russell brand - C or D?

it was a serious question, have they done anything as retarded as this before on the show?

A large part of Russell Brand's stand-up routine consists of him prank-calling people, so probably, yes.

Depends what you mean by "retarded."

For instance, Radcliffe and Maconie's disgraceful and racist extended campaign against Jay-X headlining at Glastonbury apparently warranted no censure at all.

But then that wouldn't have made A Good Story.

Put it this way: Brand and Ross were not hired to discourse on sixteenth century Silesian choral music.

xxp Based on their reactions as they were doing it, I'm guessing not on Radio 2, at least. Brand seemed pretty surprised at what was happening. Ross was so busy basking in his self-worth that he didn't seem to notice.

correction "Jay-Z" sigh...

See, there you go again! "busy basking in his self-worth." As though you wouldn't!

so this is all Ross's fault, Brand had a different agenda for the radio show?

figures.

See, there you go again! "busy basking in his self-worth." As though you wouldn't!

― Do they mean us? They surely do! It's Ray Conniff! (Marcello Carlin), Friday, 31 October 2008 20:27 (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I wouldn't, but I wouldn't be on Radio 2 either, so moot point.

I mean, was Richard "Autopilot" Allinson really the best R2 could do?

Oh yes, I forgot - cheap reliables who won't rock the boat, even if no one listens to them.

I speak as someone who's seen Russell Brand's stand-up show but hasn't listened to his radio show, btw. He's no stranger to controversy, let's be honest - presume part of the strategy of hiring him was to bring some of this "oh wow, whatever will he do next, that "edgy" and "controversial" comedian that we have employed?". But, as has been pointed out ad nauseam, it was Ross that ended up being the idiotic ringmaster of the piece.

this prank wasn't "edgy" and i am going to scream if i see it referred to as such again

Lex, I think it's a bit pointless trying to explain to you why some people found it funny. Sometimes explaining a joke destroys it, and when it was as flimsy and personality driven as the one Ross and Brand did then it's even more so. As you said elsewhere all comedians are scum.

(x-post)

Don't you even have a shred of empathy for the improvised song?

Just because it shouldn't have been broadcast, doesn't mean it wasn't funny.

i put edgy in scare quotes for a reason. but whatever.

Dunno if it's possible to feel empathy for an improvised song.

This may just be the envy talking tho.

"it was funny" is not a valid response to "why was it funny?"

Analysing why things that make you laugh make you laugh is one of the most soul-destroying things in the world. Funny = it makes you laugh. Sometimes it's just as simple as that.

has anybody made the 'they've been put on the Sachs' offenders register' joke yet?

Jay-X

sorry, laffed.

hi-fives Pete w.

ha, see, that's funny

xpost

A few reasons why people may have found it funny, the disconnect between the polite answering machine reply and the presenters vulgarity, the banter between Ross and Brand, the urge to push the envelope and better each others remarks. Not very big or clever, and definitely not the smartest thing they've ever done but in context still quite amusing, though understandably not to everyone's taste.

How did Victor Lewis-Smith get away with it for all those years?

Oh yes - he's not a Celebrity and it wouldn't have made a Good Story.

I note that R2 kept Johnnie Walker on full pay after the NOTW cocaine sting.

But then presumably JW doesn't cost £16,000 per day.

I was thinking of VicLewSmith, particulalrly his call to Hughie Green where he basically accused him of being a paedo wrt LenZav.

He died a week later, HGreen that is.

The Daily Mail were not outraged.

yeah actually VLS did a lot worse, someone subtly send a reminder to the tabloids.

i agree with LJ CAN WE PLEASE JUST STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS NOW

The worst thing about this will be the punchlines on Strictly Come Dancing. The second that Arlene Phillips attempts to compare John Sergeant's foxtrot to the contents of Andrew Sachs' answering machine, everyone's gonna be passing over this in silence.

the Lex is 100% correct.

