You don't know what you're talking about. Unless you have worked inside the BBC, you can have no idea what the "culture" is like. I can promise you it isn't one of "contempt". it's just a lot of people, many not that well paid, getting on with their jobs and working under extreme pressure (not least the pressure brought by the public sector ie. newspapers and commercial media groups, who expect the BBC to compete with it on its own terms and put bums on seats, and yet also operate like a monastery). Don't forget, the people who work at the BBC are licence fee payers too. We don't get it for free. Forget the "us and them" and try to put this into perspective.

Ex-BBC employee, London,

"A variant on Puss" - the Blue Peter site is saying the name that got the most votes was actually "Cookie". Surely we are not still being misled?

Andrew Roberts, London,

There are many wrong doings in life and lies that harm individuals in more detremental ways than is necessary - this is not one of these times. Look at the eveidence. The first dog Petra was not claimed dead as children all over the owrld would have been upset. The phone-in was faked as phone lines broke down - true or not what's the big down - a child won didn't they? And they didn't have to disrupt the programme too much. And besides they're not the first to have done this, nor will they be the last. And three, if the cat had been called 'Puss' how many parents would be phoning up to complain about that. Blue Peter was a fundamental part of my upbringing and growth so leave them alone. Instead why don't we teach children it's ok to lie for the good of others - it's called diplomacy. Parents, poloticians and in fact people have been doing it for years. If we all went round telling the truth all the time life would be hell!

Lindsey, grandola, Portugal

if the most popular name for the cat was really that bad; image the heads that would have rolled if they hadn't rigged it and instead been stung on the grounds of decency in kids tv

ross, coventry, uk

it's a cats name... GET OVER IT!!!

Mushu, London,

I really hope this BBC witch hunt doesn't eventually find out the Blue Peter tortoise was away on holiday in the Galapagos Islands when the viewers were informed that it had hibernated during the 1970's ... what a waste of tax payers money. If somebody is foolish enough to be duped into paying to call a premium rate number to enter a competition or leave a c-list celebrities name on an answer phone then more fool them.

Daniel Marsh, London, UK

So what was the selected name - a variant of Puss - that was deemed to be so inappropriate, and while we are about it lets have the BBC's explanation for their self-imposed moral guardianship?

Tom Lister, London, UK

Isn' t this latest case just a sad reflection on how society has 'evolved'. When children chose the name Pussy (which is presumably the "variant on puss" that was deemed inappropriate) why not let it stand?

bob, Croydon, England

What, exactly, was the inappropriate 'variant on Puss' that even the Times dare not print?

George Lennan, La Rochelle, France

I hardly think it's that bad - it's hardly gonna scar kids for life. Even more pathetic is the fact that Puss was deemed inappropriate.

There are much more important things in life, so they choose the winner - kids still got the chance to vote get over it!

ami , blandford,

Quite the shame that Blue Peters image as a wholesome show is being slowly but surerdly, erroded, by these peoples such as Kevin Bacon and Leona McCambridge. In the 70s this appears not to be the case. Does this give an indication on media business as a whole. The deception and breakdown of civilised behaviour and procedures, can only tarnish as it does the reputation of the group. People will look upon the BBC and feel that something is lacking, integritory. One hand we are the flag of civil reason and honest broadcasting, the other quite the opposite.

Peter Hagan, Liverpool, England

No wonder it's called 'Blue' Peter! Calling a cat 'Pussy' would be a step too far- ban this filth from our screens and replace it with violent cheap cartoons advertising plastic spin off toys from China I say!

Dan, Oxford, England

We have found dishonesty in various forms creeping in to public services of all sorts in the last few years and now we find that even children's broadcasting isn't exempt from it.

Morality and ethicacy in broadcasting and funded communication is very often sacrificed in the name of a force greater than the reader or viewer so in one sense this is no surprise about Blue Peter.

Maybe we should start looking at our own senses of right and wrong to determine who the real honest role model is and rely less on our media and not be drawn into 'public service' interaction that is likely to come back and sting us at a later date.

Pete, West Midlands,

Seems a bit unfair to me. The presenters would never have been able to refer to the cat with a straight face had they kept the name that the viewers voted for. Having said that they should have been honest and told the viewers they couldn't use that name and maybe used the second most popular name which I believe was Bearded Clam!

Rod Munch, Northampton, UK

To the investigators/people that find these discrepancies within the BBC, can you please please look more closely at Eastenders, there must be a problem with it (apart from being utterly horrible) of some description, for the plug to be pulled, forever. Along with their news broadcasts, surely there is a law about broadcasting rumours and speculation instead of true facts, delivered by two 'people' having a cosy little chat about it all.
I for one would be forever in your debt.

Lee, Dorset,

A varient on "Puss". I assume that they deemed it, at best, off colour. I don't see the problem with making such a change if it is to preserve the dignity of the foremost childrens programme in the world. The calls were likely to be on a "lo-call" number, not a premium rate.

It is also possible that there had been an organised campaign amongst older children to cause maximum embarrassment, in which case he move was eminently prudent.

