Top Gear on Hold

[cosworth151]

You forgot Rush...

Yes, I did.


Many years ago.

[Ian]

Scott, the BBC should be impartial but it's not, I'm not going to get into politics here but the BBC leans way to far to the left, it doesn't represent the views of the people who pay for it. A prime example of that are two jerks going by the names of Jonathon Ross and Russell Brandt, some time ago on Ross's show on BBC they totally insulted an actor's daughter in a repulsive way, far worse than anything Clarkson has done, guess what, yup, BBC gives them airtime again now, yup they are lefties. The BBC sucks.

[Scott]

Well, honestly, though I now get BBC 1-2-3-4, I hardly ever watch it except Top Gear and F1 weekends that they broadcast.  So I would have to defer to any of you who watch something else.

I just think too often those who lean way left think everything right of them is right and those who lean way right think everything left of them is left...if you get what I'm trying to say.  Extreme left or right are generally the loudest mouths and the least likely to find compromise.  I like to think I'm ambidextrous. 

But thanks anyway for paying for the BBC.  I don't, but I still get to watch it.

[Ian]

My mistake, the actor in question was Andrew Sachs and it was his granddaughter they were discussing, if you want to read the transcript google it up, if I had a granddaughter and they said that I'd take their faces off.

[Alianora La Canta]

The chemistry between Jeremy Clarkson, James May and Richard Hammond makes it very difficult for the series to work properly if one of those elements is removed at no notice. It was slightly different when Richard was injured because that happened with a few weeks to go before transmission of the series started, so there was time to do any reworking needed to make the format continue to work - and the fact it was not a disciplinary issue meant the only strictly necessary change was to ensure nothing too gory or scary was left in the broadcast.

They can't broadcast anything Jeremy was in for Top Gear's latest series in case it turns out to be relevant to the disciplinary hearing, and the fact this happened mid-series means that editing out sections including Jeremy would be nigh-on impossible.

The combination of legal issues and the unique way in which Top Gear became the most-watched TV car series on the planet have combined in a frustrating way here. Hopefully an appropriate solution will be found, involving justice (whatever that turns out to be for the problem that led to Jeremy's suspension - remember we don't have full details on it yet!) and a viable method for Top Gear to continue to entertain millions of people.

[cosworth151]

It looks like Clarkson has landed a new gig.

http://www.gocomics.com/thenewadventuresofqueenvictoria/2015/03/17

[Irisado]

Scott, the BBC should be impartial but it's not, I'm not going to get into politics here but the BBC leans way to far to the left, it doesn't represent the views of the people who pay for it.

Funnily enough, people who lean strongly to the left in politics complain that the BBC is too right wing .

The fact that the BBC makes the far left and the far right unhappy suggests to me that they get the balance right most of the time.  Nobody can get the balance right all the time.

Given that the majority of people in this country fall into the so called 'centre ground', the BBC is, therefore, representative of the majority of people who pay for it.

What I think that you're really trying to say is that the BBC is not representative of your views, so you don't like paying for it .  I'm sure you'll correct me if that's not the case though .


As for Clarkson, he has received numerous warnings for his conduct.  He regularly exhibits sexist and racist behaviour, among other less than savoury behaviours.  My view is that he only has himself to blame if he is removed from the programme.

[John S]

What I think that you're really trying to say is that the BBC is not representative of your views, so you don't like paying for it .  I'm sure you'll correct me if that's not the case though .

Like Ian I find the BBC unrepresentative of the majority but for different reasons, my gripe is that the licence fee is an out and out tax. Where's the opportunity for me or most other fellow taxpayers to decide on the direction, output or even size of the Beeb?  Oh and don't get me started on disproportionate regional coverage, seems the less of you there are the more resource you get feed into your locality. Try finding any proper local coverage for us million poor souls in Hertfordshire.   

Also incidentally I find there is a discernable lean to the left, certainly on news coverage or in documentaries.  I vote centre left and even I am surprised by the bias I perceive.   

As for Clarkson, he has received numerous warnings for his conduct.  He regularly exhibits sexist and racist behaviour, among other less than savoury behaviours.  My view is that he only has himself to blame if he is removed from the programme.

Whilst not excusing Clarkson I do find this latest episode could (also probably should) have been predicted, and therefore avoided by better management from the BBC's side

When the ego of a star gets out of control, which has been obvious in Jeremy's case for a while, careful & better management is the only real solution if you want to avoid losing your prize asset.

 

[Alianora La Canta]

I get annoyed by the BBC's outright inaccuracy on a number of news items. This seems particularly pronounced when the story does not naturally fit the agenda of the government of the day.

The government of the day right now is rather unpopular in Britain, so it's hardly to be wondered at that most people (for one reason or another) disagree with its angle!

