31 Oct 08 This BBC Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand thing is making me cross

The BBC did not employ Ross or Brand because of their ability to stick within socially acceptable boundaries, in fact they employed them partially because of their inability to do so. The BBC gave these two airtime, knowing that it is likely to offend certain types of people, mainly the self appointed holier than thou – the modern day Mary Whitehouses.

That is the joke: the naughtiness; the irreverence; the unashamed offensive bluntness of it all. Brand has made the same claims before about Rod Stewart’s daughter – where was the furore then. Every week on BBC1 Ross insults, offends and effs and blinds his way through a TV show and the BBC condones that.

But it doesn’t matter, because the BBC protects us. The show is not live and there are mechanisms in place to cut it if it gets too close to the bone. The problem is not what was said, but that it was not cut by the BBC.

Besides, the claim they made was apparently true – no one is talking of libel here. You might as well have a news headline that reads “Russell Brand Has Consensual Sex with a Young Actress” – it’s not even newsworthy until he says it himself.

This is an exercise in blaming leopards for having spots. The BBC employed these people to do just what they have done. Modify, advise and slap their wrists if necessary, but this sort of extreme discipline for doing what they have been employed to do, simply because it inevitably offends people, is shameful.

The BBC has a rich heritage which has given us the genius of Hancock, Milligan, Python and others. Each in their time offended and shocked and each are considered, years later to be comedic genii. The BBC might just have trashed so much of what it has been great at delivering over the years.