EAUK.org
Share
The Root of All Evil - podcast
Download: The Root of All Evil - podcast 
(Note: Right-Click / Save Target As...)
The Root of All Evil - PDF
Other FNT's you may be interested in
| ||||
Topic(s) for this FNT
Wealth and Success | Arts and Contemporary Culture | Lifestyle Issues
Data Protection Act 1998: By providing your personal details you agree to allow the Evangelical Alliance to contact you by mail, email, telephone or SMS text message in connection with its charitable purposes. The Evangelical Alliance does not make personal data available to external individuals or organisations.
The Root of All Evil
30 October 2008
Sometimes jokes go more than a little bit too far, a lesson Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand have no doubt learnt this week. Last Saturday, Brand and Ross's prank calls to former Fawlty Towers star Andrew Sachs were broadcast on BBC Radio 2, full of lewd comments and sexual innuendo involving Sachs' granddaughter. The public have been less than impressed - over 30,000 people have complained, causing Brand to resign while Ross has been suspended, his job hanging in the balance with the BBC Trust due to deliver its verdict in the next few days.
Given that the BBC Director General has called the events, "a gross lapse of taste," and "completely unacceptable," one wonders what ever possessed Ross and Brand to think this might be a good idea in the first place. Initially I wondered if they somehow thought this might make them look cool - a bit like bullies in the school playground hoping that their actions will impress the other kids. But actually, I think there's more to it than that.
In 2006 Ross became Britain's highest paid TV presenter because of his ability to attract record ratings for his programmes. Record ratings mean more money for the BBC, through selling on its programmes and better justification for the license fee. This then means happy BBC bosses, and in turn, more money for the presenters. It seems a logical cycle. It's a cycle that effectively says to the presenters: if you want the biggest pay cheque, you do whatever it takes to bring in the viewers. The kind of stunt Ross and Brand pulled off does get them the ratings, precisely the reason the BBC bosses are happy to let these kinds of programmes pass. Sadly, it also succeeds in impressing some people. Comments on news websites have included, "People need to chill out," and "It was just a joke."
It would be very tempting to jump on the bandwagon of criticising the BBC for allowing this programme on air, and to join with the multitudes accusing them of a total lack of morality. But before we rush to join in, let's not forget Paul's injunction to Timothy in 1 Timothy 6:10, "For the love of money is the root of all evil." A love of money may have contributed to the BBC bosses allowing this programme through, but the question for us remains whether we are in fact guilty of the same sin. This might mean we seek that well-paid job rather than God's calling on our life. It might mean that we hoard our money rather than helping those in need. Or it might mean that we accumulate possessions in order to try and impress people. And there's no doubt that the love of money, and the obsession with making it, has contributed to the current financial crisis.
Proverbs 11:28 also says, "Whoever trusts in riches will fall." This passage, and the words in Timothy, serve as a timely reminder of the truth of Scripture and its power to speak relevantly into our lives today. It's also another reminder that perhaps the most important false god confronting us is the perennial idol of money. The challenge for all of us this weekend, whether Christian or not, is to replace this dead and untrustworthy idol with the living God of Jesus Christ.
Susannah Clark, Public Theology Researcher
Latest comments
:
(The views below are the authors', and not necessarily those of the Evangelical Alliance.)
| Written by David Young on 05 November 2008 at 13.57 |
| Something you all seem to have missed here is that this is the normal way a complaints procedure works and is an example of the normal balance of freedom and accountability. Most systems in a democracy work the same way: a problem is classified as worth taking action over when someone goes too far. Action is taken because of the loss of profits if it isn't. You are perhaps trying to crowbar religion into it in a Thought For The Day fashion. |
| Written by ant on 04 November 2008 at 16.16 |
| Suggesting the recent Radio 2, broadcast was "full of lewd comment and sexual innuendo" exaggerates and distorts matters. As you ought to know, complaints have centred on the content of a series of short telephone messages left on a telephone answer service broadcast by the BBC, a small part of the overall radio programme. Further, I believe the references to sexual activity were blatant. What was there, if anything left to the imagination to object to? Having condemned the actions of the Radio Two, likening them to those of the school bully the reader is invited to look a little deeper. Their behaviour we are told and that of the BBC's collusion with them is due entirely to ratings because ratings mean money. Where is the evidence for this alleged collusion? Is it not plausible that the "safeguards" (assuming they existed) to which Rik Boland refers were simply not implemented? Your view of the workings of the "entertainment" industry is both cynical and judgemental. Although Ross has been suspended and Brand has resigned these outcomes may be due entirely or in part to the public interest stimulated by a media that is also hungry to sell newspapers and/or boost ratings. Talking of bandwagons, at the time your piece was written, the BBC may confirm the number of complaints received by them to be around 30,000 but you fail to mention that the BBC also claim to have received only two complaints immediately or directly following the broadcast. Rather than join the bandwagon Susannah, you have sought to hijack it and to add to it, your own agenda by trotting out a well-worn platitude about money and evil and asserting the bible's relevance to today and speculating collective guilt. Should we, "seek that well-paid job rather than God's calling on our life", you say? What well paid job and/or calling is that then? Perhaps you are simply practising your oratory and/or seeking that extra pound or two in the collection plate, but surely not the latter! Apart from keeping your flock mindful of their own failings, how does juxtaposing scripture against a recent media event help make the world a better more perfect place? Edoka Amuta may be right when he says, "This is an apt application of the Scripture to contemporary issue." However, I suggest the meaning of the quoted scripture is at best open to question and it is no clearer today than when first quilled. Following your explanation you may feel able to move on but both the BBC and OFCOM are continuing investigations. There are some real issues raised by the Radio Two. Not least amongst them is about taste; who is to determine what is broadcast and how. Jill Arrowsmith now considers it necessary to prefix having previously enjoyed Ross and Brand with notice of confession uncertain what it is that she has previously enjoyed. Hallelujah, Jesus saves. |
| Written by Edoka Amuta on 31 October 2008 at 11.24 |
| This is an apt application of the Scripture to contemporary issue. It is also a clear message of God all of us -those in Christian ministry like myself and people in secular jobs. Thank you, Sussanah Clark. *I'm sorry the earlier one I sent crediting Justin Thacker |
There are 2 additional comments for this page.
Comments for this article are now closed
