and on that Bombshell.

[LeMarchand]

Putting any 'incidents' that may or may not have happened aside, he's a bloody comedian - if you don't like him then don't watch him.. signing petitions just make you look like a .

 

I take it that applies to the 300k who’ve signed up to say that throwing a punch is no big deal; we want our Jezza?

 

I’d argue that a man whose audience is northward of 5 million and who espouses speeding:

 

Asked by interviewer Rosie Boycott, “What’s the fastest you have ever driven?” he replied: “On the public roads...186."

Clarkson, 48, claimed he had a clean license and hadn't been stopped by police in 20 years.

“Nick [Freeman, Clarkson's lawyer] is wonderful. He gets you off everything. Well, doesn’t get you off; show’s you’re not guilty.”

“The speed limit’s annoying for people who have a job to do.”

 

constantly tells people that new technology means that it’s completely safe to drive faster (ignoring the fact that not everyone has the same technology – or keeps it serviced if they do – and that very few people have the reflexes of a fighter pilot):

 

"The Highway Code tells us that it takes 240ft to stop from 60mph," he writes "Which would have been about right in 1963."

"But if you watch Top Gear tomorrow night, you will see that a modern car can stop from 60mph in just 75ft.”

 

and who seems to think that any car not capable of reaching light speed in .5 of a second is boring:

 

You may say any car capable of blistering the skin off your face with its pace and panache will, by its very nature, gorge on fuel in the manner of a hot dog presented with a refreshing mountain beck. I don’t even need to stray beyond Audi, again, to show you you’re wrong. The A8 with the V8 diesel goes like a bastard but can, if you’re careful, return in excess of 40mpg.

 

does have a detrimental effect on the nation’s psyche, even if (as he claims when taken to task) it’s all just a joke. It’s not just a question of liking him (or not), it’s that I genuinely think his attitudes cause harm. Too many (mainly male) drivers seem to think that it’s necessary to have an overpowered car and that it’s OK to flout speed limits, and JC’s well-publicised attitudes just add fuel to the fire.

 

Not at all. Over reliance on speed cameras, lack of sufficient traffic cops, no regular re-testing, keep taking your test till you squeeze a pass, possibly even the driving age (17 too young?). There's plenty of reasons for our poor driving standards. A pensioner shouting "POWEERRRRR" at a camera isn't one of them

 

You’re obviously a fan of JC:

 

Of course, the big advantage of the new 50 limit is that in the middle of the night, no-one will stick to it, and they'll raise an absolute fortune from those cameras which are hidden on the far side of the gantries.

 

Surely only a problem if you choose to ignore the limit?

 

So hes responsible for your bad driving too?

 

I avoid him at all costs, so must shoulder the blame for my own bad driving.

[mthomas08]

I thought he was meant to be a journalist, possibly an entertainer but a comedian? He is undeniably opinionated on many subjects and shares his opinions widely with the public through his newspaper columns, books and TV appearances. I think it is only right then, that people are allowed to share their opinion of him and for licence payers, that opinion may be to object to licence funds being used to swell his already engorged pay packet. The "Don't like it, don't watch it" is too narrow a response for public service broadcasting. Next we will be told we "get the Top Gear we deserve".

 

Personally I think Clarkson is a kind of caricature of himself. He was an accomplished journalist who made clever use of language to speak simply and effectively to people about cars (and sometimes other issues). Over the years though, he has allowed the language to become the message and that has sadly left the content rather hollow.

 

Although I agree, in today's world people need to know exactly what you mean with everything you say. He isn't a comedian, but he is your everyday Joe. I can't stress the amount of times I have said simple phrases that some Tom Dick or Harry will take offense to it. We have become a Country where everything can be taken badly or the wrong way. How many times have I heard IT related jokes about your stereo typical IT person and I could take offense if frankly I didn't have a backbone or a humour. I could mention the IT Crowd a show I love but the mount of times my team has been compared to them.

 

My other half insists on watching garbage (something like) ex's on the beach. Shamble of a show where they bicker, argue, sleep with each other yet the other half complains about it. My response (nothing against you BTW) is why watch it if it winds you up. She knows the type of people that go on the show all selfish pigs yet moans.