It is bad that the behaviour of wankers is being used (cynically etc no doubt) as a reason to attack THE BBC which is a different and noble thing. JR&RB do not represent The BBC, which is one of the world's greatest institutions. They are just wankers whom it has paid too much to be wankers.

You seem a little obsessed with the BBC.

He's still waiting for his Newsnight Review audition.

The idea of public broadcasting is complete anathema to these bastards

er, yeh, but it seems to have been to large parts of the BBC for some years now as well. interminable reality shows? "rolling" news without an iota of thought behind it? a once-mighty flagship morning radio programme reduced to arseholes like humphrys on a constant one-upmanship mission? BBC fucking 3?

that said: my loathing of the corporation ("noble"? good god, i've just seen that comment in the xpost warning; i nearly choked) is well documented elsewhere round these parts, and this isn't the time or place for it. sorry. and the existence of BBC4 does go a long way to making up for the above.

the one thing i will say: tracer, way upthread you ask: "why is the producer still in a job?" well: because the qualitative difference between this show and what the BBC spews out elsewhere so much of the time is actually pretty small, and i don't think it's at all reasonable to say of one over-promoted 25-year-old: "dude, you should have realised the point at which this shit crossed the line!" is every producer meant to be able to extrapolate out the outcome of every show solely in terms of how much it will annoy the daily mail?

i appreciate i sound like some grumpy old bastard who wants a return to reithian values ... that's probably because i am. however, my loathing for the bbc will be eclipsed by my white-hot hatred of the daily mail for as long as the two co-exist, so hey.

They are just wankers whom it has paid too much to be wankers

i mean, for god's sake, pinefox: if someone offered you squillions of £££ just to sit and be lazy on the radio, who's at fault: you for going: "ok, nice one!" or the dicksplashes who allowed public-service broadcasting to come to this?

is every producer meant to be able to extrapolate out the outcome of every show solely in terms of how much it will annoy the daily mail?

well the answer to this is clearly yes. this ain't a fuckin disco.

i don't even know what that last sentence means.

well the answer to this is clearly yes

yew wot?

Do they audition Newsnight Review? Candace Bushnell seemed to have trouble stringing a coherent sentence together last week.

I remember Momus saying something about being asked to come on NR and he would have had to turn up and do an audition in front of camera. He never took it any further though.

As for Thompson, he's clearly so far up the Mail's arse that he could be their prop forward next season.

So I predict a menu of cautious, bland, tiptoeing radio.

Nobody will listen to it but then nobody will be offended either.

The Mail have moved on...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081966/Even-Russell-Brand-row-raged-BBC-comedians-insulting-Queen.html

xpost well, i'll manage the unusual trick of not listening and being constantly offended by the continued existence of the BBC in its current form ;)

i'm not clicking fucking daily mail links, btw. as someone sagely pointed out upthread: these page impressions matter to the cunts.

Surprised no one's thought about reissuing Noosha Fox's 1977 single "Georgina Bailey" yet.

And as someone said upthread you only have to read the url to get the gist.

xp

is every producer meant to be able to extrapolate out the outcome of every show solely in terms of how much it will annoy the daily mail?

but you can also say "is every comedian (or whatever passes as a comedian these days) meant to be able to extrapolate out the outcome of every tasteless gag solely in terms of how much it will annoy the daily mail?"

It's disgusting the way the Daily Mail has allowed that joke to be aired.

Just so their readers can go "ha ha ha SHAME!!!"

zomg xposts re: that daily mail link

That being the joke from Mock The Week that Emily Maitlis quoted in her interview with Mark Thomson on Newsnight last night. Well done The Mail!

grimly, i mean YES - EVERYONE from mark thompson on down has said "this was an open and shut case - it oversteps the mark by miles - there's not even a discussion as far as we're concerned" .. which most people agree with. if that's the case, why did the producer OK it, and the compliance people ditto??

ken you could say that but it's not the comedians' job to think that way - it's the producer's job and the compliance people's job

i think everyone should share a bit of blame

i'll take some of it

as long as the bbc suspends me with pay