At an early stage of the uproar following the Russell Brand radio show last month, there was an item on the BBC1 News in which members of the audiences of two BBC shows were briefly interviewed. Some were people attending a gardening programme and the others, Never Mind the Buzzcocks. The first were clearly intended to represent older adults and the second to typify the younger generation. The general view of the first was strongly disapproving of the conduct of Russell Brand and his studio guest, Jonathan Ross, whereas the younger interviewees suggested that there had been an overreaction. One young woman expressed the opinion that what Brand and Ross had done had been amusing.
Whilst I do not know whether the opinions expressed by those interviewed were genuinely representative of the two generations, the News item clearly gave the impression that there is a significant divide between them as to (a) what is acceptable conduct by radio and television presenters and (b) what is actually funny. This difference of opinion is also apparent from other media reports.
There are, of course, many different types of humour and what one person finds funny, another will not. It is also the case that tastes in humour change, not only between the generations but also in individuals. My late father used to love Brian Rix farces whereas the rest of the family did not. My wife and I found Tommy Cooper painfully funny whereas our son, admittedly seeing him in a recording some time after the great man’s death, merely found him painful. I thought that the Peter Sellers’ film A Shot in the Dark was hilarious when I first saw it but was really disappointed when revisiting it a few years ago.
But God help us if society in this country has now reached the stage where a significant number of young adults find it acceptable and amusing for radio presenters publicly to pester and humiliate a dignified and harmless 78 year-old man by leaving several messages on his telephone answering machine informing him that one of them (Brand) had slept with his granddaughter (who was named). Ross was sufficiently coarse to say that Brand had “f****d” the girl.
The BBC, whilst condemning what happened, has made it clear that it does not want to sacrifice “edgy” humour. I accept this and would hate to lose programmes such as Have I Got News for You which is always irreverent, often vulgar but nevertheless very funny. The difference, however, between that programme and the offensive conduct of Brand and Ross is that the former has genuine wit and the latter was witless.
Leave a Reply