The Ross/Brand thingy...

[Tooting Gull]

Thanks Tooting Gull for illustrating my point.

All I've done is disagree with you, prompting the usual snide, superior response. It's shame you just can't resist that, because occasionally your posts are otherwise worth reading.

 

[sten_super]

Unfortunately I think a lot of the comment on here is more driven by people's prejudice towards the Daily Mail rather than the actual incident. Ironic, really. They're even more prejudiced than the Mail itself. If there is nothing the Mail could ever print that people would give them credit for (or even read), then they are every bit as closed-minded as those they claim to despise.

And everyone should be able to differentiate between satire, cutting-edge drama, and other programmes that may offend some people but deserve to be broadcast - and two idiots who went too far in an inappropriate context and deserved what they got.

I don't agree at all. I would personally have criticised whichever publication started this. Unfortunately (or rather, fortunately) there are only 2/3 that would run with this kind of story, and only 2 that I can think of that may have turned it into the witch hunt it became.

Brand and Ross made a mistake. I'm an economist; if I make a mistake, it's likely to involve publishing a wrong number somewhere, as that's what I'm producing. They are comedians; if they make a mistake, it's likely to involve saying or doing something offensive, as they are trying to produce comedy. I wouldn't expect to be suspended for 12 weeks for making a professional mistake. Would you?

 

[Easy 10]

 

[Mellotron]

This is screaming out for a poll. I'll do one.