Dear Sir/Madam,
Whilst checking the day's news on your "news" website, I noticed that Mr Russell Brand and Mr Jonathon Ross had been suspended from the BBC and that their respective shows will not be airing until "Manuel-gate" has been fully investigated.
Before I go on to ask a handful of questions about the substance of this matter I would first like to ask whether the above is an accurate picture of the situation. Given the gigantic inaccuracies and bias in your news output it would be remiss of me to go accusing you of gross stupidity before checking whether you're merely guilty of the usual gross ineptitude and partisan outlook.
Now, on to the matter at hand. I would very much like to listen to the Russell Brand radio show on Saturday evening. As things stand it will not be airing. To whom can I apply for a refund of this portion of my licence fee?
Secondly, I purchased my television licence under the impression that at the very least the Russell Brand show would not suddenly be taken off the air. Given that this has not been the case I do wonder if it can be deemed a breach of contract on your part. Could you please point me in the right direction of the appropriate public body to help me in this matter?
Thirdly, I would like to ask what the terms of Mr Brand and Mr Ross's contracts are with regards to suspensions and dismissals. Clearly it would be inappropriate for a body such as the BBC to have either of these performers on contracts that cannot be cancelled outright in cases of gross misconduct- this could easily lead to a situation whereby the BBC is paying money to someone who it believes to be pernicious.
Fourthly I would like to ask quite what aspect of this situation warranted the suspension of the two gentlemen in question 11 days following the broadcast of the material (and, I believe, 13 days following the recording of it). With this type of delay it is clear that either:
a) the substance of the events is not the problem or,
b) the BBC is unable to deal with events that are substantively unacceptable within a reasonable period of time.
Which of these two is the case?
Assuming the answer to the above is a) I would like to know what outside of the substantive events could have caused the suspension.
Assuming the answer to the above question is b) I would like to ask how the BBC intends to rectify its inability to deal with substantively unacceptable events. It seems to me that you've had 86 years in which to get this right and have failed in a rather comprehensive matter. As such I would like to offer the services of my consultancy agency Alpha Dog Consulting Ltd in reforming the BBC into the organisation it ought to be. I am happy to do this for free as long as you agree that the option of the BBC being totally disbanded remains on the table and is treated with an even hand.
These are all the questions that I have but I would just like to make one final comment. The suspension of Mr Brand and Mr Ross from your programming is reprehensible, coming as it does at this late stage. Had you deemed the material unsuitable for broadcast at the time and suspended them that would be fine. Had the material been broadcast and then the suspension taken place I would have no problem. Waiting this long is merely kow-towing to the so-called moral majority, whipped, as they are, into an orgiastic frenzy of affected outrage by the mainstream media, of which you yourselves are a part.
Yours faithfully,
Bardardo Millionaire, PhD, MD
No comments:
Post a Comment