair move.

Salzella 10-30-2008 03:47 PM

The whole reaction to this has been ridiculous. Those 30,000 complaints all stem from the moral indignation from the Daily Mail, amongst others. At first, two people complained because Ross said 'f***', and that was it, but since then evryone's been jumping on this moral bandwagon, basically because everyone else is. Tasteless? Perhaps, but people talking about prosecuting them for god's sake, is daft. It was a radio prank that got (characteristically) out of hand, and they deserved a telling off, they gave an apology, but resignations and threats of sackings? It's been blown ridiculously out of proportion considering what a relatively insignificant issue it is, and I think we can mainly blame the media and their hand-wringing hangers-on for that.

El Sitherino 10-30-2008 04:36 PM

Resignation is not all that out of the question, the issue is the mass attention and hysteria that is being created because of it. It's definitely blown out of proportion and people are over-reacting. It should have simply been "Radio host prank taken too far, resignation issued for ethics violation" and left at that.

HerbieZ 10-30-2008 04:38 PM

Russell Brand was always on thin ice when on air. I for one won't miss him, but i think the real blame lies in the BBC for allowing it to get through. The only reason Ross and Brand are on a show together is to aim for as big a demographic as possible. Therefore, Brand trying to reach out to the younger audience blurs the line slightly for some people in the editing room. Hosts say bad things and make crap decisions like the rest of us, but it's the BBC's job to moderate what goes though. They made a bad call and the BBC should pay, not any of them.

Besides. The girl is part of a pole dancing troupe called the 'Satanic Sluts' so she pretty much had a target painted on her as far as i'm concerned.

Salzella 10-30-2008 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Sitherino (Post 2546822)
Resignation is not all that out of the question, the issue is the mass attention and hysteria that is being created because of it. It's definitely blown out of proportion and people are over-reacting. It should have simply been "Radio host prank taken too far, resignation issued for ethics violation" and left at that.

But the problem with that is that the resignations are a direct result of the hysteria. If it hadn't been followed up no-one would have called for it. It was a knee-jerk reaction by the BBC that really should never have been necessary.

Astor 10-30-2008 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salzella (Post 2546825)
But the problem with that is that the resignations are a direct result of the hysteria. If it hadn't been followed up no-one would have called for it. It was a knee-jerk reaction by the BBC that really should never have been necessary.

It may have been a knee-jerk, but it doesn't make what Brand and Ross did right.

Salzella 10-30-2008 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astor_Kaine (Post 2546827)
It may have been a knee-jerk, but it doesn't make what Brand and Ross did right.

No of course not, but it's not nearly as wrong as has been made out.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.