 

People by now should know what Clarkson is like, he like the rest of us (I agree with you on this) who have a right to an opinion. His attitude is like mine on the basis that we all have a right to a voice in a democratic society, if I don't like what other people say I either respond with my voice or I simply move on and get over it.

 

Personally I hate the way this Country is going, we complain about other nations holding back basic rights or have zero democracy yet all we want to do is censor people who say something that 1 person out of 400,000 takes offense to.

[Earthling]

300,000 want Clarkson back: BBC News - Top Gear: 300,000 sign petition supporting Jeremy Clarkson

 

How many of those 300,00 actually pay the license fees themselves and how many are teens and early-20's still living at home with M&D paying the license fee for them?

[ButterflyMoon]

We as licence fee payers are his employer? Frankly if there was violence in the workplace (which if proved) is exactly that is what it should be classed as it totally unacceptable on any level. If indeed this is what happened then he should fired or will the Beeb treat him differently from any other member of public who acted in this way. Mind having just said that I would not be surprised given all that has transpired within their ranks in recent years!!

[Earthling]

But I'm a license payer and I like watching it...

 

...maybe the answer is to scrap the license? Then 'if you don't like it, don't watch it'

 

Maybe the real answer is to drop it off the BBC altogether, then I don't have to pay for it, and you can watch it as much as you like.

[mthomas08]

So hes responsible for your bad driving too?

 

+1

 

He isn't responsible for this, that would be like blaming the Trotters for all the dodgy deals that go on in this Country.

[tmcd35]

Maybe the real answer is to drop it off the BBC altogether, then I don't have to pay for it, and you can watch it as much as you like.

 

That's assuming a) the show is picked up by another broadcaster, and b) it's not Sky. If it stays where it is I can continue to enjoy watching it without any problem thanks. The licence fee is a poor argument. I pay the licence fee. I watch maybe 2 or 3 programs a year on the Beeb, Top Gear happens to be one of them. I detest Eastenders. Since I pay the licence fee I think they should replace all the programs I don't watch with ones I do. And, especially get Eastenders off the air!

[CAM]

Anyone who wants to blame Jeremy Clarkson for crap driving is barking up the wrong tree and blame shifting. You yourself are responsible for how you drive on the road, the excuse "because the guy on the telly said it is OK" doesn't fly. People who watch Top Gear know it is an entertainment program that pushes the boundaries of TV and they seek to do it day in and day out. The stop test is pretty much their regular baiting of the various safety campaigners out there and any driver should know their own car isn't fitted with sports-grade brakes plus warmed up racing tyres on a searing hot road and they certainly won't be stopping in a controlled environment where reaction times are excluded from the test.

 

So no, Jeremy Clarkson hasn't told you to go blitzing the M25 speed limits at night because it's the person who puts the pedal down who has been told not to do it as part of their tests, driver training and the highway code itself yet they go speeding off anyway and take the consequences when they do.

[LeMarchand]

He isn't responsible for this, that would be like blaming the Trotters for all the dodgy deals that go on in this Country.

 

Gonna make myself really unpopular here: but I do think that OF&H, by "normalising" dealing in dodgy goods, did contribute to some degree to acceptance of knock-offs and items of dubious provenance. I was working at a place that sold VHS at the time of its peak popularity and always wondered how funny our punters would find it if we sold them bootlegs instead of their OF&H tapes, while it was seemingly OK for the Trotters to act like that.

 

While I'm at it, I'm of a similar mind about "Bread" making it seem OK to milk the welfare state. Turning up to collect your dole money in a Roller - absolutely hilarious? I don't think so.

Edited March 11, 2015 by LeMarchand
Missing a comma

[pcstru]

Personally I hate the way this Country is going, we complain about other nations holding back basic rights or have zero democracy yet all we want to do is censor people who say something that 1 person out of 400,000 takes offense to.

The accusation in play is not that he said something controversial, but that he tried to assault someone at work. Someone here recently posted about an assault they suffered at the hands of a student and there was little sympathy for the inexperience and youth of the perpetrator, despite that a court might well see that as a legitimate consideration. While it is true that someone is innocent until proven guilty, there does seem to be a large body of opinion (hundreds of thousands sign petition) that is saying the BBC is overreacting and wrong despite an accusation of violence that would in any other circumstances warrant suspension and investigation (even if it then turns out that the accusation is untrue). This instance isn't actually about JC having a big mouth. It isn't about free speech of censorship as you seem to suggest.

