ANDREW SACHS - ABUSIVE MESSAGES

« A REALLY GOOD COFFEE & HOME-MADE SCONE | DO YOU REALLY MEAN THAT! »

ANDREW SACHS - ABUSIVE MESSAGES

by menhir @ 27 Oct. 2008 – 21:09:47

I am appalled at the abuse left on Andrew Sachs telephone answering machine by so called media models. I honestly do not think an unreserved apology from the BBC is enough, and certainly apologies, so far not readily given, by the miscreants, are definitely not an exemplary outcome for grossly offensive behaviour which, to add insult to injury, was widely broadcast to the public.

The messages, presumably also, the programme, were pre-recorded; why was this dreadful offensive exhibitionism allowed to go out over the airwaves? I think this issue is very serious and should be considered by the criminal justice system.
Options:
Tags:
- messages
- media misuse of broadcasting offensive

29 Comments to ANDREW SACHS - ABUSIVE MESSAGES

Hide subcomments

- Zappy5971
- 27 Oct. 2008 @ 21:32:10
I agree. But it seems in this society that good television obviously precludes good manners. They should be ashamed.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 27 Oct. 2008 @ 22:00:35
  This was televised as well! Lord help us...
  
  Grossly offensive behaviour, is just that, grossly offensive behaviour. Those guys should be placed on the sex offenders' register. They obviously got some salacious kick from what they did.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- isadora101
- 27 Oct. 2008 @ 21:58:27
A juvenile prank for a juvenile audience...they keep pushing the boundaries of good taste!
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 27 Oct. 2008 @ 22:03:35
  They offend youth, they offend the majority of all age groups. In my view Isadora, this disgusting behaviour transcends 'juvenile pranks'. It needs jumping on heavily, a firm stop put to it in a publicly exemplary manner, and fast.
  - - isadora101
    - 27 Oct. 2008 @ 22:33:29
    Oh dear it was obviously worse than I imagined from only reading the newspaper write-ups about the incident.
    
    We need another Mary Whitehouse..although even she couldn't stop the decline of standards
    - - menhir
      - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
      - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 10:52:31
      Agreed, though Mary Whitehouse on her own, could not have stopped this. There are too many levels of clear-out required in BBC top editorial management, who are, in this case, accessories to this abuse. What kind of minds have they got? What some people think of as acceptable is unbelievable.
      
      Then, there are the two so-called comedians, who are out of control, whose own thinking is distorted and generally disgusting. We don't need this or want it. If such messages had been left for me, I would have involved the law. It was lewd and offensive stuff.
      
      Poor Andrew Sachs; I really sympathise with him.
      - Reply to comment
      - Permalink
- kevinwilson ^Pro
- 27 Oct. 2008 @ 22:03:32
it's a disgrace.
the bbc should be ashamed and jonathan ross should be shot.
as soon as possible.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 27 Oct. 2008 @ 22:07:05
  I agree, not forgetting the 'et al'. There were two of these disgraceful exhibitionists, Russell Brand being the other one. And the BBC plumbing new lows of the lowest of depths. What a public example!!
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- deleted user (Visitor)
- 27 Oct. 2008 @ 22:25:25
I haven't heard it, I don't do radio 2. I do know that Jonathan Ross is an overpaid, spoilt brat. I'm surprised at him devoting so much air time to someone else, as he's usually far too busy talking about Himself.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 10:59:32
  It was exposed on TV as well. I don't do JR or Russell Brand. These guys and the BBC editorial management need kicking out of the public arena.
  
  It needs to be said loud and clear, such behaviour and offensive 'antics' are not acceptable.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- Munzly
- http://poppycock.blog.co.uk/
- 27 Oct. 2008 @ 23:29:25
I could only express my true opinion of Ross and Brand by lowering myself to their level.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 11:01:36
  ...and that you won't do Munzly. We do have a sense of morality and decency which those people and BBC editorial management obviously do not.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- EllieGant
- 27 Oct. 2008 @ 23:39:53
I cannot understand why those two are paid so much money to be so crass.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 11:06:17
  That Ellie, is why they have been pushing the boundaries, that is why they are out of control. They have been allowed to get away with their malpractice because other people in the BBC and media have let it be and paid these guys to perform.
  
  This is exposing the disgusting and lewd thoughts and behaviour which they and others have deemed okay. Well guys, have I got news for you... it is not okay!
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- loiswakeman
- http://lois.co.uk
- 28 Oct. 2008 @ 08:55:26
I was thinking of blogging about this myself - I share your sentiments entirely.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 11:12:53
  It is comforting to hear the support for the victim. My heart goes out to Andrew Sachs. What an awful affair.
  
  I sincerely hope the public will see an appropriate and exemplary outcome to this affair. It is this, I doubt.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- deleted user (Visitor)
- 28 Oct. 2008 @ 12:47:21
Today I received in the post some raffle tickets for a prize draw in aid of Children with Leukaemia. How unfortunate then that the front of the raffle ticket book features Jonathan Ross's face and his name with a covering letter apparently from the man himself requesting support. The timing of his misdemeanor or the timing of their mailshot, whichever way you look at it couldn't have been worse.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 16:46:10
  You're spot on there. I wonder why the organisation thought JR's face would help to increase their charity monies for them. Surely they could have approached someone squeaky clean or at least someone who presented the decent side of society. The charity has been very misguided.
  - - deleted user (Visitor)
    - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 19:30:37
    I suppose they think it gives them more credibility, although in this case I would imagine they're regretting it now.
    - - menhir
      - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
      - 28 Oct. 2008 @ 22:33:47
      It is interesting that there seems to have been, low level support,(nevertheless support)from some radio 1 listeners.
      Wit nowadays must have run its course of real cleverness when you hear of so called-comedians working audiences at this banal and disgraceful level. If lewd and libidinous, offensive and bullying tactics, are not to become standard comic material, we have to voice our feelings and concerns.
      
