Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Showing posts with label outrage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label outrage. Show all posts

Friday, October 19, 2012

Madonna upsets Denver

Going to Denver so soon after the mass shootings in neighbouring Aurora and having some on-stage violent gun-related fun probably isn't the smartest of Madonna's ideas.

Even so, 9News does have a slight air of entrappy desperation in its Facebook post:

Did you go to the Madonna show last night? We not only heard she came on stage really late, but we've also gotten calls that some of the show was pretty violent. One person sent us an email saying she simulated shooting a dancer and the audience. If you went, what did you think? We're you offended?
I'm sure there will be plenty enough people offended without the need to nudge the crowd and say 'you, you must have been offended, right?'

Seriously, though: mock shooting an audience in Denver. That's some crassness right there.

No winners, I think.


Tuesday, September 08, 2009

Gloria enraged? Mail overstates Hunniford's stance

Now it's official that Terry Wogan is off to enjoy a lie-in, and Chris Evans is going to take over, there seems to be some confusion. Especially amongst Daily Mail readers, there seems to be a misunderstanding; an expectation that TFI-era Evans is going to turn up to do the show, with testicle jokes, beer and Kula Shaker over by the piano. This is the howl of anguish from Radio 2 "loyal" listeners who haven't bothered to listen to the more mellow Evans programme on the network.

Still, it's good news for the Mail who haven't had anything to wrap up in a horseshoe and throw at the BBC for, ooh, hours. And it's not just their readers who are struggling to contain their rage, oh no:

Chris Evans tells Terry Wogan fans he'll deliver 'first rate family show' as Gloria Hunniford leads campaign against 'childish' successor

She is, is she? What's Hunniford doing, then? A petition? A march on Broadcasting House? Civil disobedience? How does she intend to be the Joanna Lumley of this campaign?
They include 'shocked' veteran broadcaster Gloria Hunniford, who said: 'I would have reservations. But that's only a personal opinion. He's a good broadcaster, but I personally don't think he's of the same calibre as Terry.'

So she has said "personally, I don't think he's quite good enough" - that hardly seems to be "leading a campaign", does it?


Sunday, January 25, 2009

Jonathan Ross says something; the Daily Mail is upset

A mild joke - tasteless, tactless, but mild - about having sex with a woman in her 80s has been enough for the Mail On Sunday to roll out the Hazmat team and call, once again, for Jonathan Ross' head on a stick:

Jonathan Ross risked the wrath of BBC executives on his return to Radio 2 yesterday by making crude remarks about sleeping with an 80-year-old woman.

It's not clear if the Mail is upset at the idea of Ross having sex with anyone, or if they're so gerontophobic they believe that the very idea that you might have sex with anyone over the average age of their readership is, in itself, wrong. Or, perhaps, the Mail isn't really upset at all, but has to continue with its pathetic campaign.

Because was anyone upset?

No:
The BBC did not receive any complaints over the incident on Saturday.


The Mail had to shake its bag of perpetually outraged contributors. Who can you find, Mail? How about one of Mary Whitehouse's mob?
John Beyer, director of pressure group Mediawatch UK, said: ‘It’s ultimately for BBC director-general Mark Thompson to say whether this sort of innuendo and suggestion is what he had in mind when he gave Jonathan Ross his last chance back in October. The BBC has to establish boundaries of acceptability.’

Well, yes, to be honest, it probably is what Mark Thompson had in mind - Ross making the sort of joke his audience will find amusing, since you ask.

Have you got anyone else, Mail?
Conservative MP Philip Davies, who sits on the Commons Culture Select Committee, said of his remarks about the elderly woman: ‘Everyone knows what Jonathan Ross is like, particularly now. 'Certainly the BBC are well aware. If you employ Ross, this is what you can expect from him and this is what you’ll always get from him. My view is that he should have been sacked three months ago.’

Oddly enough, Davies' 'this is what you expect from Ross' comment echoes exactly what the BBC says:
A spokesman said: "Regular listeners will be familiar with Jonathan's irreverence and innuendo."

Exactly. As Davies says, you know this what Ross does. If you don't like it, why listen?