Edited March 11, 2015 by pcstru

[abillybob]

Personally, I'm fed-up with paying a salary to a middle-aged man with the all the maturity, propriety and sense of humour of a Year 9 student.

 

I'm a license-payer and I don't like being told, 'If you don't like it, don't watch it'.

 

Some people do like it and don't mind paying. How come it's you that gets the end say what and what not should be on Television. I pay my license too and I like Top Gear & Jeremy Clarkson.

[JRowley]

How many of those 300,00 actually pay the license fees themselves and how many are teens and early-20's still living at home with M&D paying the license fee for them?

 

Completely irrelevant really. Top Gear isn't just paid for by the license fee and isn't purely available through TV any more. It also doesn't make the slightest bit of difference what their age or living arrangements are.

 

The petition has reached 350,000 now, it seems change.org is now struggling with the number of people accessing it, or some 'Good Samaritan' has decided to ddos the site to prevent people signing.

[Earthling]

Some people do like it and don't mind paying. How come it's you that gets the end say what and what not should be on Television. I pay my license too and I like Top Gear & Jeremy Clarkson.

 

Rather than you having the end say, you mean?

 

I'm only saying what I think should be on the BBC, if commercial channels or broadcasters want to pick it up, go for it, knock yourselves out. If commercial broadcasters don't pick it up, then that's a measure of how popular it really is.

[sted]

Rather than you having the end say, you mean?

 

I'm only saying what I think should be on the BBC, if commercial channels or broadcasters want to pick it up, go for it, knock yourselves out. If commercial broadcasters don't pick it up, then that's a measure of how popular it really is.

 

we all have a say if a bbc (or tv in general) show gets bad ratings it gets canned if it dosent it stays (assuming other factors dont come in to play like people quitting etc) its about as democratic as anything else if enough people watch it its made if they dont its canned

[pcstru]

we all have a say if a bbc (or tv in general) show gets bad ratings it gets canned if it dosent it stays (assuming other factors dont come in to play like people quitting etc) its about as democratic as anything else if enough people watch it its made if they dont its canned

Not really true. We all get an equal say, which is to say, we don't get a say. The BBC [*1] has a remit to produce programmes which may only appeal to a small minority of viewers. There is no requirement that programmes have some arbitrary number of viewers or they get canned.

 

[*1] and Channel 4 to some extent.

[burnsyb0y]

Scrolling through this thread I cannot believe how many miserable buggers are on this forum.

The man is a legend and the show will die without him, if they are stupid enough to go through with offing him I am sure that it will be a big game of who can throw the most money Clarksons way to get another show going.

[pcstru]

Scrolling through this thread I cannot believe how many miserable buggers are on this forum.

The man is a legend and the show will die without him, if they are stupid enough to go through with offing him I am sure that it will be a big game of who can throw the most money Clarksons way to get another show going.

 

So you are in favour of an organisation not suspending an employee where there is a credible accusation of attempted assault against another employee? You think that as long as the person is brings in enough money or publicity, that an organisation should tolerate them, whatever they do? Presumably you think that others should just lump it - perhaps literally "take it on the chin" or anywhere else these VIP's care to aim for?

[JRowley]

So you are in favour of an organisation not suspending an employee where there is a credible accusation of attempted assault against another employee? You think that as long as the person is brings in enough money or publicity, that an organisation should tolerate them, whatever they do? Presumably you think that others should just lump it - perhaps literally "take it on the chin" or anywhere else these VIP's care to aim for?

 

We don't actually know it was credible, we know basically nothing about this, if there was an assault, or attempted assault then where are the police? There is far too much speculation being thrown around.

