Jeremy Clarkson

[Adam Went]

Well it pleases me to see that the majority of people on this thread seem to have taken the comments for what they are and not done the all too common thing of blowing things way out of proportion.

Brummie:

I agree with you about the culture of "celebrity" wholeheartedly, but disagree with you that Clarkson fits into that category.

Limehouse:

I don't think anybody would deny that Clarkson should be challenged over comments such as that - he has been in the past, will be again and it doesn't change the way he goes about things, he loves it - but the issue is that, as I said in my previous post, you'll get a whole heap of bandwagoners who don't have a clue who Clarkson is or what he's like who will just be critical because that's the modern thing to do.

As has been pointed out already, Clarkson is a money making machine and contributes a lot more than might be seen outwardly. He's not everyone's cup of tea but good on him for not TRYING to be everyone's cup of tea, I say.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Limehouse]

What consequences? Is anyone being shot in front of their families? Is anyone actually being hurt by the comment? It's just a funny comment by a man, that is all

The consequences to which I was referring were the objections raised by people who did not think what Clarkson said was funny. He can't say things like that and expect people to stay silent.

[Steven Russell]

What consequences? Is anyone being shot in front of their families? Is anyone actually being hurt by the comment? It's just a funny comment by a man, that is all

Precisely.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Limehouse]

Im not sure it does. No offence but thousands could do your job, very few can do Clarksons. That in itself suggests his contribution should be valued higher.

And im sure his tax contribution to education is substantial indeed.

Very few could do Clarkson's job because it's a no job. He's a gobsh*te.

Thousands can do my job - that's true - and many more thousands benefit as a result. It's an essential job.

[DrHopper]

If, as you say, his remark was meant to be 'throw away' he should have thought about the consequences of making such a remark. It's not a case of people being 'over sensitive', it's case of Clarkson being irresponsible.

What consequences? Is anyone being shot in front of their families? Is anyone actually being hurt by the comment? It's just a funny comment by a man, that is all

[jason_c]

My contribution is to have taught thousands of young people and young adults a wide range of useful skills. I always work far more hours than I am paid to work and I have done all sorts of voluntary work since the age of 14.

I think that compares favourably.

Im not sure it does. No offence but thousands could do your job, very few can do Clarksons. That in itself suggests his contribution should be valued higher.

And im sure his tax contribution to education is substantial indeed.

[Limehouse]

Just to wander slightly off the point, perhaps the most disturbing thing about this is the fact that in Britain today the focus of society is all about 'celebrity'. The fact that Clarkson can be seen my some as a 'celebrity' merely for being an oafish boor with no discernible talent is extremely worrying. These days when people are considered as celebrities for having appeared on some freakish reality show is frankly bizarre, and when you have earthquake in Turkey,global economic disaster,and troops fighting around the world yet the tabloid front pages prefer to go with the latest escapades of x-factor contestants something is clearly wrong,yet people just lap it up. Until society changes its perception of 'celebrity' status we will have to put up with half-wit nonenities like Clarkson I'm afraid.

An excellent post brummie. I couldn't agree more.

[Limehouse]

Mr Clarkson's TV show is a money making machine for the BBC. This money subsidizes much of the BBC's output.

What is your contribution to society in comparison?

My contribution is to have taught thousands of young people and young adults a wide range of useful skills. I always work far more hours than I am paid to work and I have done all sorts of voluntary work since the age of 14.

I think that compares favourably.

[jason_c]

I hope no one wants to ban this lady? Absolutely delightful :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_14LIkuTJ0

Thats the type of thing that makes Britain Great. There's too many professional complainers in this country. These complainers about Clarkson are the liberal equivalent of Mary Whitehouse.

[jason_c]

Hello Adam,

I seriously believe that, although Clarkson claims to have been joking, there was an underlying intention to stick the boot in. However, even if he WAS joking, it was an insensitive remark to make. But, as you say, Clarkson cares nothing for sensitivity.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that Mr Clarkson appears to contribute little to society for the money he is paid and is therefore hardly in a position to criticise others, joking or not.

Mr Clarkson's TV show is a money making machine for the BBC. This money subsidizes much of the BBC's output.

What is your contribution to society in comparison?

