keep clarkson on top gear

[Azzer]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

PC gone mad is one argument - and then there is respect

I think you need to watch more comedies on the BBC and "main channels" in general, you'll probably go crazy about the lack of respect comedians have. Try Jimmy Carr or George Carlin or Michael Moore or something. Plus it's not like he actually named any individual cases, which is part of the joke, the generalisation - not targetting any actual specific individuals or cases. If you're adamant about your opinion, then I'd suggest avoiding a lot of the comedians and funny people of the world, and things like satire (imagine how upset the families of politicians get when they see Have I Got News For You... those poor people....). Methinks we're going to have to agree to disagree as to what we consider "taboo subjects nobody should joke about" and what is acceptable subject for humour in the modern age.

As for the women comment, well proportionate to the amount of females:males that frequent these forums, I'd say the female:male ratio of replies on this thread seems about right... and if you want a list of females that would defend Clarkson, click the link in the OP to the petition, and have a look through at how many Mrs. and Miss people have signed it... there's more than a few.

 

[CFalcon]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the BBC allowed this to go out? The comment was made on one of their pre-recorded tests, it wasn't live. It's like a take going badly, Clarkson spewing profanities, and then the BBC deciding to air the swearing. Clarkson's fault how??? Unless we've decided that nobody should be allowed to make any kind of indecent comment anywhere ever. Yay for fascism.

 

[Harbinger]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the BBC allowed this to go out? The comment was made on one of their pre-recorded tests, it wasn't live. It's like a take going badly, Clarkson spewing profanities, and then the BBC deciding to air the swearing. Clarkson's fault how??? Unless we've decided that nobody should be allowed to make any kind of indecent comment anywhere ever. Yay for fascism.

Didn't they teach you to read at that there university James? I made that point already

OK - let me clarify. Did I say Clarkson should be sacked? No. Did I say that all tasteless or indecent comments should be censored? No . All I said was that it shouldn't have been broadcast and that the editor/producer was guilty of appalling judgement.

My comment about male/female opinion was not a reference to the disproportiate number of silly boys who frequent this forum - it was an observation. And I guarantee that if you presented the facts to a random sample of the population made up of 50% male and 50% female, that the females would by a considerable margin, find Clarkson's comments offensive seeing as it relates to a specific case of five women being brutally murdered..

My main point was linked to the recency of the offences and subsequent trial and conviction that Clarkson was clearly inferring to - his 'joke' was not a generalisation.

And Azzer, anybody who knows me would testify to my sense of humour - Carlin is one of my comedy heroes (God rest his soul - although Carlin of all people wouldn't be expecting salvation and everlasting life in heaven!!) .

So where do we draw the line Azzer - are you saying that anything goes on these forums? I'm allowed to make tasteless jokes about the recent child brutality case? Take the piss out of jews for the holocaust? Spout racist bigotry? Are you saying that these forums are not censored?

Hypocrisy - what a crock of **** you sometimes talk. :roll:

 

[CFalcon]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

Didn't they teach you to read at that there university James? I made that point already

The show is recorded on a Wednesday for transmission on the Sunday - the editor and producer should also be reprimanded for an appalling lack of judgement.

The only letters I see these days are variables, and most of those are greek....

But having been reminded of this reading malarky, I would note that you said "also be reprimanded"
If JC has to do anything more than make an apology I'll be ashamed of this country.

My point was more towards the whole controversy surrounding this. The majority of people defending Clarkson are using the PC gone mad, learn to take a joke argument, which isn't conclusive or (depending on your view) even that convincing for the reasons you brought up. But the point that 'if you're offended, take it up with the BBC not Clarkson' is pretty rock solid.

 

[Azzer]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

My comment about male/female opinion was not a reference to the disproportiate number of silly boys who frequent this forum - it was an observation. And I guarantee that if you presented the facts to a random sample of the population made up of 50% male and 50% female, that the females would by a considerable margin, find Clarkson's comments offensive seeing as it relates to a specific case of five women being brutally murdered..

Oh that makes perfect sense now.... all those that disagree with your opinion are silly boys, and those that agree with you must be women or mature sensible adult males. Gotcha

 

[Harbinger]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

My comment about male/female opinion was not a reference to the disproportiate number of silly boys who frequent this forum - it was an observation. And I guarantee that if you presented the facts to a random sample of the population made up of 50% male and 50% female, that the females would by a considerable margin, find Clarkson's comments offensive seeing as it relates to a specific case of five women being brutally murdered..

