Russell Brand was forced to resign while Jonathan Ross was suspended after calling Andrew Sachs on a radio show; which lead to them harrassing and humiliating him in regards to his grandaughter.
What in your opinion, was the problem with this broadcast?
I believe that the main problem was the fact a eldery, and highly regarded actor, was attacked and humiliated publicly. Sachs probably felt targeted as he was the only person they rang. Also, because it was previously recorded and the BBC chose to air the radio show adds to the problem.
Why was this particular case of blatant disregard of OFCOM regulations highlighted?
As a consequence, BBC was fined £150,000 by Ofcom following the prank phone calls. Their actions 'exposed an unforgivably cavalier attitude to editorial standards in some parts of the BBC'.
What was hoped would be gained?
Ross and Brand thought they were being humourous, in a bid to entertain their audience and gain some comical popularity through impressing their listeners.
Was it right to punish Brand/Ross? Why?
It was right to punish Brand and Ross, as they are responsible for their actions. However, the BBC had the chance to remove it off air, as it was previously recorded. Ross reveals that they believe that this is not offence during the radio show, so therefore they believe what they were doing was funny and unoffensive.
What do you think should have happened to Brand/Ross?
A public apology to Sachs and his grandaughter, as well as pay a fine personally.
Does this case highlight the need to regulate the media?
Yes as many people can be offended and feel targeted as victims due to the media.
No comments:
Post a Comment