a typically intelligent perspective

Normally I'd just bung this in today's Articles post, but it makes too much sense, so here it is by itself:

Welcome to the Blander Broadcasting Corporation by Mark Lawson
(from guardian.co.uk)

"while there is no defence for the incident, there's cause to worry that the rumpus will prove damaging to larger parts of broadcasting than the careers of Brand and Ross. After each of the recent public controversies over BBC programme... broadcasters and producers at the BBC have noted a reduction in courage, a paranoia among managers about making another mistake... The making of editorial policy at the corporation consists largely of padlocking doors that have just opened... And so, inexorably, all shows will be forced to become safer and blander."

"...it's a terrible mistake to impose a single tone or set of guidelines on thousands of different shows. As society becomes increasingly fragmented - containing, for example, older people who never swear and younger ones who never stop swearing - universal rules become increasingly futile. The fact that only two of Brand's actual listeners are reported to have complained about the original broadcast reminds us that definitions of acceptability vary widely among audiences, and the BBC's ability to compete will be greatly reduced if all are held to the same standard."

"...It still seems improbable that the BBC will permanently remove one of its most popular broadcasters, and the fact that the programme was recorded rather than live will make it hard to argue the presenters were finally responsible. But, once a prime minister gives backing to a newspaper witch-hunt, the momentum for dismissal can become unstoppable... Were the BBC to now sack Ross, he would probably be rapidly taken on by commercial broadcasters, or even by the networks of Rupert Murdoch, whose newspapers have been calling for his head."

Too true.