The Student Room Group

Jeremy Clarkson gets suspended from the BBC

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Drewski
Clarkson is topgear, it's his and Renton's baby. Without him, no show. The BBC can't afford to lose the £130m+ they earn every year through tg and it's various spinoffs.


Clarkson is kind of an elite, in the sense that he's untouchable. Ok I can imagine if he was actually racist and not the half arsed liberal lefty "racist" accusations over nothing he'd get arrested but he could just ditch BBC and do a show on any other channel. He holds all the cards but it's all self made, like Richard Branson.
Original post by blue n white army
The bbc would be idiotic to sack the main presenter of their most successful show. What happens if they sack him? he takes his show to another network, hammond and may will follow and top gear is relaunched under a different name on ITV. The bbc lose a massive audience to a different channel and end up with a programme similar to 5th gear

We're talking about a show which is broadcast over hundreds of countries and clarkson is a major reason for that, I bet other TV channels are licking their lips waiting to offer him a deal.


This. Plus a lot of the fuss at Clarkson I think is manufactured by professional offendees.

As you say no doubt 'Top Gear' in some form or another will just go elsewhere. A lot of it's success is down to the chemistry between the presenters. It's why UK Top Gear is the tits while knock-off Top Gear from elsewhere sucks nuts.
Reply 22
Original post by Snagprophet
Clarkson is kind of an elite, in the sense that he's untouchable. Ok I can imagine if he was actually racist and not the half arsed liberal lefty "racist" accusations over nothing he'd get arrested but he could just ditch BBC and do a show on any other channel. He holds all the cards but it's all self made, like Richard Branson.


I don't see Jeremy Clarkson as a good presenter on his own. In Top Gear Jeremy needs Hammond and May the same as they need him (in Top Gear). The best thing about Top Gear and the reason a lot of people watch is the... i hate saying this word.... 'banter' (let me never say that word again) amongst the 3. On their own in Top Gear they just aren't as entertaining, though Hammond and May have proven they can hold their own outside of Top Gear in more 'factual' programmes. Jeremy on his own always comes across as a smug ******** . He needs the banter of May and Hammond (if that makes sense)

Jeremy is the guy who's a bit of a prick who you let hang around with you in the pub. You wouldnt spend time with him on your own because you find him unbearable, but with a group of people he's alright (if you get what i mean). I just find Jeremy an absolute smug ******** when he's on his own. Top Gear without Jeremy is kinda like South Park without Cartman imo (though Cartman's existence is to make fun of racist, xenophobic, sexist ********s)

sorry if this doesn't make sense.


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by datpiff
I don't see Jeremy Clarkson as a good presenter on his own.


Have you seen any of the many factual programmes he's fronted? Usually of a military history nature, they're all on YouTube and are very good. It's a very different presenting style to that of his TG persona.
Original post by Drewski
Have you seen any of the many factual programmes he's fronted? Usually of a military history nature, they're all on YouTube and are very good. It's a very different presenting style to that of his TG persona.


On Top Gear it's kind of like a forced, more emphasised persona. In other shows, notably QI, he's rather toned back. I've read a load of his columns and he's quite consistent in creating amusing rambles with ludicrous ideas.

It's incredible people call him unbearable. You wanna know what's unbearable? Katie Hopkins. There's a few times where she has a good point on something, but mostly it tends to be harassment, like with the recent Danny Dyer "drama".

I think the best way to describe him is expressive. He doesn't just say "I have a problem with some habits I've seen a couple of people exhibit" but he does it like "No-one is capable of doing this properly" etc.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by aoxa
I hope this doesn't last long, and they manage to sort it all out.

I'm in the minority who actually thinks Clarkson is funny though :dontknow:

And what makes you think that's a minority?
When do we riot?
Original post by Gott
Obviously the BBC is just a labour propaganda instrument


I worked there...it really isn't.
Classic Clarkson. Why would anyone expect anything less?
this ancient model has been kept running due to sentimentality. it has become increasingly unreliable and difficult to handle. now there seems to be a serious suspension problem. it is time to put it out of its misery.
Original post by Snagprophet
On Top Gear it's kind of like a forced, more emphasised persona. In other shows, notably QI, he's rather toned back. I've read a load of his columns and he's quite consistent in creating amusing rambles with ludicrous ideas.

It's incredible people call him unbearable. You wanna know what's unbearable? Katie Hopkins. There's a few times where she has a good point on something, but mostly it tends to be harassment, like with the recent Danny Dyer "drama".

I think the best way to describe him is expressive. He doesn't just say "I have a problem with some habits I've seen a couple of people exhibit" but he does it like "No-one is capable of doing this properly" etc.


He plays up to a character. He's really not that different to someone like Al Murray in his pub landlord guise.
Reply 31
Original post by Raymat
And what makes you think that's a minority?


I know a lot of people - both on and off the internet - who seem to hate Clarkson.

It was just a general comment - lots of people find him a bit dated and offensive, but I still find him hilarious, especially with May & Hammond too.
Original post by Drewski
He plays up to a character. He's really not that different to someone like Al Murray in his pub landlord guise.