As Blue Peter deals with questions on Father Christmas each year, and it is so important to tell the truth, then should Blue Peter take the responsibility for informing Britain's children that he doesn't actually exist.

Madness.

Mark, Chelmsford, Essex

As a former teacher, I speak from experience of children naming class pets. If you asked them for a suitable name, (these were 7 & 8 year olds) you got something sickeningly cute like "Sweetie" or inappropriate to the animal such as "Darth Vader". The older ones would use better imagination perhaps but the most popular name would make your (inward) toes curl as you asked them to look after it.

I quickly realised I could forestall this. My class hamsters were Amber and Agamemnon. But the best were the gerbils! I thought i had 2 boys and named them Hatushilish and Piamaladouche, (extraordinary names of 2 Hittite Kings that I had liked after hearing them on Michael Wood's programme. )Of course the classic happened! One had babies. So Hatu and Pia carried on in the class room. Among others, they had Bdwasiemanpensa and Clytemnestra that I can remember. We could watch the little animals doing what came naturally and another litter would appear. For a while i was the local gerbil supplier

Carlyle Braden, Croydon, U.K

What a lot of fuss about nothing!!! Lose their job over a vote to name a cat!!!! This is all that is wrong at the moment. Who cares if they choose another name or even to that matter if everyone gets question wrong on a phone in!!!!! Surely people have got more important things to worry about rather than this

Michael, Poole, Dorset,

One can never condone fraud if done deliberately to extract money from the public e.g. via phone ins and the results then not being used. Worse still if its done for a "prize" of whatever value which was then awarded to some fictitious name which the rest of us have no ability to check up on. Such things rely, as does much of our society on "conscience".

Long may it be so. Its actually what makes civilisation be seperate from the jungle.

As to a producer getting sacked because the names which came from the public weren't up to much that's daft and a great example of lack of perspective.

As long as money wasn't involved who is harmed.

I think the name "socks" is an imaginative one and obviously much better than the "puss" variant. Surely the average Joe public doesn't always have a monopoly on good ideas which at the end of the day are only "average". If some bright production team come up with something better and there's no prize not won or lost then - great.

Peter Roberts, Haywards Heath, West Sussex

Andrew Collins above personifies the blinkard mindset so prevalent at the Beeb.
First he puts his colleagues forward as 'martyrs' for the cause, like they should really achieve sainthood for the work they do, when in fact they are more than overpaid for the poor quality, biased reporting and copycat and repeat programming, instead of fulfilling their mandate and promoting quality creativity.

He sees the Beebs' obligation is to satisfy the commercial media pressure and not the public remit of fulfilling its charter FIRST AND FOREMOST - without exception.

And finally, he tries to be our conscience telling us what's right and wrong, when HE SHOULD BE EXAMINING HIS OWN AS WELL AS THAT OF HIS COLLEAGUES.

It's your mates who have been found wanting.
Your license fee payment is what you get for working there; We get corruption for ours.

Ted Berra, Leatherhead, Surrey

I can promise you, having working at various bits of the BBC for the last 15 years, that there is no "culture of contempt", so please don't cast that particular stone. It's just a whole load of people, many of them not well paid, just getting on with their jobs, and working under ridiculous pressure, not least the pressure brought to bear by the commercial sector of the media, who demand that the BBC competes for the same bums on seats whilst operating as a monastery. BBC employees are licence fee payers too.

I can't comment on the individual case, as I know the people involved, and it's ongoing, but I will say that it's not very attractive to applaud when people lose their jobs - especially when you don't know the full facts.

Andrew Collins, London,

Who in their right mind would prefer to have Blue Peter presenters talking about pussy during a kids' show?! I know there's "blue" in the title, but the fuss over renaming the cat is ridiculous.

Gringo, London, UK

What WAS the variant on "puss"? If it was "Bagpuss" I'm going to scream.

starling, Lancaster,

In the final analysis, we just don^t expect the BBC to act in this way

Frank Greaney, Formby, Liverpool

Has the world gone mad..its only a cat for pity sake. No-one has died.

P McKnight, Newtownabbey, N> Ireland

I think there is a big difference between faking a live phone in on a recorded program and conducting a real phone in, collecting people's money while misleading them about their chances to win or to choose the name of a cat. Both are unacceptable, but the second type of disception goes beyond gross misconduct and is criminal fraud. If there was any accountability at all, this business would be completely reorganized, starting at the top or preferably closed down for good. For too long the BBC has been wasting our licensing fees, now they are using them to rip off innocent people.

Lee Watts, Bucks Horn Oak, Surrey / Hampshire Borders

Leona McCambridge must go, and her dismissal for perpetrating this fraud on license payers must be seen as the benchmark against which further disciplinary action should be measured.

Is Bectu seriously going to use the : "She was only following orders." line of defence? Or, perhaps, the "Towing the line is the accepted way to get on" defence?

It's clear that a culture of contempt for the license payer permeates the BBC and that these incidents are only the tip of a very large iceberg, otherwise we would be hearing more from employees who said "No".

dominic, oxford, uk