Jeremy Clarkson

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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]

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.

[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.

[Steven Russell]

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.

OK. I'm sure the last thing he would expect (or want) is for people to stay silent. So what?

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Natalie Severn]

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?

More to the point Jason is that Clarkson is the mouthpiece for the BBC.They can thus voice their own views hiding behind his stinking coat tails!.
Horrible man-and 21,000 +people have now written in to day so.

[Steven Russell]

More to the point Jason is that Clarkson is the mouthpiece for the BBC.They can thus voice their own views hiding behind his stinking coat tails!.
Horrible man-and 21,000 +people have now written in to day so.

True. And they can no doubt hide behind that stinker David Attenborough while he foists his uninformed and outrageous views on an unsuspecting public. BBC forever!

[DrHopper]

Natalie Severn
Are you living in some weird parallel universe?
My God, really? Jeremy Clarkson as the 'real' voice of the BBC, that well known reactionary and right-wing organization. LOL.
If you look carefully at coverage of the strikes and, well, any news item over the last 35 years, you will see a marked, distinct, and sometimes unbelievably irritating, liberal left-wing bias.
The ideal of Clarkson being a mouthpiece for the BBC is just laughable. By all means dislike the man, lots of people do. But don't make up spurious and completely ridiculous conspiracy theories to strengthen your dislike. That's just sad.

[Natalie Severn]

Natalie Severn


The ideal of Clarkson being a mouthpiece for the BBC is just laughable. By all means dislike the man, lots of people do. But don't make up spurious and completely ridiculous conspiracy theories to strengthen your dislike. That's just sad.

Oh do stop talking rubbish.
Do you know how much the BBC pays Jeremy Clarkson for being 'outrageous?
Did you know the 'outburst' was actually carefully rehearsed?

Did you know he is one of Cameron's best pals?

21,000 people found his views so offensive they emailed to the BBC to object.

[jason_c]

More to the point Jason is that Clarkson is the mouthpiece for the BBC.They can thus voice their own views hiding behind his stinking coat tails!.
Horrible man-and 21,000 +people have now written in to day so.

Jeremy Clarkson speaks no more for the BBC than does left wing comedian Stewart Lee, environmentalist David Attenborough, or countless talking heads wheeled in to BBC News 24.

Im tired of liberal paternalist's whose main idea of free speech is to say words such as "christ" and "fu.ck" on television.

[jason_c]

Oh do stop talking rubbish.
Do you know how much the BBC pays Jeremy Clarkson for being 'outrageous?
Did you know the 'outburst' was actually carefully rehearsed?

Did you know he is one of Cameron's best pals?

21,000 people found his views so offensive they emailed to the BBC to object.

Since when did the wrath of the populace mean anything to you? Would you be quoting these figures if the same amount of people endorsed the death penalty? banning homosexuality? migration reform?

Free speech should not be curtailed by the mob or professional complainers.