h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

'Satanic' not 'Demonic' and that wasn't the issue (not that you'd know that from reading any of the tabloids).

And still the BBC goes on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on....about this story

Controller of radio2 resigns and then they go and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on about it.

2/3 clucking days of this utter nonsense whipped up by 'disgusted of Tunbridge Welles'.

Yes it was a mistake by certain twerps....but for god's sakes....this incestuous nonsense dominating the news, day after day after day after... I'm sick of it.

They very very briefly mentioned on 5live earlier that there might be another "Ruanda' about to happen in the Congo. People all over the world are being hit by possible serious recession. And a hundred other much more important stories.

What's the hell is the controller of BBC news up to?

And no doubt we'll end up with an utterly castrated BBC after all this utter twaddle.

(Sorry haven't bothered reading the backlog - too bored)

ffreEs; flying ants; Romantic hardcore.
You are replying to this message: Jump To Reply Field





I agree though it's more self-flagellation than insectuous.



I hope not I like 'edgy' humour but not purile, infantile, sub-night down the pub humour that these two do.

It was a stupid mistake by the editors to let it through. THey should have apologised straight away. Maybe no-one would have had to resign.

I can see this being another Hutton epsiode where everything is now toned down too much. They really have shot themselves in the foot.

<(Sorry haven't bothered reading the backlog - too bored)>

I agr

Ross suspended without pay for 3months.

To put into perspective that is half a million pounds he is going to 'lose'.

Can we come back in 3months and vote on wether we actually missed him and it would have been worth paying him half a million pounds to enrich our lives in his edgy unique way such that he deserves half a million pounds for 3 months work?

Actaully, I think its over £1million pounds. He signed an £18million contract in 2006 tying him to the BBC til 2010.

I think Ross should follow his buddy and resign, along with whoever else at the BBC resigns or is pushed. Personally I think his ego is larger than his ability, and he has begun to consider himself as too big to 'hit'.

I won't miss him.

Novo

Well, Lesley Douglas has resigned and Ross has been suspended without pay for 3 months. So much for the apologists trying to excuse them.

Who are the apologists then?

Mark Easton, Rod McKenzie - BBC Editorial bloggers.

Maybe you could give some kind of quote? I've yet to hear anything approaching what I'd call real apologism. But I've heard vast amounts of pathetic whining and whinging about a silly schoolboy/ mistake/prank though. I've heard no-one dispute that.

But what a lot of people dispute is the degree of 'disgusted of Tunbridge Welles' hot farting air' on *BBC news*; especially when there is so much *real news* to report. Utter tabloid pathetic, simple minded, nonsense.

I know 5live is pretty moronic and tabloid at the best of times, but this is Daily Mail style journalism, taken to an extreme. And yes I'm well aware that appeals to *some people*.

Maybe I could. Maybe I can't be arsed. You decide.

>You decide.<

Nahhh, I think I'll just run along and listen to some 5live instead.

The BBC really have lost the plot: in place of Jonothan Ross on Friday night they are showing the film Speed...one brains out programme for a brains out film. I like the film but they could at least try a bit harder to put something a little better on.

"Can we come back in 3months and vote on wether we actually missed him and it would have been worth paying him half a million pounds to enrich our lives in his edgy unique way such that he deserves half a million pounds for 3 months work?"

Why is Ross paid so much? Because that's what the BBC have to pay him to keep him, because that's what he's worth to their commercial rivals; and the reason he's worth so much is because so many people like him enough to watch his TV shows and listen to his radio shows. The reason he's paid so much is typical market economics and not, as so many blinkered idiots genuinely seem to think, because the BBC loves paying that sort of money to one person.

Wow >Speed.< ....sounds a lot better than Jonathan Ross.....

(Maybe it's a funny beeb injoke...?)

Davina what's her name was out defending Brand - no talent defended by no talent.

Brand is no loss and should have been sacked - if I used that language on the phone to anyone - having attached my company's name to it I'd be sacked.

Ross should do better - but he should be sacked too.

Well Leslie Douglas has gone and guess who was the first on air defending her, yes, another of the foul mouthed brigade, Chris Evans. Anybody giving odds on how long he and the other idiot, Moyles, will last.

Why do the BBC persist on chasing market share when they are funded from the license fee. It's the wrong metric. They should be monitoring listener satisfaction. I don't remember ticking that box on the last RAJAR survey I filled in.

As to Ross, let him go to the competition. At least then I have a choice over whether I fund his montorous salary. I rely on the BBC trust to do that at the moment and they have let me down. He should have been sacked.

Well if all the whining brings back a 'Mary Whitehouse' era, I reckon millions like me will just stop watching and listening altogether. The BBC is supposed to appeal to a cross section. If they get rid of all 'edginess' that means they will just be pandering to one 'easily disgusted and offended' section of the community. Yeah I can hear dear old Mary cheering from her grave..

We'll have a constant diet of Last of the Summer whine........(sic)

You do get a choice though WA you can not watch TV and then you dont need to buy a licence.

You can write a letter to the BBC saying that you dont watch or listn to his/their programmes because you object to his enormous salary and/or miniscule talent.

Your choice however is only one amongst many and you are onto a loser if you think your individual opinion will outweigh the masses who happily pay their licence fee and actually enjoy what the BBC and Ross but out.

You actually have less choice if he works in commercial broadcasting because that involves avoiding every product advertised during his programmes and writtingto each advertiser explaining why you are not buying their products.



As to whether the "Satanic (not Demonic, like that makes such a huge difference) Slut" was asking for it.

Well I not only stand corrected but also chastised. How horrible of me to suggest that a woman who joins a burlesque group called such a name and willingly sleeps with such a well known, loud mouthed, celebrity-shag-about as Brand was asking for publicity or even had the slightest inkling that her antics might be paraded in one of the many mediums for clelbrity tittle tattle.

What you forget is who pays the piper. The DG is under intense pressure as he cocked up the license fee re-negotiation and it is the license payers who are baying for the likes of Ross's blood. And you know what, I wouldn't be surprised to see both Ross and Thompson go.

The present BBC cult of increasing audience numbers from the 'Younger' set and 'at the edge' broadcasting which may be popular amongst the metrosexual, multicultural, London centric cognoscente but sticks in the craw of a lot of baby boomers is coming to an end.