It's a bit closer than that. His attitude towards things he does in a similar way but he'll emphasise a more silly idea in Top Gear. Whereas you can tell when Al Murray is the Pub Landlord.
hes just too big headed it was only a matter of time because this would happen,
Original post by Ikidyounot.
I worked there...it really isn't.


I'm interested...

Sounds like you've got some insider information! Do you mean that like its the exact opposite so really or just slightly pro conservative or that it really is impartial (which I think no matter how hard it tried it could never really be, people can never quite ignore their biases no matter how hard they try)
Top Gear is one of the BBC's most popular programmes and without Clarkson it is nothing. He knows this, and so do the BBC. It does say that this is only temporary due to an investigation, and we can't even be sure what exactly happened or how serious it was. I'm pretty confident that the show will continue.

There's this talk of Clarkson being sacked because he was already on a "final warning" but he's had that sort of warning before and gotten away with far worse things (even though a lot of those things were exaggerated).
Original post by Gott
The BBC is another of the Stalinist monstrosities which has somehow survived privatisation and is not influenced by the consumer, it simply steals from the license fee payer


Please explain what that word means.
Original post by BefuddledPenguin
As a liberal and Guardian reader, I'm strongly against the sacking of Clarkson.

The BBC is essentially owned by the people, we all pay for it. Top Gear makes shed loads of money by being sold worldwide to various broadcasters. If it goes off the air the BBC's budget will descend and the quality will decline or we will be charged a larger license fee.

So I'm against Clarkson's potential sacking.


I agree with you but I'm also against his sacking because I find him very funny. The reason why he is funny, at least in my opinion, is that he isn't scared to offend and let's face it, that's what the best comedy does. It offends and challenges opinions and what is considered the norm. Politically correct comedy is never anywhere near as funny as non PC comedy. In fact political correctness is pretty much just a method of state control over us by making us feel guilty for expressing opinions or beliefs. Sometimes it's good to offend people because if everybody tries their hardest not to offend nothing will ever change and our society and civilisation is essentially doomed to decline. I think the world would be a better place if everyone could feel free to challenge and offend other people and the response equally challenging and offensive to the first person without involving violence. After all it's better to fight with words than with weapons.
Reply 38
Original post by aeroline1999
I agree with you but I'm also against his sacking because I find him very funny. The reason why he is funny, at least in my opinion, is that he isn't scared to offend and let's face it, that's what the best comedy does. It offends and challenges opinions and what is considered the norm. Politically correct comedy is never anywhere near as funny as non PC comedy. In fact political correctness is pretty much just a method of state control over us by making us feel guilty for expressing opinions or beliefs. Sometimes it's good to offend people because if everybody tries their hardest not to offend nothing will ever change and our society and civilisation is essentially doomed to decline. I think the world would be a better place if everyone could feel free to challenge and offend other people and the response equally challenging and offensive to the first person without involving violence. After all it's better to fight with words than with weapons.


But theres a difference between the comedy of South Park (Trey Parker and Matt Stone), Al Murray and the comedy of Jeremy Clarkson. What is the intent behind the material? Will the joke just perpetuate racism, sexism, etc? JC is nowhere near the level of Trey Parker and Matt Stone and even Al Murray.

Jeremy Clarkson's brand of what he calls 'comedy' is often outdated. Just saying an offensive term for the sake of saying an offensive term isn't funny. Things we don't want to go back to. Its often like listening to your grandad tell jokes about those 'oriental's eyes'. Jeremy Clarkson is a reminder that old tory white blokes still dictate what entertainment is on TV.

Also its who says the joke which is a huge factor in something being funny. A racist joke coming from a man who is known to be mates with the PM just is not funny.


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by aeroline1999
The reason why he is funny, at least in my opinion, is that he isn't scared to offend and let's face it, that's what the best comedy does.


The thing is, it's not as if that old version of the nursery rhyme and saying ****** (the N word in case this gets filtered) is why people watch him. Clearly he mumbled it, some social justice warriors feel the need to pick it apart because they have nothing better to do. Also, JC himself decided they were going to dump it. Literally makes no sense.

And slope-gate, I don't understand. No-one calls Asians Slopes. Slanty eyes? Maybe, but slope? Who thinks of that if you just say "the slope"? This never got explained. Was it about his eyes? They said it referred to both the bridge and the man on it, but what else was there other than the eyes? It didn't get explained.

As for Mexican-gate, seriously what's difference between calling Americans fat and stupid and that? Absolutely nothing. There's no reason for that to even blow up like it did. Apparently Mexico is a different race, hence "racist", even though it's made up of whites, mayans and mixed race people. No-one cares if he talks about another country, but if it's Mexico, then it's magically racist with no explanation.

It just sounds like pure nonsense when the BBC says "this is your last chance" as if he's ever done anything wrong, especially something as drastic as racism.

And what annoys me most is that people who don't like him will never explain why, it's always some generic way of saying "annoying" but never anything specific, almost like they don't even know.

Quick Reply

Latest