The end of Top Gear?

[Mitch]

Hear, hear!!! Haggis/J.R. - there's a vast difference between Clarkson et al's humour and the so-called "happy slapping" laugh's that leave people dead or crippled, yet the scum perpetrators of those particular "gag's" don't even get thier names mentioned, let alone thier entire lives destroyed!

[careful_eugene]

Do you really not drive a car? do you walk everywhere?

There are more choices than between cars or walking you know!


I don't have a TV so luckily I hardly ever see Jeremy Clarkson, but on the odd occasion when I've had the misfortune to do so, or have read something he's written in a magazine or been reported as saying it just confirms my opinion of him that he's brutal, stupid, testosterone-overloaded, rude, sexist, homophobic and car obsessed. And just covering all that up with the weak fig leaf of saying "Our Jeremy's just provocative" as the BBC are won't to do (knowing which side their money-making bread is buttered) doesn't excuse it.

Apart from that, he's probably OK.

If you ever get the chance you should see his documentaries on the Victoria cross and the WW2 raid on St Nazaire, I'm sure your opinion would change.

[Totally_Baffled]

GM are stuffed!

Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., seeking federal aid to avoid collapse, said it may not have enough cash to keep operating this year and will fall ``significantly short'' of the amount needed by the end of June unless the auto market improves or it raises more capital

.

I dont know about top gear, but it looks like the end for General motors!?

By volume, they are the largest US car maker and second largest car maker in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry

Ford aren't far behind!

Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co., with U.S. sales shredded by the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, posted a third-quarter operating loss of $2.98 billion and said it used up $7.7 billion in cash.

Ford are also stuffed!

[chubbygristle]

Me personally I'm anti-censorship, I believe we should choose freely to do what we do. Maybe it's all too easy to blame the media and this in turn gives the media more belief in their own 'power' - just a thought.

I'd consider myself to be fairly anti-censorship too. I also think that operating a media source that allows a hand full of people to be able to broadcast their messages to an amazingly disproportionate amount of people, only physically possible due to their exclusive control of a percentage radio spectrum and the widespread use of television sets, requires a level of responsibility. When you are in the position to influence the thoughts of so many viewers, promoting things (such as car usage) that are have pretty much been proven to be a contributing factor to climate change cannot be considered to be responsible in anyones book.

Censorship is a funny thing. The 'Media' could be considered to have been censoring the peak oil and climate change contingent for years up to now by simply having the ability to shout louder to more people - is drowning people out with noise and distraction similar to making someone shut up? I guess the end results are pretty similar. Obviously the Internet had turned the tables a bit allowing the general public (with enough money and technical ability) to broadcast their messages, but even then this is often lost in a sea of other such noise and even that is coming under attack now with net 'governance' plans and selective promotion of content etc.

Again, if you believe that people should freely be able to do what they want to do, what about the freedom of people to not have the things done to them that result from 'people doing what they want to do'.

At the end of the day I would't want to see Clarkson and his cohort of clowns forced off the television but expecting broadcasters to operate with a modicum of responsibilty and respect certainly doesn't add up to censorship in my book.

At the end of the day cars, especially driven by testosterone fueled idiots, are responsible for a lot of road deaths and (the ones driven by 'normal people' as well) will be partially responsible for global human die off if we don't get our arses into 'top gear' regarding climate change. I think there'd be less of a censorship outcry if I broadcast a program called 'What Landmine?' or a program reviewing really good knives for stabbing people with aimed at the inner city dwellers aged 14 - 18 and it got pulled!

[Totally_Baffled]

Reference Jeremy Clarkson, I wonder if he would be more receptive to peak oil than climate change?

The two issues are the same in terms of the response that is needed to prevent disaster (or limit disaster given that it's getting late in the day)

From a factual point of view, PO is very much more 'black and white', where as CC is bit more complicated.

JC is an intelligent man and has children, and if he was presented with some of the hard facts about oil and the issue of declining flow rates - he may very well acknowledge that him burning shed loads of fuel in his ford GT (and encouraging others to do the same) leaves nothing to produce and trnasport all the goods his children will need in the future.

Maybe I am being generous to the man! (or nieve or probably both)

One thing that is a little sad is that JC and his fellow presenters talk about cars like a heroin addict would talk about their next fix. I like cars, but I have to acknowledge that the waste of burning 70% of a vital mineral like oil in single passenger vehicles is just nutty (certainly not the actions of the supposed species at the top of evolution!)

[happychicken]

Willf, I do drive a car, but very reluctantly. I only drive it on 2 days a week because I have to for my job. The rest of the time I ride a bike.

Top Gear is on in our house every Sunday. I have sat through several episodes over the years. And also programmes like Fifth Gear, The Car's the Star and every other motoring programme there is, because my partner is a fan of all of them.

These days I can't bear to be in the room when these programmes are on so I go elsewhere and do something else. I am saddened by the promotion of owning and driving cars with complete disregard for the consequences. I have children and their future is very important to me.

One of my favourite books is the novel Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, written in 1932, in which he predicted how man would worship the motor car and the part it would play in the downfall of mankind. I doubt he'd be sad to see the demise of Ford if he were still alive.

[RenewableCandy]

I think TG should dedicate a prog to the review of these beasts! A nice race up the M6 to Whinash and then get the lads to assemble the pieces...

[johnathome]

brutal, stupid, testosterone-overloaded, rude, sexist, homophobic and car obsessed

That's just the image he projects when he does the show. You do know James May is gay don't you? If he was homophobic JM wouldn't be a presenter, no JC no Top Gear.

[Bandidoz]

Top Gear is on in our house every Sunday. I have sat through several episodes over the years.

Top Gear has become a completely different programme since Quentin Willson left. I never used to watch it during the QW era (when it was just about cars), but almost religiously watch it now.

[Bandidoz]

I'm not a NIMBY or a BANANA but I'm afraid I was offended by Clarkson's insensitive remarks on TG.

Bear in mind that for every type of technology there is a corresponding NIMBY. You'll have NIMBies opposing windfarms, espousing Nuclear, who invite their own NIMBY fraternity, espousing hydro, inviting NIMBies against damming etc.

In a similar vein, for every target of humour, someone, somewhere, will be offended. I vaguely remember a stand-up who asked "is there any Irish in the audience?", then "Americans?", "Germans?", "French?". So the net result is, we either tolerate it, or we don't have any of it (well, just the watered-down humour that you grow out of by the age of 8).