Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross

Church leaders have criticised the BBC for paying millions on Jonathan Ross while failing to invest in the 'equally popular' Songs of Praise .

In a joint submission to Ofcom, the broadcasting watchdog, bishops from the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church call the corporation inconsistent for spending far more on the controversial chatshow host than the religious programme, even though they have similar viewing figures.

The Rt Rev Nick Baines, the Bishop of Croydon, and the Rt Rev John Arnold, the Auxiliary Bishop of Westminster, made their comments to Ofcom as part of its review of public service broadcasting.

The bishops say: This is not an obscure or technical issue, but one which affects us all. The survival and flourishing of public service content is not just an economic or political question; it has implications for the kind of society we want to be.

They say that although broadcasters claim public service programmes are unprofitable, the BBC spends far less on programmes dealing with religious and ethical issues than on entertainment shows that attract the same size of audience.

The bishops say: There still remains both confusion and inconsistency about how religious output is viewed and its value to audiences, mostly around the definition of religion on TV.

It is clear that one programme gaining an audience of around four million weekly is regarded as a wild success meriting an £18 million star (Friday Night with Jonathan Ross) while another with a similar audience is regarded as part of an unprofitable genre ( Songs of Praise ). This seems to be a striking lack of consistency.

Forgive them their trespasses... Unless they trespass against YOU

Jonathan Ross will return to BBC work as the Baftas host after the end of his suspension.

And in a cheeky move that nutters say shows a total lack of humility, Ross has asked for fans to email him 'improbable words' he can slip into his speech.

He wrote on his blog: Here is a game you'll like. Suggest an improbable word that I have to slip into the Baftas when I host them in February. Ready, set, go.

The prestigious role, and Ross's comments on his blog, attracted predictable nutter 'outrage'.

Conservative MP Philip Davies said: The BBC should have fired him. Ross clearly does not realise how angry people were - and still are. He should come back and show that he has taken that - and his suspension - on board, but the evidence from his blog is that he hasn't learnt anything.

John Beyer of Mediawatch UK, said the BBC should be more circumspect. He added: BBC1 controller Jay Hunt has said that Ross needs to regain viewers' trust. He needs to prove himself and I don't think being handed this highprofile, prestigious role just two weeks after the end of the suspension is the right decision.

Ross's Friday night chat show will return on January 23. The Bafta ceremony at the Royal Opera House in London will be broadcast on February 8 on BBC1, BBC2 and BBC3.

Jonathan Ross was heavily censored when his chat show was aired on Friday night.

Despite swearing several times and making a series of crude remarks during the pre-recording of Friday Night with Jonathan Ross on Thursday morning, Friday's broadcast of his chat show was radically toned down, with all of Ross's bad language and sexually suggestive remarks cut from the final version of the programme.

Ross twice directed 'fuck' at Tom Cruise, one of the guests on the show, during the pre-record.

He also swore at the comedian Lee Evans, another guest of the show, who used the word 'shit' shortly after he came on. In response, Ross said: Don't come on here with your 'fucking' foul mouth. This is a brave new world.

All of Ross's swear words were cut from the programme when it was aired on Friday night.

During the pre-record, Ross also asked Cruise to feel his right biceps, before claiming that his right bicep is better toned thanks to what he does with that hand. This was also cut from the final version of the show.

Ross also made several joking references to Russell Brand, all of which were cut from Friday's broadcast.

John Beyer, the director of the pressure group Media-Watch UK, said: The BBC would have been very foolish to continue giving a completely free rein to Jonathan Ross. Let's hope this brings a more sensible approach to this sort of programme and that viewers' trust in broadcasting is restored.

Ross returns to radio with some old jokes

Based on article from dailymail.co.uk

The Daily Mail  enjoyed the return of Jonathan Ross to Radio 2 and his remarks about sleeping with an 80-year-old woman.

Ten minutes after the live show began, Ross and his co-presenter Andy Davies talked about how they had spent the past three months, when Ross was suspended from the BBC.

