Ross and Brand - what's that got to do with us?

I am not going to discuss the issue of taste, but with Jonathan Ross now back on my small screen (or your huge one if yours is state-of-the-art) I think his apology for causing offence seems a little bit misplaced.

When we launched PJ Online last summer, we explained that people who made comments about articles needed to follow the rules or risked having their postings removed if they caused offence.This caused a few ripples among our regular contributors to The Journal.

One of our most controversial writers (mentioning no names) was dismayed and admitted that he relied on the editorial team to ensure that what appeared in print was legal, decent and honest. And it is right that he should rely on us - we welcome outspoken letters that push arguments to the extreme but it is our responsibility to drag them away from the legal abyss.

Brand and Ross were let down by their editors: the programme was pre-recorded and the editors missed the opportunity to pull the plug on the item. Rightly, the head of Radio 2 took the blame and resigned.So let's hope that Ross and Brand for all their faults continue to push the boundaries and live up to their reputations of being naughty but not nasty.

And let's hope that correspondents to The Journal who want to take up an extreme position will continue to send us letters, safe in the knowledge that we will do our best to make their tirades publishable.

But remember, that if you are posting online without a safety net, you need to remember to wear your verbal harness.