(And the TV licence is not a tax; with judicious use of catch-up TV - that is not covered by the licence - visiting of like-minded friends or otherwise-licenced locations on the rare occasion that watching live is necessary (which for me is currently around 12 times a year) and filling out a quick form every year - there's no need to pay it at all).

[John S]

(And the TV licence is not a tax; with judicious use of catch-up TV - that is not covered by the licence - visiting of like-minded friends or otherwise-licenced locations on the rare occasion that watching live is necessary (which for me is currently around 12 times a year) and filling out a quick form every year - there's no need to pay it at all).

Tax dodgers nearly always use the excuse that the tax has nothing to do with them. 

However the licensed premises you visit have to pay so indirectly you will pay something towards the TV licence.

I call it a tax because if you have TV receiving equipment you must pay, even if you never watch BBC programmes.     

You must have a licence for owning a TV it's not optional, you can own a car but not have a driving licence - you can even drive it as long as it's on private land.

Since it's not optional for a switched on set, even on private land,    it must be a tax.   

     

[F1fanaticBD]

First of all, its not a surprise Jeremy reacted this way, it nothing new and he would do it, if he is put in the similar situation in the future.

I love that guy, because he makes Topgear work, he keeps really to the edge. Look at 5th gear, do they create as much as steer as Topgear? nope because they do not have Clarkson there.

This is a person who is racist, insult anything and everything around my territory (Actually the show omitted the existence of my country in one of the show's finale), but I love him, I watch him make mockery of things, for very simple reason, he keep the 15 year old in me alive, for whom car is not an asset or investment, but a thing of joy, something to dream about, something to cherish for. It not James May or Richard Hammond but Jeremy Clarkson who does it for me, and for that reason I willing to accept him whatever the way he wants to present.

[Irisado]

Like Ian I find the BBC unrepresentative of the majority but for different reasons, my gripe is that the licence fee is an out and out tax. Where's the opportunity for me or most other fellow taxpayers to decide on the direction, output or even size of the Beeb?

By voting for political parties (e.g. the Conservatives) who want to shrink the size of the public sector and publicly funded organisations, such as the BBC.  Now, I understand that this is probably not an attractive proposition, based on how you vote, and I agree with your voting position incidentally, but there is another option.

The BBC Trust regularly has adverts on BBC television and radio asking for feedback from the public on the future of the BBC and BBC programmes.  If you feel so strongly about the licence fee, make your views known to them.  There are also feedback programmes on the BBC itself.  There's Feedback on Radio 4, Points of View on BBC1 or BBC2, and there's also a programme on the BBC News Channel, although its name escapes me, and that may just be for news coverage.

Oh and don't get me started on disproportionate regional coverage, seems the less of you there are the more resource you get feed into your locality. Try finding any proper local coverage for us million poor souls in Hertfordshire. 

I live in Hertfordshire, and there's just about sufficient regional coverage given what happens here.  It's hardly a hub of political and cultural activity.  However, I do agree that regional coverage on the radio has got a lot worse, following the cuts to local radio, but that's not entirely the BBC's responsibility.  The coalition, particularly the Conservative Party, must take a significant level of responsibility for this.  The irony, of course, being that the license fee doesn't have to be paid if you are just listening to BBC radio.

Also incidentally I find there is a discernable lean to the left, certainly on news coverage or in documentaries.  I vote centre left and even I am surprised by the bias I perceive.

I vote centre left too, and yet I can't perceive that bias.  Certainly not on a regular basis anyway.  It's interesting how perception varies .   

Whilst not excusing Clarkson I do find this latest episode could (also probably should) have been predicted, and therefore avoided by better management from the BBC's side

When the ego of a star gets out of control, which has been obvious in Jeremy's case for a while, careful & better management is the only real solution if you want to avoid losing your prize asset.

I see where you are coming from.  I would, however, argue that he's a liability, rather than an asset.

I call it a tax because if you have TV receiving equipment you must pay, even if you never watch BBC programmes. 

How could someone prove that they never watch BBC programmes?   

It's really not a tax.  If you go through all the different types of taxation in this country, it doesn't fit under the headings for any of them, so far as I can tell.  You might well perceive it as being a tax, but that doesn't actually make it a tax .

[cosworth151]

I find that, more and more, I'll turn Top Gear off in mid-episode. In every case, it's because I've had all of Clarkson's bluster and bigotry I can handle. I can't wait to see who replaces him.

http://www.gocomics.com/thenewadventuresofqueenvictoria/2015/03/18

[Scott]

Me too.  No great loss.  If anything I would only miss his deep baritone intro's to cars and the Stig (which I'm pretty sure someone else writes).  He can be easily replaced, and I look forward to it. 

[Ian]

It gets worse, now some BBC executive has likened Clarkson to
Savile. What is up with them ?