Davies said that he had been doing some DIY at his house in Spain, and referred to an ‘older woman’ who lives nearby who keeps trying to kiss me...she must be about 80, I reckon.

Ross replied: Oh God. I think you should, just for charity. Give her one last night, will you? One last night before the grave. Would it kill you?

A BBC spokesman said it had received 18 complaints about the show.

The family of an 86-year-old Alzheimer's sufferer condemned Jonathan Ross after he cracked a joke about having sex with her.

The broadcaster marked his return to his BBC Radio 2 show with the gag which was immediately pounced on by those gunning for him to be sacked.

Elderly Francisca Guzman's son expressed deep hurt that his frail mother, who has had dementia for three years, was the butt of Ross's joke.

Jose Maria Moreno said: It is offensive. My mother's mental health should not be a subject for comedy and Ross should be sacked. What he said is unforgivable and offensive. I don't understand how he can continue working for an organisation like the BBC.

Ross and his producer Andy Davies were discussing how they had spent their time during the suspension. Davies said he had done some bricklaying in the garden of his villa in Spain but kept getting grabbed by a frisky 80-year-old woman.

Ross declared: Eighty, oh God! I think you should, just for charity. Give her one last night, will you? One last night before the grave. Would it kill you?

Although Mrs Guzman was not named, she is well known in the Andalusian village of Conchar, near Granada, where Davies has his villa.
Jonathan Ross

Last night there were new calls for Ross to be sacked. Tory MP David Davies said: There is a place for humour but it has to be appropriate to the time of the day. And that clearly wasn't.

Mediawatch director John Beyer said: Jokes like this are not on. He should have gone months ago.

Ross told the News of the World yesterday: Absolutely no offence to any individual was intended. It was a spontaneous, light-hearted remark made in response to an anecdote set in Spain, where no one was named or ever likely to hear the broadcast. As far as I was concerned, the story may even have been apocryphal or exaggerated for comedic purposes.

The BBC said it had received 25 complaints.

Free speech controversies involving Prince Harry, Carol Thatcher and Jeremy Clarkson show the new thought police are in danger of running riot.

Ever since ‘Sachsgate' – the BBC controversy involving Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand – it has been a constant story of another day, another ‘scandal' about some celebrity or other being banned, investigated, suspended or censured for saying something offensive or outrageous. It is not only the frequency of these media controversies that stands out lately. Something new is happening in the free speech wars. It has become a war on words.

...Read the full article

What’s the point of having a media watchdog, if the people who fall foul of it just make fun of it?

The Daily Mail have had a bit of fun in a rant about Jonathan Ross being a little flippant over a statement about the Ofcom fine:

Jonathan Ross remained unrepentant over the Andrew Sachs scandal and made a string of sarcastic remarks and jokes on his Radio 2 show after a damning watchdog ruling into his conduct was read out.

Instead of taking the opportunity to apologise after the Ofcom ruling was detailed before his Saturday morning slot, he made a series of gags and the played Fun Boy Three’s The Lunatics Have Taken over the Asylum.

The ruling was over obscene messages that Ross and Russell Brand left on the 78 year-old actor’s answermachine about his granddaughter Georgina Baillie.

It described the messages as offensive, humiliating and demeaning. The statement continued: The material that was broadcast was exceptionally offensive, humiliating and demeaning.

After the announcement had finished, Ross said: You can never find a pen when you need one, can you? You didn’t get that email address down, did you? I want to get the full thing sent over because I can’t read enough about it.

He then played The Lunatics Have Taken Over The Asylum and made loaded comments with sidekick Andy Davies that suggested the lyrics were a fitting response.

After the song ended, Ross commented: You know, I’ve never really listened to the lyrics of that before. Davies laughed in the background and added: That was a lucky accident.

Conservative MP, Philip Davies, who sits on the media select committee, said: These comments show Jonathan Ross still does not think he has done anything wrong. He just didn’t seem to understand how angry the general public are about what he did.