[LeMarchand]

Anyone who wants to blame Jeremy Clarkson for crap driving is barking up the wrong tree and blame shifting. You yourself are responsible for how you drive on the road, the excuse "because the guy on the telly said it is OK" doesn't fly. People who watch Top Gear know it is an entertainment program that pushes the boundaries of TV and they seek to do it day in and day out. The stop test is pretty much their regular baiting of the various safety campaigners out there and any driver should know their own car isn't fitted with sports-grade brakes plus warmed up racing tyres on a searing hot road and they certainly won't be stopping in a controlled environment where reaction times are excluded from the test.

 

So no, Jeremy Clarkson hasn't told you to go blitzing the M25 speed limits at night because it's the person who puts the pedal down who has been told not to do it as part of their tests, driver training and the highway code itself yet they go speeding off anyway and take the consequences when they do.

 

Yes - the ultimate responsibility lies with the individual, but you're being disingenuous if you're suggesting that those in the public eye are incapable of influencing public opinion/action. Did Amy Winehouse force thousands of girls to get a beehive? Would "that" haircut have ever caught on with young chaps had it not been for Beiber?

 

So many worked up sad faces bleeting about it, I think some people might have to take a day off tomorrow it seams to be effecting them so much LOL.

 

Yep, three hundred and fifty thousand of them (and counting).

[pcstru]

We don't actually know it was credible, we know basically nothing about this, if there was an assault, or attempted assault then where are the police? There is far too much speculation being thrown around.

If it wasn't credible they wouldn't suspend him pending investigation. For the police to be involved, someone would need to make a complaint to them.

[burnsyb0y]

We don't actually know it was credible, we know basically nothing about this, if there was an assault, or attempted assault then where are the police? There is far too much speculation being thrown around.

+1

And to be dead honest, yes.

They guy makes so much money that the BBC should be counting they're stars that he still wants to work there over all of the politically correct rubbish that has gave the man so much hassle.

[mats]

Anyone who wants to blame Jeremy Clarkson for crap driving is barking up the wrong tree and blame shifting. You yourself are responsible for how you drive on the road, the excuse "because the guy on the telly said it is OK" doesn't fly. People who watch Top Gear know it is an entertainment program that pushes the boundaries of TV and they seek to do it day in and day out. The stop test is pretty much their regular baiting of the various safety campaigners out there and any driver should know their own car isn't fitted with sports-grade brakes plus warmed up racing tyres on a searing hot road and they certainly won't be stopping in a controlled environment where reaction times are excluded from the test.

 

So no, Jeremy Clarkson hasn't told you to go blitzing the M25 speed limits at night because it's the person who puts the pedal down who has been told not to do it as part of their tests, driver training and the highway code itself yet they go speeding off anyway and take the consequences when they do.

 

I agree, I am responsible for my driving. However, you don't have to spend long on the roads to see that there are a significant number of drivers with the mental capacity of a peanut and I don't think they do appreciate the nuances you describe. It's a drip-drip-drip of entitled damn-everybody-else attitude which does get through to people who don't care much for the consequences of their actions or the safety of others. Watch any police camera action show if you don't believe me.

 

Sadly, I'm not sure there's much of a show in "Look how well I anticipate the situation ahead of me. I managed X miles per gallon on this trip and nobody was endangered by my actions" motoring.

[sted]

We don't actually know it was credible, we know basically nothing about this, if there was an assault, or attempted assault then where are the police? There is far too much speculation being thrown around.

 

its been reported to his management whatever else has/hasnt happened it needs investigating properly and that pretty much means he is off until its resolved the same as anyone else. At this point it dosent actually matter as such if he did hit someone but proper procedure has to be followed

[JRowley]

If it wasn't credible they wouldn't suspend him pending investigation. For the police to be involved, someone would need to make a complaint to them.

 

They can suspend him for any number of things, pay, behaviour, conduct, assault, attempted assault, a heated discussion. Until the police get involved then nothing is confirmed and there is nothing but speculation.

[DGardiner]

So you are in favour of an organisation not suspending an employee where there is a credible accusation of attempted assault against another employee? You think that as long as the person is brings in enough money or publicity, that an organisation should tolerate them, whatever they do? Presumably you think that others should just lump it - perhaps literally "take it on the chin" or anywhere else these VIP's care to aim for?

 

 

on the same note - Top Gear atleast as much as i care will be dead to me if he departs... the entire production crew could be out of a job for nothing more than handbags at 10 paces?