There are a number of wrongdoings involved in this story, of varying magnitudes and each deserving to be addressed (and reparations to be be made for it) separately.

a) No doubt one of the most serious is the lapse in the BBC's editorial controls that allowed this to be broadcast. Looks like heads are rolling for this already.

b) And of course, Brand's & Ross' behaviour on a programme intended for broadcasting - albeit after editing - was deplorable. Brand resigned from his 200k job; Ross did not do the same (perhaps the £6 million a year shifted the ethical balance for him...), but he is now suspended without pay for 12 weeks anyway. Still, they could argue that they knew the programme was being recorded, and assumed that some editor would make it all right. BUT...

c) ...the fact remains that the offending messages were left on the voice mail of Mr Sachs. Nothing to do with broadcasting, this is an act that is despicable in and of itself. And as we now know, it was no joke, but Brand was telling the truth about his relationship with Miss Baillie - she admitted it later. But there are lots of kiss-and-tell cads out there, right? Let's just stop a moment and think: Why would anyone do this, not just to Mr Sachs, but to anyone? Is it out of intention to be funny? Or is it simply the malicious, vicious, intentionally hurtful action that it appears to be? And never mind about Mr Sachs, why should anyone receiving such a message not go straight to the perpetrator's home and kick seven shades of shit out of him?

d) Also, for the kiss-and-tell act itself, in my book Brand deserves to have his willy grow hairy warts. But that's just me.

Nevertheless there is a real danger of this story ending up hurting the BBC and British comedy, because I do agree that comedians need to have the freedom to live near the edge. The best ones manage to keep the balance, teetering over but never quite falling into the poo. They need to have theirminders, editors, production teams etc, to save them if they slip up - but the edge is where we want them.

A sideshow to all this of course is why are Ross and Brand in such demand; a BBC rep admitted it on Radio 4 today - it is all part of the Beeb's attempt to get down, to be with it, to be relevant to the youngsters (most of whom did not find this and other similar episodes distasteful). BUT the BBC is not just a commercial organisation that needs to pander to all the customer's whims - it has a role to entertain, but also to educate, to help civilise society. When its efforts to be "relevant" take it away from those aims, it should have a serious re-think.

And finally: Brand himself said in his apology "I was caught up in the moment"... Yes, sure, we can see how this can happen. But I argue the main underlying cause is that increasingly, our "celebs" are believing their own advertising. Because we tell them they are good, they think that they really are. And THAT is dangerous for anyone.