A senior BBC insider told the Daily Mail: There are plenty of people at the BBC that would just like to see him go when his contract runs out. Ross just behaves like he has no respect for the people that have put their neck on the line, or lost their jobs, so he can keep his.

Mediawatch director John Beyer said: The BBC should be reviewing his contract. What’s the point of having an official regulator, if the people who fall foul of it just make fun of it?

Once again the corporation opted to defend his behaviour.

A BBC spokeswoman said: We are satisfied Jonathan’s light-hearted comments did not detract from the seriousness of the statement.

Satanic Sluts III: Scandalized is a 2009 UK adult video by Nigel Wingrove (Redemption Films)

Notable for starring Georgina Baillie aka as Voluptua, the grandaughter who Russell Brand claimed on air to have 'fucked' in a phone message to Andrew Sachs.

The BBFC cut the DVD by 9:25s when submitted in 2009: Distributor chose to remove images of explicit and unsimulated sexual activity in order to achieve an '18' category (in this instance, explicit detail of cunnilingus, dildo penetration and digital penetration). An 'R18' uncut was available.

Not really sure what version has been issued in the US but it is nominally unrated. This unrated US region 0 DVD is available at US Amazon

A number of listeners complained to Ofcom about the Jonathan Ross show on Radio 2, claiming the comments on his programme on Saturday were homophobic.

Ross was involved in a light-hearted discussion about prizes in a competition themed around the fictional teen pop star when he joked: If your son asks for a Hannah Montana MP3 player, you might want to already think about putting him down for adoption before he brings his...erm...partner home.

A spokeswoman for Ofcom was unable to say how many people had complained but said: We have had complaints. We are assessing those complaints against the broadcasting code.

A BBC spokeswoman said: The BBC has received four complaints about Jonathan’s comments on Saturday’s show. However, these off-the-cuff remarks were made purely in jest and were not intended to be offensive. Jonathan is not homophobic in any sense and never meant for his comments to be taken seriously.’

Jonathan Ross's Saturday morning show on BBC Radio 2 is to be pre-recorded 24 hours in advance, the BBC has revealed.

Recording the show ahead of broadcast, enables us to ensure the programme is watertight , said a spokeswoman.

Ross, she continued, was absolutely on board with the decision, as it meant he gets his weekends back.

Ross resumed his Radio 2 show in January after suspension, but some of his more recent remarks have come under scrutiny.

The newspapers pounced on a remark he made in his comeback show about an elderly Spanish neighbour of co-presenter Andy Davies.

More recently, he was criticised for implying that boys who are fans of US pop star Hannah Montana are gay and should be put up for adoption.

The BBC Trust ordered a review of acceptable standards following the row over obscene phone messages left for the actor Andrew Sachs by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand.

The report - written by BBC creative director Alan Yentob and director of archive content Roly Keating - calls for clear guidelines on intrusion, intimidation and humiliation to to ensure that everyone involved in programme making understands that such behaviours are unacceptable.

Of 2,206 adults aged over 16 were questioned for an Ipsos Mori survey.

The main findings were:

1. Where audiences are concerned about the area of taste and morality on television as a whole, this is often connected with broader concerns about falling standards in terms of quality and the over-reliance on reality formats.
2. Standards of morality, values and behaviour in the media in particular are not a top-of-mind issue for the majority of the public.
3. The BBC overall performs well in the audience's perceptions of standards of morality, values and behaviour, compared to other channels and broadcasters. The audience also has higher expectations of the BBC.
4. In general terms, the public do not want increased censorship or regulation. The majority value the creativity of the BBC and accept that it may sometimes lead to offending some people.
5. When prompted, a significant proportion of the audience have various concerns about standards of morality, values and behaviour in the media as a whole, including newspapers, magazines, broadcasting and online content.
6. Strong language is an area of concern for some audiences; they recognise when language is used for clear purpose or effect within a programme - including comedy and entertainment - but dislike 'unnecessary' or excessive use.
7. In certain genres, the offensive potential of strong language can be compounded when it is combined with apparently aggressive or bullying behaviour. This reflects broader public concerns about aggression and bullying within society as a whole.
8. There is little public consensus or agreement about what constitutes offence: it means very different things to different sections of the audience.
9. The context in which potentially offensive content is placed is of paramount importance to audiences, as are judgements of quality. Both can make the difference between whether something is acceptable to audiences or not.
10. Tone and intent can also make strong material acceptable: the 'twinkle in the eye' of a performer and their skill in delivery can make the decisive difference, even with potentially offensive material.
11. Age and socio-economic group go some way to describing who in the audience is more likely to have concerns, but they do not tell the full story.
12. Younger audiences (11-15 year-olds) are uniquely self-selecting in their choice of media content, through the web and magazines as well as broadcast material. Though strongly drawn to more sexual content, some express unease about the sexualised nature of the media world in which they live and the pressure to 'grow up fast.'
13. Sexual content on television and radio was a matter of relatively low concern for audiences. There was an expectation that the television watershed should be respected, and content on radio appropriately scheduled. There is no appetite for a watershed in radio.
14. Some respondents commented that the transfer of some successful series from BBC Two may bring a somewhat ‘edgier' tone to BBC One.
15. Respondents expressed few concerns about standards on BBC Radio. However, of all the BBC's services, Radio 1 has the most divided response in terms of morality, values and behaviour.
16. Audiences are conscious of the challenges presented by the growth of online and on-demand content, but there is little awareness of the BBC's 'G for Guidance' systems, or understanding that iPlayer has a parent password protection scheme which prevents children accessing adult content.

Conclusions

1. Audiences accept potentially offensive content but believe it should be there for a purpose. They have a sophisticated sense of different programme genres, from serious documentary to reality and entertainment. Producers should ensure that any potentially offensive material has a clear editorial purpose and ask themselves is it necessary? Does it enhance the quality of the experience for audiences?
2. Viewers understand and value the television watershed. The BBC must respect and maintain its significance as a crucial contribution to audience confidence in television standards. There is no audience demand for a radio watershed.
3. Of all BBC services, BBC One is the most sensitive, because of its ability to unite generations and families in shared viewing. The bar for the strongest language between 9pm and 10pm must therefore remain significantly higher than on other BBC television channels.
4. On all channels, producers, presenters, commissioners and controllers have a shared responsibility to ensure that the force and value of the strongest words is not weakened by over-use. The mandatory referral of the most offensive language to Channel Controllers reflects this and must be maintained.
5. Mischievous banter, practical jokes and formats, which include elements of confrontation and criticism, can all be legitimate, indeed the public tell us that they can add greatly to their enjoyment; but programme makers, on-air artists and presenters must ensure that they never tip over into malice, humiliation or harm.
6. Audiences admire performers who take risks but have the expertise to know when to draw a line. To support such talent, producers and controllers must always be candid and open with them about judgements of tone and content, and be prepared where appropriate to take and enforce tough decisions.
7. Risk-taking is as vital a part of the BBC's mission in comedy, drama and entertainment as it is in other genres. As with all programme making, the greater the risk, the greater the thought, care and pre-planning needed to bring something groundbreaking to air.

Recommendations

1. New series on television and radio For new series where questions of taste and standards are likely to arise, there must be a discussion with the commissioning executive early in the production cycle to agree appropriate parameters of tone and content, to ensure that all involved, including presenters and performers, have given thought to questions of channel, context and slot. Even when a returning series has established expectations of strong language and content, there should be a similar discussion before the start of each run.
2. Greater care over cross-channel transfers When a TV series moves to a more mainstream channel - especially to BBC One - producers and controllers should be sensitive to its new context, and give careful consideration to adaptations of tone or format if necessary.
3. Clearer policy on bleeping of strong language A clearer policy should be set for the use of bleeping in TV and radio programmes. In general, where strong language is integral to the meaning or content of a programme, and other questions of slot, context channel etc have been resolved, it should not be disguised. But when in other circumstances a sequence that is editorially necessary happens to contain the strongest language, it may be right to bleep or disguise the words, even after the watershed.
4. New guidance on malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation BBC programmes must never condone malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation. While they are all aspects of human behaviour which may need to be depicted, described or discussed across the BBC's factual and non-factual output, they must never be celebrated for the purposes of entertainment. New guidance is needed to ensure that everyone involved in programme making for the BBC understands that malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation are unacceptable.
5. Clearer audience information and warnings The BBC should always recognise that some sections of its audiences are more readily offended than others. We owe the public the information they need to make informed choices about viewing and listening and to avoid material they may regard as unsuitable for themselves or their families. Each channel must make even greater efforts to ensure that appropriate content information (eg. billings and presentation announcements) is provided which enables informed judgements to be made by all audiences, both pre- and post-watershed, about programme content.
6. Music radio Music radio thrives on strong personalities, and young audiences value BBC Radio 1 highly; but editorial teams must be reminded that particular care needs to be taken at times of day, such as school runs, when different generations may be listening together.
7. Major awareness campaign about online guidance The BBC has pioneered content guidance and child protection mechanisms provided by the iPlayer. Audiences are concerned about the internet as a space of unregulated content and are insufficiently aware of the protection available for BBC content. A major campaign of public information is needed as soon as possible to raise awareness of the content guidance and offer reassurance to audiences. The BBC should also work to ensure that the next generation of Freeview and FreeSat PVRs have PIN protection functionality.
8. More regular audience research In-depth audience research, along the lines of the findings in this paper, should be conducted more often to ensure that the BBC maintains a full and detailed understanding of audience attitudes to taste and standards. To keep up with changes in audience taste, research should be commissioned every two to three years. Careful attention should be given to key tracking questions that will enable the BBC to identify changes in audience and societal attitudes.
9. Revision of Editorial Guidelines and Guidance The BBC's Editorial Policy department should use the research, general principles and recommendations in this report to inform the current general revision of the BBC's Editorial Guidelines and, in particular, to clarify audience expectations of tone and context. In addition, new Guidance will be required to keep programme and content makers up-todate with audience expectations of BBC content.
10. Increased commitment to training The research findings offer new opportunities to illuminate the understanding of taste and standards for programme makers across the BBC. The findings should be briefed to leadership groups in all content divisions by the Director and Chief Adviser, Editorial Policy. The Colleges of Production and Journalism should develop new training material that explores audience attitudes specific to each of the key genres, which will be rolled out to programme makers both in-house and independent. The audience research and the conclusions of this report should also be made available through normal Editorial Policy channels to all programme makers. The findings of this study and the materials used in it should inform online courses, which will be used to maintain editorial policy standards.

Jonathan Ross
BBC Radio 2, 9 May 2009, 10:00

During a live and unscripted part of his Saturday morning radio show, Jonathan Ross discussed the prizes for the week's competition with his producer, Andy Davies. The prizes were primarily made up of Hannah Montana merchandise, which included a Hannah Montana MP3 player. As part of this discussion, Jonathan Ross said:

If your son asks for a Hannah Montana MP3 player, then you might want to already think about putting him down for adoption in later life, when they settle down with their partner.

Ofcom received 61 complaints from listeners who were concerned that Jonathan Ross' comments were offensive and derogatory towards the gay community.

Ofcom considered these complaints under Rule 2.3 (material that may cause offence must be justified by the context).

Ofcom Decision: Not in Breach

Jonathan Ross' BBC Radio 2 show has been broadcast since 1999. It has an established format that is largely made up of quirky, humorous stories and on-air chat with the show's producer, Andy Davies.

The comment complained of was made during a live and unscripted element of the programme as part of a light-hearted discussion between Jonathan Ross and Andy Davies. In Ofcom's opinion, the comment was clearly presented as a joke intended to make light of the reactions that some parents may have if their child chooses a toy that is very widely recognised to be designed and marketed for the opposite sex. The humour was therefore based on the absurdity of the scenario and was not intended to cause offence. The fact that this comment was intended to be a joke was illustrated further by the reaction from Andy Davies, who was heard laughing. Ofcom therefore considered that the nature of the joke and the tone and manner in which it was presented made clear that it was not intended to be hostile or pejorative towards the gay community in general.

Ofcom took into account that Jonathan Ross is a well known personality, who has an irreverent, challenging and at times risqué humour that is familiar to audiences. Ofcom also recognised that the comment was clearly aimed at an adult audience. Importantly, if children did hear this comment it was unlikely that they would have understood it or its implications. In light of this, Ofcom considered that there was little potential for the comment to be imitated by children, for example in the playground.

Ofcom considered that the comment was in keeping with the usual light-hearted and humorous style and format of the programme. The nature of the joke would have been well understood by the vast majority of listeners and would not have exceeded their normal expectations for the programme.

Taking all these factors into account, Ofcom considered that on balance the material was justified by the context and met generally accepted standards. The programme was therefore not in breach of Rule 2.3 of the Code.

Fear of causing offence has left TV in danger of becoming too bland, Channel 4's programme chief has said.

Julian Bellamy told the Royal Television Society that recent scandals were preventing broadcasters from taking creative risks.

He said the BBC appeared to avoid controversial ideas like the plague in the wake of last year's Radio 2 prank calls row: After a string of scandals about taste and decency, it seems to avoid disruptive, potentially controversial ideas like the plague. Time and again, producers tell me this and I believe it.

Bellamy said the industry's compliance spiral threatened to bland out the medium to no-one's benefit . But he said Channel 4 would continue to take creative risks even when public sentiment risks being offended . He described it as the sole guardian of nonconformism and provocation on Britain's most powerful cultural medium . I genuinely believe if Channel 4 retreats into conservatism we will cease to be a meaningful cultural force .

Richard Herring has complained about the increasing regulations on radio shows since Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand's controversial phonecall to Andrew Sachs.

The comedian told Metro that greater censorship was the reason for his new series of online gigs, which are written on Sunday, performed on Monday and released as a podcast on Tuesday.

He said: Radio shows can take two years to get on air and there are so many restrictions about content now. Most people don't need nannying in that way.

It's got worse since the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand thing but even on my last show, there were battles. I wasn't allowed to use Schopenhauer's quote about history being a whore with syphilis as it was deemed offensive.

Comic Russell Brand said he would never tone down his comedy routine and was not afraid of censure. As hundreds of fans flocked to a DVD signing session in London yesterday, Brand leapt to the defence of fellow stand-ups Jimmy Carr and Frankie Boyle, who were criticised recently for offensive routines.

Frankie Boyle is brilliant and Jimmy Carr is brilliant, he said. They're not trying to be offensive, no-one is actually offended, the people saying they're offended aren't actually offended, the whole thing is constructed.

He added: If you hear it (the joke] delivered cold, like vomit into the nape of your neck, it might be offensive, but mucking around I don't think is offensive.

Last year, Brand resigned from his job at BBC Radio 2 after a scandal surrounding a series of lewd messages he left on actor Andrew Sachs' answer phone. But he insists Manuel-gate , as Brand prefers to call it, was just rhubarb and guff and he would do the same again.

I would've done nothing differently. I apologise for the thing I did wrong to the person I did it to, but the whole subsequent scandal was funny. It's just rhubarb and guff.

And he vowed never to tone down his own material for fear of further censure: I will not lose my edge.

Classes on goodies and baddies, endless rows about jokes in poor taste . . . is an increasingly cautious BBC suffocating new comedy and drama?

On Saturday, it will be one year since the BBC Trust ruled on Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand's dirty phone calls to Andrew Sachs. These represented deplorable intrusion with no editorial justification , the Trust concluded, but no further action was necessary beyond the three-month suspension that Ross was then beginning to serve.