      I should think the charity are regretting their frontman image.
      - Reply to comment
      - Permalink
- kitschslap
- http://kitschslap.bigcartel.com
- 28 Oct. 2008 @ 23:27:05
I agree menhir. It's the length of time the behaviour went on for that shocks me. Is there no gauge in their brain as to when something is going from cheeky to completely unforgiveable? They have plenty of time in which to reel in their behaviour but obviously didn't see a need to. Disgraceful. I have to confess to ususally liking Jonathan Ross even though he sucks up to his guests and always feels the need to comment on their appearance, but after this I certainly cannot respect him. I liked Brand for a while whenever he wasn't being completely lewd but now I just think he gets away with offensive material by hiding it behind interesting language.
I feel awful for Andrew Sachs who seems to be a very nice person, though I would feel badly for him even if he wasn't so nice. How humiliating for him and his granddaughter to have to face these embarrassing comments.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 29 Oct. 2008 @ 10:17:09
  Well said Kitschslap; I couldn't agree more. Both men stepped over line. I am amazed, even concerned, when I hear controllers from other BBC radio stations counselling minimisation of the offensiveness of the behaviour. You wonder if they have indulged in vicarious pleasure, not quite daring to cross the Rubicon of decency in case of personal repercussions. I question what lies behind these pathetic pronouncements. I have also heard what is tantamount to rationalisations for this disgraceful exhibitionism.
  
  It took some time for sympathy and empathy to emerge for the recipients of this offence. The victim issue must be addressed. To date, I understand that Russell Brand is keeping quiet and J.Ross has made an apology.
  
  There are laws that deal with such gross behaviour and I do believe they should be used. Having villified and insulted Andrew Sachs, the reverse public villification of the men and the BBC editorial department that allowed the behaviour to be publicly aired, in my opinion, is good. It is certainly a type of restorative justice process which has not yet reached a satisfactory conclusion.
  
  (I'm having problems with I.D. number 3 here! I will get used to it MB... )
  - - kitschslap
    - http://kitschslap.bigcartel.com
    - 29 Oct. 2008 @ 11:00:22
    I'm relieved there was such a strong outcry - sometimes I wonder do people notice how awful the things people say actually are anymore.
    
    As for ID number three - why don't you just call me MB Menhir? It is after all how you know me best!
    - - menhir
      - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
      - 29 Oct. 2008 @ 20:55:18
      I hear Russell Brand has resigned before he was unceremoniously dumped. He has admitted he was on an uncontrolled roll. J.Ross is suspended, but has apologised. The BBC have now got to look closely at their own structures and people employed in it.
      
      One senior being has stated that radios one and two should not be trying to [collude]with particular young audiences. I think there are other seriously emotionally immature and inappropriate groups who should not be pandered to, either. The Prime Minister has also declared the affair to be unacceptable. Official complaints have risen dramatically as you know.
      
      As I said, we are not there yet.
      - kitschslap
        
        http://kitschslap.bigcartel.com
        
        30 Oct. 2008 @ 03:30:25
        
        Some people think there's been too much of a fuss but personally I think it's important that they have been made an example of. I'm by no means a prude in regards to humour and language but it's the lack of respect that is spiralling out of control lately. And the strong element of misogyny that taints so much of it.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        menhir
        
        http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
        
        30 Oct. 2008 @ 11:41:45
        
        Agreed. There's also the breaching of boundaries of decency as defined in our society today. That is why there are legal controls. They are there to protect, they are not used as well as they might be.
        
        There is a lot of angst about the lack of role models and the lack of respect. Society has to got to make a stand. Get a grip of this base and gross type of behaviour. We should not be playing to the lowest common denominator. The BBC has a case to answer, too. The show was pre-recorded.
        
        I am glad that the ability of these two men to digracefully perform with ease and disdain has been exposed. They believed that they could do as they pleased, ad infinitum. However, the BBC could have dealt with this in-house, if their editorial staff had any morals and sense of decency, thus preventing people from being sorely hurt. The act of leaving indecent messages was unacceptable, to pass it for broadcasting was unbelievable. The BBC could have jumped on it. Their own rules and working practices have got to be tightened up and adhered to. The whole organisation is racked with arrogance and a belief that they hold the balance of power and therefore, they are above the law. In essence, they make their own rules and think they can get away with it. The really yell when they think the BBC is 'unfairly' treated.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        kitschslap
        
        http://kitschslap.bigcartel.com
        
        30 Oct. 2008 @ 14:29:24
        
        Agree on every point.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
- timsuzi ^Pro
- 29 Oct. 2008 @ 08:42:24
Well Menhir, I just wanted to join you in condemning this awful action. It shocks me to think that Brand and Ross considered their humour to be 'dangerous' and pushing back the boundaries when it is simply cruel and bullying. I guess people on the liberal left side of politics have tended not to criticise such comics because it makes them appear as if they are following in the footsteps of Mrs Whitehouse but surely now most people are appalled at such wanton and vindictive behaviour and do not want it broadcast as entertainment.
- - menhir
  - http://www.myword.blog.co.uk
  - 30 Oct. 2008 @ 22:37:38
  I do hope you are right Tim. It has been an appalling state of affairs. I shake my head when I hear terms like 'risqué broadcasting', 'edgy humour'. Who are they kidding with this terminology. It is reductionism of the worst kind. It lacks all responsibility and respect.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink