Brand and Ross - It's our fault not HR's
It doesn’t take a genius to work out that something isn’t quite right about the media furore surrounding the antics of two of the BBC’s biggest names – Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand. Why? Because nobody seems to have a clue who to blame, and with good reason – there doesn’t seem to be any strong contenders. Some place culpability at the feet of the stars themselves (employees breaching their employment contracts); others find their line managers at fault (a poor 25 year-old producer seems to have got a distinctly age-discriminatory mention here), while for others it is a failure at the very top and an issue of organisational talent management. Just about the only people not to have attracted any blame is HR, but it hardly seems fair even they should take the rap. If anyone is to blame, it’s us, the great (although it seems, fickle) viewing public. Millions of us tune in avidly precisely because Ross is rude, his material close to the bone and is anti-establishment. If HR were to get involved (Ross and Brand have, after all, both been suspended), what would they say, and how strong a case would they have? Nothing in these broadcasters’ recent behaviour is at all out of character. It’s what we want and expect. If these stars do get the chop, and want to fight it, I’d argue HR doesn’t have a leg to stand on. Ross may, on numerous occasions, have reduced guests to squirming wrecks with his overly sexual remarks. But the audience has always been complicit, and by default, he has had his employer’s blessing. Where were the calls for him to be sacked when he asked Nicole Kidman if she had a ‘Brazilian’, or if her ‘collars and cuffs’ matched? There were none. Like it or loathe it, the Beeb has, for the most part, actually given us what we want, and we’ve all been happy to lap it up. Is it right Ross and Brand are made to feel they’ve had their comeuppance for behaviour their bosses have supported and encouraged? You decide. But I dare say they are the scapegoats for an employment policy that was never codified, and never tested until the anti-BBC media decided it should be.
