Jonathan Ross suspended without pay and Brand resigns

The argument that everyone pays for commercial channels through the products they buy (and hence fund the advertising) is hardly a fair comparison. Everybody pays a different contribution depending on the products they buy and how much they spend. I doubt anyone would think of complaining to Sainsbury's about an offensive drama on ITV1 simply because they sponsored it.

I fully support the licence fee. But because of the way the BBC is funded, directly through a tax, they must accept that the need for accountability is far stronger in the public's mind.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned already, but there's a programme about this tomorrow evening on Channel 5:

DOCUMENTARY: Russell and Ross: What The F*** Was All That About?
On: Channel 5
Date: Wednesday 5th November 2008 (starting tomorrow evening)
Time: 22:00 to 23:05 (1 hour and 5 minutes long)

Documentary about the scandal generated by Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross's radio-show prank on veteran actor Andrew Sachs. As well as examining the impact the controversy will have on the careers of two of the most highly paid comedy personalities in the country, the film also features an exclusive interview with Sachs's granddaughter, 23-year-old Georgina Baillie, and contributions from publicist Max Clifford, former Heat editor Mark Frith and some of Brand's former colleagues.
(Subtitles)

What's that got to do with anything? All newspaper editors, to quote you, 'sit on their arse all day reading copy'. That's their job.

Does it justify their pay packet? Does it justify the power they wield? They have the potential to offend millions more people with their views than the relative minority who were "offended" (read into that "whipped up in a Daily-Mail-esque frenzy) by Ross and Brand?

BTW does anyone note the wonderful irony shown tonight by Ponderland being followed by Fonejacker?

Looks like Live at the Apollo will be filling the Friday Night slot...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/11/live-at-the-apollo-bbc-jonathan-ross

Live at the Apollo will commence on Friday 28th November 2008.

At least we will have something new rather than repeats of movies.

I think they will continue with Live at the Apollo right over Christmas and upto mid-January when Jonathan returns.

I think they should have kept Friday Night but with guest hosts.

They started to have guest hosts on Have I Got News For You when Angus was fired in 2002, so I do not see why they couldn't have guest hosts leading upto Christmas?

Because It would be "Friday Night With Jonathon Ross with guest host .. .." and people here are far to anal to accept that. It would do their head.

Although that might have been entertaining, I think the BBC didn't want to give prolonged publicity to the fact that Ross has been suspended. Having his self-titled show on every week without him presenting would have been a constant reminder of that. Removing all traces of Ross completely for 12 weeks will hopefully be long enough for people to start forgetting about the whole debacle and the show will have a (slightly) smoother return when it does come back.

In a few months time we'll have all forgotten about the whole thing and everything will be back to normal! (everyone but the Daily Mail...)

It is just a shame as they could have kept it.

They could have even brought over The Graham Norton Show in its full uncut edition for Friday nights, instead of waiting till Sunday.

Still ridiculous how the BBC actually apologised for the incident before any investigation into it was complete. They should be working on their schedule, not that of the Daily Mail, and therefore giving due consideration to the claims that Sachs himself actually was aware and had agreed to the broadcast beforehand, and that allegedly Jonathan Ross had been informed it would be cut from the show all together.

Good god you're as obsessive as the Mail.

All parties agreed that an epic mistake was made right from the start - both Ross and Brand apologised before the BBC did.

THEY accept a mistake was made - so who are you trying to convince?

Perhaps Brekkie is trying to divert the mob before he is the one lynched on the nearest tree.