Soldato
Good riddance. Can't stand the man or what the show became.
Jeremy Clarkson suspended from BBC
- Thread starter bloodkil
- Start date
- Status
And, principle (especially backed by a very good brand - Hammond and may wouldn't be short of job offers), especially when you have several million in the bank.
I enjoyed a lot of the shows that May presented himself... Not so much the subject matter... May is a very likeable fellow but to me they all are.
One thing I'm really wondering about is this;
Most people who supposedly "hate" Top Gear complain about how it's severely scripted and edited and none of it's natural and spontaneous. This I admit, is almost certainly the case, a show doesn't maintain 5,000,000+ viewers per showing without careful thought and planning.
On the other hand, if it's so heavily edited, scripted and planned out, how can Clarkson, Hammond and May, which by the admission of the above statement, are barely more than creative input and "line delivery actors" be responsible for "supposedly" unacceptable racist remarks making it into the broadcast show?
For one thing, I dispute the severity of most of the racist remarks. While "Slope" can be interpreted as a racist remark against a far-eastern person, I've never heard it used that way, before or since. If any word with possible racist connotations is now taboo, we might as well give up English and start using sign language.
Regarding the "Mexico" issue - I don't know how many of the complainants have ever been to the US, but in much of the US you'll hear far worse said of Mexicans and Latin-Americans said on a daily basis, it's not as though they consigned them all to death, unlike many of Top Gears opponents. Admittedly, that doesn't mean that the line should necessarily have made it into the episode, I think it was unnecessarily crude and too close to the line, but in that regard, why did it make it into the episode at all? It's not as though the studio portions of Top Gear are broadcast live. Why wasn't that segment re-shot. Surely, one of the BBCs many "Hurt-feelings-protectors" should have realised that this would cause issue and had it cut from the episode?
It seems to me that people want to absolve the cast of Top Gear from it's success, but simultaneously make them solely responsible for it's failings.
As for the current issue, we've still not heard an official account of what actually happened, and until we hear one, everything is pure speculation.
Most people who supposedly "hate" Top Gear complain about how it's severely scripted and edited and none of it's natural and spontaneous. This I admit, is almost certainly the case, a show doesn't maintain 5,000,000+ viewers per showing without careful thought and planning.
On the other hand, if it's so heavily edited, scripted and planned out, how can Clarkson, Hammond and May, which by the admission of the above statement, are barely more than creative input and "line delivery actors" be responsible for "supposedly" unacceptable racist remarks making it into the broadcast show?
For one thing, I dispute the severity of most of the racist remarks. While "Slope" can be interpreted as a racist remark against a far-eastern person, I've never heard it used that way, before or since. If any word with possible racist connotations is now taboo, we might as well give up English and start using sign language.
Regarding the "Mexico" issue - I don't know how many of the complainants have ever been to the US, but in much of the US you'll hear far worse said of Mexicans and Latin-Americans said on a daily basis, it's not as though they consigned them all to death, unlike many of Top Gears opponents. Admittedly, that doesn't mean that the line should necessarily have made it into the episode, I think it was unnecessarily crude and too close to the line, but in that regard, why did it make it into the episode at all? It's not as though the studio portions of Top Gear are broadcast live. Why wasn't that segment re-shot. Surely, one of the BBCs many "Hurt-feelings-protectors" should have realised that this would cause issue and had it cut from the episode?
It seems to me that people want to absolve the cast of Top Gear from it's success, but simultaneously make them solely responsible for it's failings.
As for the current issue, we've still not heard an official account of what actually happened, and until we hear one, everything is pure speculation.
Last edited:
I agree. It is all a load of rubbish. I mean the Mexico thing was clearly stupid and in jest. Look how American cartoons such as family guy get away with their portrayal of us brits (all pointy noised, wonky teethed etc).
In fact, god look at South Park's portrayal of pretty much....anything!
Comedians get away with much worse on a daily basis, and even on BBC panel shows.
I just don't understand why Top Gear are not allowed to make jokes like this, but others are.
Even this writer said "I don’t wish to sound extremist, but I have no doubt that if every signatory to this petition were boiled down for biofuel, the world would be a cleaner, smarter place"
http://www.newstatesman.com/sarah-ditum/2015/03/we-live-world-stupid-and-jeremy-clarkson-its-king
This is akin to Clarkson's "shoot the strikers" comment but will she be hit with the same amount of hate for saying that? No. Will she have to apologise for threatening to burn me down to biofuel? No. Why? BECAUSE IT WAS A FREAKING JOKE. Even if I disagree with what she is saying I will still stand up for her right to make a flippant murder joke
What about every single Garfield book that was written where Garfield said "......should be drug out into the street and shot". Should they all be burned now?
I honestly can't fathom why Clarkson is not allowed to make a joke
.
Last edited:
Are the complainants suggesting that substitutes for unacceptable words are themselves unacceptable?
Is "fudge" now equivocal to the F-word?
Exactly, it all seems utterly preposterous.
That would be standard for any contract in CASPAR.
Commissario
The contracts will almost certainly be for different shows, not as full time employees a situation that is fairly standard with presenters etc, even many of the "BBC Presenters" you rarely see off the BBC aren't technically employed by the BBC for much of their work (they'll often be working for a third party who just happens to make something shown on the BBC).
So there would be nothing to stop Hammond and May doing work for another broadcaster on "Maximum overdrive" or whatever, whilst still doing work for the BBC as well, it would depend on scheduling which already happens.
If you look at Hammond's presenting work in the past you'll notice that he's done stuff shown in Sky for example, whilst he was presenting Top Gear.
Soldato
Bikes and Cars should be the new program title. 2/3s of the presents love bikes 
To what end? His contract is up, if he didn't want to renew it he's quite capable of saying 'no' or making it not viable for the BBC to renew if he'd prefer to avoid being seen to say 'no'. The incident in question apparently wasn't reported by either of the parties involved, who have worked with each other for over a decade.
On the speculation available it seems that a 3rd party saw two long time work colleagues behaving in a manner they believed was not appropriate, reported it, and following the allegation the BBC acted in it's usual manner. I've seen someone pulled in a work capacity for something similar, while on his lunch with a female colleague he referred to her in a term that a 3rd party took to be offensive and bullying. Neither of the people involved in the conversation agreed, but work still had to take the time to investigate.
Last edited:
I think to be honest, it is the people that shout that he is a racist/sexist/bigot that worry me far more. If you actually take the time to watch Top Gear and read his books you will very clearly come to realise that he is not any of those things. He is a bit of a prat, granted, but he certainly is no racist and is not a sexist person.
All these people are clearly terrible judges of character,
All these people are clearly terrible judges of character,
And terrifying, given that they say things like this; "I don’t wish to sound extremist, but I have no doubt that if every signatory to this petition were boiled down for biofuel, the world would be a cleaner, smarter place"
I am hoping it was written intentionally in an effort to be ironic, but I think I am giving her too much credit.
Stupidity and hypocrisy is the more plausible explanation.
The even funnier thing is that the BBC made him say that because his previous comments were deemed too supportive of the strikers XD
Caporegime
Make a petition
I find it funny how all of these writers suddenly feel that it is okay to now call someone a **** or a **** (think man parts
) yet when it happens the other way it's COMPLETELY TERRIBLE!!!!1111I've never understood this with people, it's always 'one rule for one, another for everyone else'.
It depends on what's in the contract. Maybe a non-compete clause if he resigns or doesn't renew, but no such clause if he's dismissed.
But I doubt it was for that reason however.
Thing is though, he was in the process of negotiating a very lucrative three year contract for himself/Hammond/May when this kicked off.
- Status