Let's be clear: I didn't laugh at the joke. But I also didn't laugh when Jonathan Ross was suspended; when the BBC Trust decided it was at the beck and call of the Daily Mail and waded in to lay down the law; and by the time Leslie Douglas resigned I was into negative laughs: I was making other people miserable to deny the world of their laughter also.

I did laugh when Russell Brand issued his resignation with a photo of Joseph Stalin in the background.

This entire incident has reached levels of craziness that would never have happened were we not in the middle of a series of important ongoing stories that have become boring before they end. Without something new, the media jumped on a story, any story, that was different. If only the election had happened a week earlier; if only the financial system had collapsed slightly quicker and we'd been getting on with our lives by now; if only there'd been a major humanitarian disaster to divert our attention from two people paid by the BBC to be professional children.

Sure, some of the media, rather than jumping on the bandwagon of hate, calling for resignations and firing and the pulling down of the BBC while desperately digging through the archives for topless photos of Georgina Baillie, instead made their new front page story all about how everyone else was doing this. No matter: it's still a media storm even if you're merely talking about people talking about something.

But really this isn't about the media. It's about how the BBC is governed. And what we've had confirmed is that in the 21st Century the BBC is allowed to run according to its internal procedures - including investigating when they might have been broken - right up until the point where a newspaper with a large enough readership decide that they're upset.

The current complaints tally is around 37000, some 0.6% of the population of the country, or one in 1600 or so. A few thousand complaints always sounds like a lot, but it's really not. While not quite in the position of the famous Brass Eye Paedophilia Special, where 2000 complaints had to be weighed against 3000 calls of support, a Facebook supporting Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross has racked up over 29000 members (via The Guardian), and it is likely that more of those supporting actually listened to the show in the first place than those in opposition. Add in that it's much rarer for people to officially register support of something contentious than to complain about it, and it's clear that although passions are riding high on this issue, it's complex enough that it should have been resolved calmly, rather than with pitchforks and torches.

Decency is not democratic: what you think is funny I think is horrific, and vice versa. We have rules and regulators which provide for professionals to determine what the current suitable limits are for broadcasters, and to enforce and sanction around the fringes. This is necessary because, no matter how much a passionate individual believes that something is a black and white issue, there will always be an opposing voice from somewhere. This country has produced Oswald Mosley, Richard Dawkins and Mary Whitehouse, and we should be proud of that, even if we agree with none of their positions.

The biggest risk, which as the outraged opinion pieces are dying down is starting to be discussed more seriously, is that the new, neutered BBC, will take significantly fewer risks in comedy. And you have to take risks with comedy: otherwise you're just chasing the tails of anyone with more balls than you. There are very few things I've laughed out loud at that won't upset someone, which is simply the nature of humour. Jim Davidson was once the funniest man on television, Graham Norton once raised eyebrows with his Mother Teresa drag act - and although opinion is divided over Brand and Ross's actions in October, even the most stupid, ignorant and insular idiot who doesn't read the Mail on Sunday can accept this means that some people find them incredibly funny.

So no, I didn't laugh at the joke. But let's be reasonable: they killed that night.

Enemy of rational thought Richard Dawkins has been at it again, spouting off about how "religion is accustomed to getting a free ride - automatic tax breaks, unearned respect and the right not to be offended, the right to brainwash children". And don't get me wrong - he has a point about entrenchment of religion in society. However when he pledges money to a humanist group that wants to plaster buses with the slogan:

"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life"

he's just using the same unsophisticated brainwashing he's accusing organised religion of sneaking upon us. It's like one of those terrible Wikipedia jokes: needs references. Dawkins is supposed to be a scientist (I personally think he should have to hand his gown and fluffy hood back), and scientists are automatically suspicious of blanket statements like that. Probably no God? So you've run the figures on that, I take it? You're not just foisting your beliefs on people who don't know better? To use his own word, isn't that brainwashing?

He manages to make it worse by rounding off, "this campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think - and thinking is anathema to religion". Really, Richard? Anathema, you say? Anathema is generally taken to mean someone or something detested. But religions have for millennia welcomed thinking people; is Dawkins arrogant enough to seriously think that (say) Thomas More, humanist (that word cuts both ways) scholar, statesman, and actual bloody saint was detested by the Catholic Church? Or perhaps that he wasn't a thinker - that the word 'utopia' was stolen by him from a heretic boy in Southwark? One of the premises of Utopia is that a man without religion cannot be trusted by society, so I can understand why Dawkins might like to ignore More; I just can't see how he can claim he wasn't one of the most important thinkers of his day.

Honestly, it makes me embarrassed to be an atheist.

The other day I dug up a sketch I'd written back in 2000 or so. I'm not 100% certain whether it ever saw the light of day; it's possible that Tori and I performed it at some point. What's notable about it is the bit I seem to have bolted onto the front before the sketch gets going. This is fairly high up on the list of sins of sketch writing, as it stops you figuring out what the hell's going on in the crucial opening few seconds, but even more strange is that it doesn't sound like my writing at all. If I'd read it in any other context I'd have sworn it was written by John Finnemore:

This occurred to me just now, while walking round Sainsbury's failing to avoid buying discounted donuts, and it rang a bell. A few weeks ago I was with some friends in the pub, and one of them had to berate me for being macho. Which I'm not. It took me a fraction of second to realise that my uncharacteristic behaviour was pretty much just aping one of Aaron Sorkin's characters from Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip.

If you notice my doing anything like this in the future, please tell me to stop. I do genuinely have a personality all my own, and it isn't macho.

Alex Epstein, unsurprisingly making a lot of sense.

MoveOn.org's advert for Obama. Finally, they've done something that doesn't make me cringe.

60th Primetime Emmys coming up (and you can vote for a couple of categories) - but am I the only person who thinks the logotext makes it look like "EMMYs: Goth Primetime Emmy Awards"?

Cut down 9 lbs of stomach fat every 11 days by obeying this 1 tiny rule

In case you aren't aware, that's a calorie shortfall of around 2800 kCal per day, or more than you eat. So the "1 tiny rule" is: eat nothing. Or possibly: buy a knife.

The world's first USB-charged vibrator disguised as lipstick is now available. Which is, I guess, great (although I'm not sure how subtle plugging a lipstick into your laptop is - we probably need a new disguise for vibrators). But why can't it also have remote control via the USB connection? Nothing complicated is required, and given the Nabaztag is only about twice the price, it should be possible to do it for under fifty pounds. USB control would make it pretty easy to connect up for teledildonics, at a comparable price to the Televibe, and cheaper than the Sinulator. But, you know, easier to write software for.

And it's called Mia. Aww, how cute.