Options

Radio 2's Dave Barber resigns over Manuelgate

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,391
Forum Member
✭✭✭
BBC Radio 2 head of specialist music and compliance Dave Barber has resigned in the wake of the Sachsgate affair.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media
«1

Comments

  • Options
    BluenileBluenile Posts: 11,712
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Everyone but Ross, the idiot that caused the problem in the first place by being an arrogant tosser. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,391
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bluenile wrote: »
    Everyone but Ross, the idiot that caused the problem in the first place by being an arrogant tosser. :rolleyes:
    I still believe those calls were never made. I think it's the Beeb trying to cover up a fakery scandal. Sachs took 10 days to make a fuss about it - days after the Daily Mail poked their nose into it. He said he heard it on the iPlayer, not his actual answerphone.

    I'm glad all these bosses are going. All the Radio 2 listeners that whinged and complained because Brand and Ross were taking over their precious station should get their just deserts. For them it was an excuse to get Brand and Ross off the air. As a result they've lost some of the bosses that made R2 sound fine.

    Anyway here's the apology:
    "On October 18, the BBC broadcast an exchange between Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross on The Russell Brand Show on Radio 2.

    "This concerned the actor Andrew Sachs and his granddaughter, Georgina Baillie. Some of this exchange was left on the voicemail of Mr Sachs.

    "The conversation was grossly offensive and an unacceptable intrusion into the private lives of both Mr Sachs and Ms Baillie. It was a serious breach of editorial standards, and should never have been recorded or broadcast.

    "The BBC would like to apologise unreservedly to Mr Sachs, Ms Baillie and to our audiences as licence fee payers."

    It'll air at 9pm and 10am tomorrow.
  • Options
    RikScotRikScot Posts: 2,095
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Jmoo wrote: »
    I still believe those calls were never made. I think it's the Beeb trying to cover up a fakery scandal. Sachs took 10 days to make a fuss about it - days after the Daily Mail poked their nose into it. He said he heard it on the iPlayer, not his actual answerphone.

    Maybe that's why we've not heard anything about the police being involved in an obscene phone call charge..if there was no actual message left. This is not to defend what went on but maybe it was limited to being said on air as opposed to being recorded on voice mail as well.

    As for bluenile's comment, don't you think you're falling into the same trap as those you're complaining about? There are other words you could use.
  • Options
    mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,308
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bluenile wrote: »
    Everyone but Ross, the idiot that caused the problem in the first place <irrelevant obscenity snipped>
    Remember that someone was supposed to have checked this pre-recorded programme to ensure that it complied with the relevant guidelines, and signed it off (something that patently should have led to this phone-in section being removed).
    It is thought the station's specialist music and compliance boss would have been involved in checking the content of programmes prior to broadcast.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7716415.stm
  • Options
    BluenileBluenile Posts: 11,712
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    Remember that someone was supposed to have checked this pre-recorded programme to ensure that it complied with the relevant guidelines, and signed it off (something that patently should have led to this phone-in section being removed).

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7716415.stm

    Shouldn't '£6 Million a year man' have realised his behaviour was likely to cause problems for his employer though?

    I admit here I really bloody hate Ross.
  • Options
    mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,308
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bluenile wrote: »
    Shouldn't '£6 Million a year man' have realised his behaviour was likely to cause problems for his employer though?
    Sorry, but this has been done to death really, the punishments have been handed down to the two broadcasters, all that remains is to determine responsibilities at the vetting stage (a stage that each recorded program,e has to go through, where specific boxes are ticked/completed, prior to someone charged with that process physically signing off that recording. Regardless as to what Ross/Brand did, and how inappropriate it was, another major part of the checking process failed completely (with the implication that the processes were either not followed, or ignored) - a programme containing overt sexual content and offensive material was checked off when the rules (had they been correctly followed) should have stopped it or caused the offending part to be edited out. Barber seems to have been one of those responsible for that failing (either directly, or by way of carrying managerial responsibility), and in those circumstances has paid the price.
  • Options
    lbc417lbc417 Posts: 654
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I can't help thinking the Beeb are scared to sack Ross, as if they do, he'll be snapped up by Absolute, and more than likely, ITV. I honestly believe he's still at Auntie due to a ratings thing, and nothing else. Well, I bet 1000 Beeb journo's are now having the last laugh... Ross should remember, that while it's good at the top, it's a hell of a long way down to fall....
  • Options
    SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    lbc417 wrote: »
    I can't help thinking the Beeb are scared to sack Ross, as if they do, he'll be snapped up by Absolute, and more than likely, ITV. I honestly believe he's still at Auntie due to a ratings thing, and nothing else. Well, I bet 1000 Beeb journo's are now having the last laugh... Ross should remember, that while it's good at the top, it's a hell of a long way down to fall....

