Wednesday 20 May 2009

Should we be shocked by Ross and Brand's Prank


Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand, the BBC’s A list TV and Radio presenters have landed themselves in hot water again. This time they have made obscene phone calls to Andrew Sachs from Fawlty Towers and boasted that Brand had slept with the actors Granddaughter. They’re used to creating controversy by themselves, but have this time teamed up to bash another celebrity with their quick wit and originative insults. Since the news went public via just a few newspaper inches dedicated to the prank, it is estimated that there have been 30,000 complaints registered to the BBC about the incident. What’s surprising is that almost all of these were made two weeks after Russell Brand’s Saturday night Radio two programme was aired. The show was even recorded and was later aired without the BBC’s bosses taking such potential upsetting comments too seriously and allowed it to be heard. To some, this prank was a step too far and outrageously offensive. However, to others it was entertainment, but to what extent?

Jonathan Ross is paid a fortune by the BBC; an estimated 18 million for a three year contract. His detractors believe he is not worth anything near that figure. But others might agree with a view that defends the BBC that there is simply no one better, funnier or more cutting edge in entertainment right now than Wossy and his mate Russell Brand. Ross is paid to be funny, to be entertaining. His quick wit, tempered by what some consider to be insults have made him a figure of controversy. He is used to making people laugh by being close to the line of what is and what is not acceptable to say. He knows that what makes us laugh is what entertains us and this has always been a factor where comedy is concerned.

Insults and picking on people have always made people laugh. Being abusive is far funnier than saying a kind word about someone. It gets a bigger reaction and ultimately a bigger laugh. Celebrities are no more immune from this than anybody else, in fact in terms of having a target, they are the easiest of them all. We idolize the famous, but we are as fickle as we are Human. Its so satisfying to see the celebrity dethroned and sent to the bin of “Yesterdays News.” One minute your an A list star, the next your treading over other former stars in a mad stampede to be on the next “ I’m a Celebrity, get me out of here.”

For Brand and Ross, its not the first time they have been criticized for courting Controversy. In 2006 while speaking at the Q awards, Ross, afterwards came under fire from disability groups when he called Heather McCartney a “Fucking Liar and wouldn’t be surprised if she had two legs.” Another time when discussing Abi Titmus he quipped that she’s been tied to more bed posts than David Blunkett’s dog.” Its as entertaining as people feel about such issues. If not most us will hide the instinct to laugh. We suck in breath, defuse a cry of laughter and smile innocently inside. Jonathan Ross is not alone in his attempts to walk the line between what’s funny and what should not be said at all.

Brand himself caused a heated reaction at another awards event when he confessed that he’d been “having a go” on Rod Stewart’s daughter. Hardly a subtle statement and not taken in jest by Rod Stewart himself who was in the same room at the time. People still laughed, being offensive is it seems another form of giving entertainment. Who can forget Julian Clary’s immortal words on another TV awards programme in 1993? When asked how how he was hanging by the well-versed Jonathan Ross, he replied Oh very well…in fact I’ve just been fisting Norman Lamont. Such statements on TV are soon forgotten and no one lost their job over it

Ross and Brand don’t have to strive to be the best entertainers on UK TV, they are that and they have done this by playing on celebrities insecurities. In 5 years time when Piers Morgan interviews Russell Brand on TV for “ You can’t sack me I’m a celebrity. “ He won’t be impoverished or short of work. In fact, I have a feeling that the BBC will employ him again one day in the future.

Was it right for Ross and Brand to be reprimanded for their prank calls to Andrew Sachs? The BBC producer even rang Sachs about the Broadcast, but still made the decision to air it. Subsequently, a number of BBC controllers have stepped down because of the decision to let it be heard. They must have at some point found the whole thing a gas or been blindingly stupid to believe it would not offend someone. Sachs and his Granddaughter did not make the most fuss about the whole matter. In fact, Sach’s Granddaughter has done very well out of it and I look forward to seeing her on Celebrity Big Brother, real soon.

It’s the 30.000 people who complained; those who came to the defence of Sachs who have been responsible for people losing their jobs. Was the prank in bad taste? Yes, most definitely, but where did 30,000 Mary Whitehouse’s appear from. I thought we had moved on as a nation and had all become crueller.

It would seem so when a young man in Derby stood on top of a Multi Storey Car Park and threatened to end his life by jumping. What happened next was perhaps one of the most sickening episodes in the history of the British People. Some on the ground that day were heard to goad him and encourage him to follow through with his threat and jump to his death. He did and those who could have saved this distressed man committed the biggest insult they could have to him and his family. Do the lewd comments of a few BBC presenters add up to more than the comments of a baying crowd who enjoyed the entertainment in Derby that day.

We live in a TV age where bigger laughs mean better entertainment and this means higher viewing figures. The paying audience will always enjoy the comical exploits of the people in the media that take the greatest risks. Brand and Ross do this with certain ease. They know and so did the BBC that these players come with an element of danger but pack a dynamite case of laughs and entertainment. People will always complain about sick jokes for as long as people keep writing them. It’s human nature to poke fun and in some way feel superior to the victims, on this occasion Brand, Ross and most notably the BBC found out just how far they could push it.

The Court of Public Opinion


You've heard of the Law Courts of England and Wales, The Courts of the European Union and even the Court of Human Rights, but now there is another court and this one you will not have heard of. Its...wait for it...the court of Public opinion. Not heard of it then? No, you won't have, because such a court does not exist! Except, that is, in the mind of Harriot Harman, Labour's Deputy Leader. This fictitious place is where the voting public vent their anger about the RBS Boss who walked away with a fat pension despite bringing his bank to its financial knees. What an outrage, what a heinous crime, but isn't it nice that the government have shown anger towards this issue too? Afterall, if there is one thing some politicians hate more than criticism about how are they acquire their inflated salaries with certain dodgy expenses claims its seeing other people taking money that they do not rightly deserve either.


Harriot Harman's swipe at Sir Fred's large pension was as close as the Government will publicly side with the public on a single issue. When talking on the BBC Ms Harman blasted, “The Prime Minister has said it is not acceptable and therefore it will not be accepted. It might be enforceable in a court of law this contract [Sir Freds Golden Goodbye] but it's not enforceable in the court of public opinion and that's where the Government steps in." However, try as she might to find a legal loophole to prevent Fred the Shred getting all of this money, but claiming that public opinion is now the dish of the day is a little conderscending. Strange as for centuries governments have turned away from listening to public opinion. Considering too much power by the people to be anti-democratic and fearing some medieval “Mob rule”


The real Court of Public Opinion is, as far as I am aware, in session for only one day every five years. It's when a General Election is held and the concerns of the people of Britain are seriously taken in. They decide who and what political party is fit to become the government. I am a firm believer in Democarcy and know that there are many ways that the democratic process can be expressed, but most British citizen's only concept of Democracy is expressed by 8 to 10 crosses in a lifetime on a ballot paper. There are many decisions taken away from ordinary people who often feel more qualified to make them than some politicians are, but this is the nature of a constitututional Democarcy that we live in. This is not ancient Greece where every man has a part to play in decision making. Nor is this a country where there is a Court of Public Opinion.