[brummie]

Just to wander slightly off the point, perhaps the most disturbing thing about this is the fact that in Britain today the focus of society is all about 'celebrity'. The fact that Clarkson can be seen my some as a 'celebrity' merely for being an oafish boor with no discernible talent is extremely worrying. These days when people are considered as celebrities for having appeared on some freakish reality show is frankly bizarre, and when you have earthquake in Turkey,global economic disaster,and troops fighting around the world yet the tabloid front pages prefer to go with the latest escapades of x-factor contestants something is clearly wrong,yet people just lap it up. Until society changes its perception of 'celebrity' status we will have to put up with half-wit nonenities like Clarkson I'm afraid.

[Limehouse]

Hello all,

Well, the divide is becoming stronger. That is the divide between those who are over-sensitive, who become increasingly over-sensitive about anything and everything, and those who wish to annoy the over-sensitive folks by making their remarks increasingly "offensive".

Anybody who watches any episode of Top Gear, ever, will see that Clarkson is not afraid of making controversial remarks. He does it all of the time, yet in this instance I think too much is being made of something which was intended to be a throwaway remark.

I don't think even he would deny that he can be an arsehole at times, and says things which some people won't like, but then he hasn't got to where he has in life by being the meek, inoffensive gentleman either.

Now that's not to say that what he said was right, if we take it in context, because it most definitely is obviously not, but the point is that in any situation like this you'll get a million bandwagoners who don't have a clue who Clarkson is or what he's about joining the queue to be critical of him, because that's what people like to do these days, lay the boots in whenever there's a chance to do so.

I could highlight again just how much things have changed in the past 20 years if I said that a "Blackface" act appeared on an Aussie TV show 20 years ago and won the contest (which was a comedy routine by foreigners in respectable positions in life, I might add) and then it appeared again in 2009 for a reunion special and was criticised around the globe for being racist - and not just that, but Australians as a whole are the most racist people on the globe.

That of course is a load of BS and just another case of people bandwagoning over something which was in itself never meant to be taken anywhere close to seriously, and Clarkson is facing the same problem now.

We all just need to toughen up a bit, really...

Cheers,
Adam.

I think you're kind of missing the point Adam. If Clarkson has the right to be an arsehole, then he must expect to be challenged by people who object to his approach. If, as you say, his remark was meant to be 'throw away' he should have thought about the consequences of making such a remark. It's not a case of people being 'over sensitive', it's case of Clarkson being irresponsible.

However, what I would question is the wisdom of anyone asking Clarkson such a question, and expecting a measured and carefully considered answer.

[Robert]

I hope no one wants to ban this lady? Absolutely delightful :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_14LIkuTJ0

[Adam Went]

Hello all,

Well, the divide is becoming stronger. That is the divide between those who are over-sensitive, who become increasingly over-sensitive about anything and everything, and those who wish to annoy the over-sensitive folks by making their remarks increasingly "offensive".

Anybody who watches any episode of Top Gear, ever, will see that Clarkson is not afraid of making controversial remarks. He does it all of the time, yet in this instance I think too much is being made of something which was intended to be a throwaway remark.

I don't think even he would deny that he can be an arsehole at times, and says things which some people won't like, but then he hasn't got to where he has in life by being the meek, inoffensive gentleman either.

Now that's not to say that what he said was right, if we take it in context, because it most definitely is obviously not, but the point is that in any situation like this you'll get a million bandwagoners who don't have a clue who Clarkson is or what he's about joining the queue to be critical of him, because that's what people like to do these days, lay the boots in whenever there's a chance to do so.

I could highlight again just how much things have changed in the past 20 years if I said that a "Blackface" act appeared on an Aussie TV show 20 years ago and won the contest (which was a comedy routine by foreigners in respectable positions in life, I might add) and then it appeared again in 2009 for a reunion special and was criticised around the globe for being racist - and not just that, but Australians as a whole are the most racist people on the globe.

That of course is a load of BS and just another case of people bandwagoning over something which was in itself never meant to be taken anywhere close to seriously, and Clarkson is facing the same problem now.

We all just need to toughen up a bit, really...

Cheers,
Adam.

[Steven Russell]

Clarkson's "humour" often derives from taking a slightly controversial stance and then exaggerating it wildly for comic effect. He was saying he disagreed with the strikers' action but no-one should believe that he was serious about shooting people.

He is a boor but for many that's part of his appeal. As has been noted elsewhere, Christmas is coming so a bit of controversy gets him right in the public eye just when people are deciding what book or DVD to get Uncle Alan. Whatever else he is, Clarkson is not stupid.

Best wishes,
Steve.