At the time, a common view (certainly mine) was that, 12 months on, Ross might well have found a job elsewhere, but that the BBC's general panic over editorial guidelines might have calmed down. In fact, it has gone the other way. Ross remains in his post – a ghost of what he used to be, because of a strict system of precautionary recording and editing – while an increasing number of writers and performers are complaining about the effects of compliance : the system of BBC editorial defences introduced after Ross/Brand and an earlier run of scandals over faked or misleading content.

...Read the full article

Jokes aren't true - they're lies they're exaggerations, they're distortion, they're imbalance, they're having a go, they're bullying, they're insulting, says The Thick of It creator Armando Iannucci

Of course the intention is to cause offence.

The intention is to cause hilarity but, with hilarity, someone, somewhere along the line will be a bit a miffed.

Iannucci is one of a number of leading figures who fear the rules of comedy writing in Britain are changing.

...Read the full article

BBC staff say they have been forced to spend hours vetting preschool children's series and classical music concerts for sex, violence and inappropriate language under idiotic compliance rules introduced after the Jonathan Ross scandal.

taff have told The Sunday Telegraph that his legacy is a burdensome bureaucracy which stifles creativity while being unlikely to prevent further incidents.

Under the enhanced compliance procedures, which apply to most pre-recorded programmes, every second of material to be broadcast must be watched or listened to check for unacceptable content, and a seven-page form must be filled out.

Among the programmes subjected to the new procedures are parts of the BBC's Armistice Day coverage. All episodes of the Teletubbies must be vetted, despite the show being aimed at under-threes and containing few or no normal words. Also being vetted are many Radio 3 concerts of works written after 1900.

...Read full article

The Guardian have been sepaking to BBC's head of in-house comedy, Mark Freeland.

The BBC introduced stricter compliance procedures in the wake of the controversy over the lewd messages Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross left on Andrew Sachs's voicemail and faces accusations that it takes fewer creative risks. Meanwhile Channel 4, proud of its reputation as the home of edgy comedy, is awaiting Ofcom's verdict on a joke made by Frankie Boyle in Tramadol Nights about the disabled son of Katie Price.

Freeland rejects suggestions that the BBC has lost its nerve in comedy, citing Psychoville and Stewart Lee's Comedy Vehicle as examples of bold shows broadcast since the Sachs affair. Coming up tonight is Mrs Brown's Boys, a raucous, late evening BBC1 sitcom starring Brendan O'Carroll as the all-fecking, eponymous Dublin housewife. Freeland reckons British comedy is experiencing a golden age that compares favourably with US output in the genre.

People were saying comedy had gone into its shell. But it hasn't retreated from saying the unsayable, he argues. As long as your processes are right and you've made a judgment call that you can back up... I find the fact that I'm sitting on a very combustible slate very exciting.

Tramadol Nights, Freeland accepts, would probably not be made by the BBC. He also claims to welcome the BBC soul-searching in the wake of Sachsgate, largely because it reminded programme-makers of the limits and especially strictures on bullying.

There is a common decency which I hope people have adhered to in anything that comes out of here. But at the same time, if I thought we had lost our bottle then we are not doing our job as we ought to, he adds.

...Read the full article

The compliance culture at the BBC has become an unbelievable nightmare since Sachsgate, Chris Evans has said.

The Radio 2 presenter said the furore over the prank phone calls made to Andrew Sachs by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand had changed the broadcasting landscape, with programming weighed down by extra rules and regulations.

Evans said the changes were needed because comedy on radio and television had become too coarse. What has happened since [Sachsgate] is very, very good but also a complete pain in the backside, he said.

It means comedy has become much more sophisticated but the compliance culture that has come in since, you wouldn't believe it. The compliance department of the BBC is so extensive it's an unbelievable nightmare.

Sometimes you come up with an idea and the compliance you have to go through is so great that you just say, 'Let's not bother'.