SW17LS

We were watching an old special from the show in solidarity the other night lol, one of the producers came up and gave Jeremy a challenge and I said "Look, he didn't punch him in the face!" lol

gyrase321

Everyone experiences stress. But not everyone acts out in violent fashion. Matter of fact, most people don't. For those who do, that's when the laws are enforced. You're making it sound as if violent behavior due to stressful work environments is par for the course. It's not. BBC is doing its job by complying with its internal guidelines on how to deal with workplace bullying/harassment. Hence, Clarkson was suspended. And he's the only one that got suspended. The producer was not. What does that tell you about who the BBC thinks is culpable?

The BBC and Clarkson have a contractual agreement with each other. If BBC suspends/fires Clarkson, it must view its relationship with Clarkson to have been violated and no longer viable. As far as I know, suspension/termination are the accepted ways by which to end non-viable business relationships. BBC's action is not a "gross overreaction". It may even be long overdue. BBC must have done risk-benefit analysis and decided that pulling the plug is the correct approach.

Same argument could be made for maintaining slavery, child labor, illegal drug trafficking, etc etc.....

Shoving and pushing doesn't happen "all the time". Wherever did you get that idea? Your sales job? You must work in a dysfunctional environment. Sure, workplace tensions are common, but not actual physical violence.

Then these petitions to reinstate Clarkson at BBC are rather pointless. Clarkson is free to go wherever he wants, I'm sure the 900K fans will follow.



Is this all that matters: making money? By this logic, slavery should be reinstated since it makes money for the owners and slaves at least have food on the table and a place to live.

.

The BBC has been around a long time. It will be fine without Clarkson. The idea that Clarkson is the only thing that props up BBC is sheer hubristic arrogance.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

the bbc is not a business, it's a government run and funded channel (liks pbs except it doesn't take donations, the uk govt stiffs EVERYONE who owns a tv with an annual "tv license". sure it has financials but top gear has essentially been an unplanned windfall for the channel. since it's government run (and left wing biased and extremely 'politically correct'), top gear has always been a problem, but the channel has looked the other way because (being hypocrites) they like the revenue to fund crap like "plant watering by ethel" (i made that up, but a lot of bbc is straight up AWFUL).



http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-31828184[/QUOTE]

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

i hope clarkson and/or bbc don't renew his contract (which is over either way this month) so he can go somewhere that will appreciate him more.

swajames

The BBC has made and continues to make some of the finest television anywhere. Its output puts most of what we get here in the US to shame.

gyrase321

[/QUOTE]

Let's stick to the facts as we know them. Clarkson is being suspended because he was involved in a physical altercation with a producer. This act - at the minimum - is considered assault. The act may have been aggravated assault or a felony, depending on whether there were injuries inflicted and/or a weapon was involved. Bottom line, even simple assault violated the BBC's guidelines on workplace bullying. Hence the suspension. It has nothing to do with left wing or right wing politics.

gyrase321

True. Totally agree with the superior content of BBC programming, Clarkson notwithstanding.

SW17LS

No doubt in my mind the BBC thinks Clarkson is culpable. I'm not saying its par for the course, I'm just saying these things do happen...and Clarkson does not have a history of this sort of behavior. Never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. None of us know what we might be capable of doing in a given circumstance, we'd all like to think we wouldn't behave that way...but you never know.

I don't agree. The X Factor here is like bitkahuna said, the BBC is not a business, its a public entity. They are not accustomed to dealing with a show of this level of success and value, nor with talent as eccentric and brilliant as Clarkson. One of the reports on he incident said Clarkson started by extolling "This is so typical of the BBC!" thats part of the issue...an underlying frustration thats been building for years...and the producer became the embodiment of that frustration in that moment. I have to agree, no way a big production company who values their talent would expect them to go without a hot meal at the end of a filming day. A producer who would fail to make sure that did not happen should be fired.

Doesn't make it right, but you can see how things got out of hand.

Thats just a preposterous statement, and not at all similar or comparable. We're not governing the world here, we're producing a TV show...lets keep some perspective.

I never said it happened all the time, I said it happens. If you don't think it happens you've obviously never been to a bar, or a sporting event, or a junior or senior high school, or a college campus. People can be violent, things escalate and even normally nonviolent people can become violent.

People voicing their opinions when they feel they need to be heard is never pointless.

To a business? Frankly yes...businesses exist to make money, and thats the only reason they exist. The X factor here is the BBC is not a business. I think something as hugely popular as TopGear is wasted on a company like the BBC. A real production company could do so much more with it.

Again, the slavery thing is incredibly overstated and out of touch. We're not governing, we're producing a TV show.

It will be fine, but it will be diminished from what it became because of the success of Top Gear. Top Gear exposed the BBC and British productions to the world stage. Big reason we have BBC America? Top Gear.

I agree, and I think Clarkson agrees too. I just hope he and Hammond and May stay together, because its the trio that makes Top Gear so great. F' the BBC, he needs to be in the hands of professional producers.

SW17LS

First off...we're talking about the UK. You keep using terms and such that apply to our legal system...they don't apply to his legal status there. Nobody has filed any complaints or pressed any charges and Clarkson has not been charged with any crime, so back the legal nature of this out of it. All that matters is the BBC's internal policy.

As for your comment on right wing or left wing politics, no idea where that came from

gyrase321

That's lame. Clarkson knew when he started working at BBC that it's a government-owned entity. He knew exactly what he was getting into. To have stuck it out with BBC for years - getting rich in the process - and only now expressing "frustration"? That smacks of barely concealed opportunism.

DaveGS4

iTrader: (2)

Guys, please take the back and forth on this to PM

05RollaXRS

Its official. Clarkson left the show for good. BBC seeing no future of the show without Clarkson, has cancelled Top Gear.

SW17LS

I don't know that I would consider that "official"...

yowps3

I really like JC as people like him who are free spirited, pure hearted & non politically corrected are becoming a rarity.

-All this could be an illuminati plot to force JC out as he was probably considered a "loose end" and he could have potentially exposed them.

mmarshall

True or not, I don't see how the world (or even Top Gear's world) is going to stop spinning without Clarkson. His own colleagues (or, should I say ex-colleagues?) Richard Hammond and James May are quite adept at the business of reviewing and discussing cars, even if they lack some of Clarkson's ability to ramble and pontificate. James May, for example, writes a nice column in every publication of the magazine describing the physics, in simple terms so that even a beginner can understand it, of how various automotive systems work and the forces involved in driving. It's ingeniously simple but informative at the same time. At the end the each article, he signs off by saying...."Has James earned a pint (of ale, of course) for this lesson?" Most of the time, IMO, he has.