Home Search First Look Rules Help TheDaddy.org BlogLogin/Register
By bye hackers
Should Clarkson get the sack? - 1 to 8
Return To The Big Questions

Spanners*
Misses his big brother :(
Fri 30th May '08 8:22AM
4597 Posts
Spanners's Avatar
Member Since
7th Apr '03
There's been some serious outcry over his claim that he did 186 mph in a residential area. Being that he is the presenter of probably the biggest car programme in the world, and undoubtedly a big influence on many young drivers, should he get the sack for being completely irresponsible?
Over the years his public disregard (and sometimes full contempt) for road laws, the environment and other drivers (he is on record saying that all bikers should be shot in the face) make him a complete twat in my mind and, although he is at times an entertaining twat, I wouldn't be too sad to see the back of him.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7424651.stm
    

General*
Windows Bob - the best!
Fri 30th May '08 9:57AM
4213 Posts
General's Avatar
Member Since
7th Apr '03
Jeremy Clarkson is a character invented by Jeremy Clarkson for the purposes of entertaining the public.
If he didn't say silly things his shows would be less entertaining and I think people need to be responsible enough to make there own decisions rather than try to blame it on something they say on TV.
Personally if I had access to a Veyron I would be lying if I said I wouldn't put my foot down at least once and I think speeding by experienced drivers is less dangerous than for example driving whist talking on a mobile phone or just not leaving a decent gap to the driver in front.

An interesting case I can't find a link to was the guy who got caught driving about 150 in a Honda NSX he managed to get his punishment commuted from dangerous driving to speeding because he demonstrated that the car was capable of doing those speeds safely that the roads were empty and that he had extensive training in high speed driving.
    

Epicure_mammon
I'm not crazy cause I take the RIGHT pills :)
Fri 30th May '08 11:55AM
140 Posts
Epicure_mammon's Avatar
Member Since
12th Dec '06
That said Jeremy Clarkson does quite often want to make me gnaw my own arms off... is that a sackable offense?
  

General*
Windows Bob - the best!
Fri 30th May '08 12:04PM
4213 Posts
General's Avatar
Member Since
7th Apr '03
I think you either find him funny or totally hate him. I actually find him very amusing whilst disagreeing with quite a lot of what he says.
    

Demian*
Oh Lordy, Plegaleggole
Fri 30th May '08 12:32PM
4678 Posts
Demian's Avatar
Member Since
7th Apr '03
He just seems so terribly dated, and somehow naff, like Loaded magazine. Refusing to be politically correct has pretty much been done to death now, maybe he just needs a new act.

EDIT: I've figured it out, he'd make an ideal replacement for Jimmy Kranky's dodgy permed friend!
  

Spanners*
Misses his big brother :(
Fri 30th May '08 3:03PM
4597 Posts
Spanners's Avatar
Member Since
7th Apr '03
Character or not I still think it's wrong for him to be publicly glorifying dangerous driving and environmental damage
    

Malcolm*
My ape goosed a Bishop. Who are you?
Fri 30th May '08 4:04PM
1673 Posts
Malcolm's Avatar
Member Since
3rd Jun '03
But then, Borat publicly glorifies keeping disabled children in cages, chasing enormous model Jews for sport, and so on...

Obviously I wouldn't directly equate the two characters or their level of influence, but I do think there's a continuum with "straightforward, honest, unadulterated fact" at one end and "entirely fictitious character" at the other. Or perhaps a way of seeing it would be a continuum where one end was "100% information, 0% entertainment" and the other was "100% entertainment, 0% information". You could perhaps characterise the aims (although I admit the effects aren't necessarily the same) of any particular film, persona or character along that. So, you've got Peter Sissons at one end, Trevor Macdonald very close to him, BBC Breakfast a bit further in, GMTV a bit further still, and Borat at the far end.

I think General's spot on in saying that the character (or the brand?) "Jeremy Clarkson" is what Top Gear is based on, rather than whatever the real man underneath is. It's reminiscent of an interview I once heard in which the singer and ex-Take That member Robert Williams talked about how "Robbie" is just a character he invented. So, Clarkson clearly resides somewhere along the line, designed to inform you a bit but entertain you a lot. As long as the viewers mainly understand this (which I would suspect they do), that does give him more leeway to make ridiculous comments without being considered irresponsible.

Peter Sissons, or the head of the Driving Standards Agency, or the Chancellor of the Exchequer - these are all people who should always expect their words to be taken seriously, and who should therefore choose their words carefully. Jeremy Clarkson is not - but he's not 100% Borat-esque fiction either. So should he be able to say such things and get away with them? Like most important questions, I think the answer comes down to a firm "To an extent."
   

General*
Windows Bob - the best!
Sat 31st May '08 9:53PM
4213 Posts
General's Avatar
Member Since
7th Apr '03


Malcolm was bold enough to comment:

What I wanted to say but in a far more eloquent way.




What he said....
    

Bookmark With: Post to DiggDigg   Post to DeliciousDelicious   Post to RedditReddit   Post to FacebookFacebook   Post to StumbleuponStumbleupon
Return To The Big Questions

Time Zone is Greenwich Mean Time You are Visible
Html Tags are On Smileys are On
Anonymous Posting is Not AllowedSwoop is The Daddy