    I read that Ross said that if he was fired he would sue. The BBC didn't want to fight a long & very expensive court battle with him, especially if it resulted in them having to actually pay him the huge amount of money that is left on his contract, on top of he legal costs! The publicity would be terrible and, coupled with the enormous costs, could well have hastened the BBC's demise.
  • Options
    BluenileBluenile Posts: 11,712
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    andy.cox wrote: »
    I read that Ross said that if he was fired he would sue. The BBC didn't want to fight a long & very expensive court battle with him, especially if it resulted in them having to actually pay him the huge amount of money that is left on his contract, on top of he legal costs! The publicity would be terrible and, coupled with the enormous costs, could well have hastened the BBC's demise.

    I think most people would hope the BBC Royally screws Ross.

    I hope the bloke ends up on Bid TV selling MP3 players. I'd happily pay an extra £10 on my licence fee just to see him get ****ed.
  • Options
    SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Bluenile wrote: »
    I think most people would hope the BBC Royally screws Ross.

    I hope the bloke ends up on Bid TV selling MP3 players. I'd happily pay an extra £10 on my licence fee just to see him get ****ed.

    Charming!
  • Options
    BluenileBluenile Posts: 11,712
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    andy.cox wrote: »
    Charming!

    You think I'm on my own?

    If he ever dares to go back on his chat show or enters Radio 2 HQ he'll get lynched.. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    PhilHPhilH Posts: 2,791
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lbc417 wrote: »
    I honestly believe he's still at Auntie due to a ratings thing, and nothing else.

    The BBC in "employs someone because he gets loads of listeners/viewers" scandal. :rolleyes:

    Seriously, whatever you may think of Ross and Brand, both of them -- particularly Ross -- are experienced enough to know what you should and shouldn't do on the radio, and someone at Radio 2 should've ensured that it didn't go out.

    Simple as.
  • Options
    trendartrendar Posts: 499
    Forum Member
    Bluenile wrote: »
    You think I'm on my own?

    If he ever dares to go back on his chat show or enters Radio 2 HQ he'll get lynched.. :rolleyes:


    You have a point. The network lost a good Controller who maybe shouldnt have hired Brand in the first plac e - but could have reasonably expected her executives to watch the programme carefully. A lot of people at Radio 2 blame Ross.
  • Options
    RikScotRikScot Posts: 2,095
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    trendar wrote: »
    A lot of people at Radio 2 blame Ross.

    How do you know?
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 914
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Bluenile wrote: »
    You think I'm on my own?

    If he ever dares to go back on his chat show or enters Radio 2 HQ he'll get lynched.. :rolleyes:

    what a load of tosh. His show will probably bring in more viewers due to this "scandal". And yes, I think the Been were scared to sack Ross, but only because he would be snapped up by commercial rivals in no-time!
  • Options
    HelbrownHelbrown Posts: 3,411
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Has the obviously totally inept producer escaped though? :confused:
  • Options
    trendartrendar Posts: 499
    Forum Member
    RikScot wrote: »
    How do you know?

    I know because I know people there and have worked with the BBC in the past. You may know different, but then you might know other people.
  • Options
    BluenileBluenile Posts: 11,712
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    wills**01 wrote: »
    what a load of tosh. His show will probably bring in more viewers due to this "scandal". And yes, I think the Been were scared to sack Ross, but only because he would be snapped up by commercial rivals in no-time!

    Yes, Bid TV.
  • Options
    lbc417lbc417 Posts: 654
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hang on a minute... You say this...
    PhilH wrote: »
    ... both of them -- particularly Ross -- are experienced enough to know what you should and shouldn't do on the radio

    ...but then say...
    PhilH wrote: »
    ... and someone at Radio 2 should've ensured that it didn't go out.