Oh that makes perfect sense now.... all those that disagree with your opinion are silly boys, and those that agree with you must be women or mature sensible adult males. Gotcha

Astute summary there Azzer, in this particular instance, that pretty much sums it up - although there will be some women who don't agree with me, and some immature males who might agree

I didn't complain to the BBC - I don't believe Clarkson should be sacked (see above) - and calls for it are way over the top (the producer maybe, for simply not doing his job right). Anyone who believes it was right for that particular comment to be broadcast, in light of the recency of the case, is an idiot in my opinion (present company NOT excepted ).

 

[Azzer]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

I didn't complain to the BBC - I don't believe Clarkson should be sacked (see above) - and calls for it are way over the top (the producer maybe, for simply not doing his job right). Anyone who believes it was right for that particular comment to be broadcast, in light of the recency of the case, is an idiot in my opinion (present company NOT excepted ).

Well it's a fair opinion and I can't argue with that, you're not exactly being unreasonable with the opinion itself (eg not demanding JC be sacked or anything crazy - you're blaming the producers not just JC. etc.). But personally I don't think, for television broadcasting, what he said was particularly bad or offensive, or was unreasonable to air - mainly as he didn't specify any particular case (and there's been more than 1 or 2 cases in history). I'd say it's comparable to any 'current affairs' comedies (as I mentioned in a prior post, something like "Have I Got News For You"... think about the families or victims of all the people affected by whatever news story they ever take the mick out of there! Ok generally it's much more light hearted/"family" show, but generally speaking...).

Besides, how long after an event occurs should you wait before you can make a (non-specific) joke that might relate vaguely to that event, is there a set time? I assume you must have a figure in your head, since you said that your main point was the recency of a particular event relating to the general subject of lorry drivers that might kill prostitutes, so what's the limit of that recency? Do you have to wait until all direct family members/friends of anyone involved in something are dead? Some people can remain sensitive to something for years, decades... others can remain sensitive for mere days/weeks/months. Also who is limited to making jokes about it until this "time-period"? Any public media? Local media? Any form of media or area that is not entirely "private" (eg a joke at the pubs with your mates will obviously always be ok... but what about small publications, local newspapers, websites with a particular type of user, etc.?).

I think that because of all the unknowns and haziness (how offended can a person be, how many people can be offended, just how offensive is something to the average person... how recent was something, how many cases of something has there been/how specific to a particular case is something... what media is or is not allowed to joke about it), this can only be a matter of opinion, not a statement of right/wrong - which is why I was highlighting your accusation that anybody that disagrees with you must be a silly boy - there is absolutely no way that your perception of what is allowed or not allowed can be an actual 'right' compared to all the "silly boys" being 'wrong'.

(sorry for the wall of text )

 

[Harbinger]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

I think that because of all the unknowns and haziness (how offended can a person be, how many people can be offended, just how offensive is something to the average person... how recent was something, how many cases of something has there been/how specific to a particular case is something... what media is or is not allowed to joke about it), this can only be a matter of opinion, not a statement of right/wrong - which is why I was highlighting your accusation that anybody that disagrees with you must be a silly boy - there is absolutely no way that your perception of what is allowed or not allowed can be an actual 'right' compared to all the "silly boys" being 'wrong'.

(sorry for the wall of text )

Accusation? Strong word. It wasn't an accusation it was an opinion All opinions are subjective - and all subjectivity assumes that the 'subject' is 'right' in their opinion.

I wasn't saying people couldn't disagree with me - quite patently they will, as is their subjective right - but that in my 'opinion' they would be wrong to do so.

There is no 'right' - there are very few absolute truths.

 

[Charlie_B]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

While this discussion is interesting, you're all missing out on the most important point: Clarkson is a terrible presenter and the world would be a much better place if he was never allowed to darken our TVs again.

 

[timtadams]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

While this discussion is interesting, you're all missing out on the most important point: Clarkson is a terrible presenter and the world would be a much better place if he was never allowed to darken our TVs again.

Hmmm, you will have a hard time convincing me of that, however, this gave me an idea, why dont we see what everyone thinks of this, but in a different thread, since that would be going off topic

http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2115

 

[Cheese]

Re: keep clarkson on top gear

Clarkson IS top gear

I would much rather say the 3 of them are top gear as with any one of them being removed the show it just wouldn't be top gear no more

I might have to resort to watching 5th gear or what ever that lame excuse of a show on channel 5 is if clarkson gets the boot