    So, if Brand, and particularly Ross, are 'experienced enough to know what you should and shouldn't do on the radio', then they should have never conducted themselves in such away to start with then, regardless if someone at Radio 2 was on the ball or not...

    Simple as... ;)

    BTW, Bid TV is too good for Ross... Stick him on Big L... :rolleyes::D
  • Options
    PhilHPhilH Posts: 2,791
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lbc417 wrote: »
    So, if Brand, and particularly Ross, are 'experienced enough to know what you should and shouldn't do on the radio', then they should have never conducted themselves in such away to start with then, regardless if someone at Radio 2 was on the ball or not...

    Simple as... ;)

    Exactly my point. There were two points of failure. Two errors of judgement. The thing was recorded, then it was broadcast -- two separate things.

    Ross and Brand should never have left abusive messages on Andrew Sachs' voicemail, but they weren't the ones who actually put it to air. Presumably, that decision fell under the jurisdiction of Mr Barber.
  • Options
    BluenileBluenile Posts: 11,712
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    PhilH wrote: »
    Ross and Brand should never have left abusive messages on Andrew Sachs' voicemail, but they weren't the ones who actually put it to air. Presumably, that decision fell under the jurisdiction of Mr Barber.

    I think it's the abusive messages left by the hugely wealthy Ross and Brand that most people object to. Not the fact that they were aired.

    Ross should go, so should those who gave such ridiculous contracts to these people.
  • Options
    JG1970JG1970 Posts: 1,544
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Helbrown wrote: »
    Has the obviously totally inept producer escaped though? :confused:

    The producer works for Vanity Productions which is Russell Brand's company so he wasn't employed by the BBC
  • Options
    Francis HFrancis H Posts: 469
    Forum Member
    andy.cox wrote: »
    Charming!
    One of your previous and widely criticized threads was "Who will never work again". At last a credible answer. Ross may well turn up sometime in the future, but I hope to God it's not on BBC radio or television.
  • Options
    GeorgeSGeorgeS Posts: 20,039
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    RikScot wrote: »
    How do you know?

    Paul Gambacinni's comments would seem to indicate so.
  • Options
    SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Francis H wrote: »
    One of your previous and widely criticized threads was "Who will never work again". At last a credible answer. Ross may well turn up sometime in the future, but I hope to God it's not on BBC radio or television.

    It will be. He will be back in 3 months.

    Personally, i'm not mourning his temporary loss from our airwaves. I don't have a tv so I haven't seen his chat show but it doesn't really seem to be my cup of tea to be honest. I got bored of his radio show years ago & have tended to avoid Radio 2 on Saturday mornings for the last few years. For me it's something of a relief to be able to tune into R2 on a Saturday again!

    I've never understood the attraction of Russell Brand either. I would really love Bob Harris to be brought back to a more sociable timeslot on a Saturday evening now that Russell has, thankfully, departed.

    I think it will be extremely interesting to see how the BBC handle Ross from now on, and indeed how Ross handles himself. It certainly seems to have been a spectacular fall from grace. A few weeks ago he was probably considered one of UK broadcasting's hottest properties but now i'm not sure that many broadcasters would touch him with a bargepole. However, as i've expressed in a previous post, the BBC are probably 'committed' to him for now by virtue of their mutual contract which would be too expensive and difficult for the BBC to disentangle itself from. It will be quite interesting to see what happens when the contract expires in 18 months time. Between now & then I think we are going to see Jonathan Ross working rather hard to re-ingratiate himself with BBC management and, perhaps more importantly, the British public.

    Despite the 'national outrage' that cheered us all up a bit from the seemingly relentless gloomy news stories about the economy & George Osborne, I would suspect that most people in the country are not especially worried about Jonathan Ross' behaviour. He was/is a popular broadcaster and is undoubtedly a talented communicator. He will probably be able to rescue his career from this low point. It will take a bit of work though. Unlike Russell Brand whose career will have received an major boost from this incident I would say. It's exactly the kind of thing that appeals to his fans sadly.

    Anyway, i'm glad that it isn't dominating the news stories anymore as the usual hyperbole of the British media did get a little tedious for me in the end! I am glad however that it has stimulated a sensible debate, within the BBC and beyond, about the nature of public service broadcasting in this country.

    Richard Allinson on Radio 2 this morning...
Sign In or Register to comment.