There's a big difference between Have I Got News For You and Top Gear though. News for You was never all about Angus Deayton anyway, it didn't hinge on the central presenter. If Hislop and Merton stop doing it, the show will finish shortly after - I believe Hislop has done every episode since 1990.
Top Gear is basically the Jeremy Clarkson show. Absolutely everything about it is a reflection of him. The entire programme is reflective of Clarkson's world view. Everything they do, they do it because he wants it to happen.
In that way Clarkson has been incredibly lucky. He's had 25 years being paid vast sums to express his world view to millions and have incredible fun doing so. Almost nobody gets to do that in life.
|
"Mark Thompson, the BBC's director general, is gaining a reputation as something of a rottweiler as he slashes into the corporation's staffing structure.
Yesterday this image took on a physical manifestation when allegations emerged that, when he was editor of the Nine O'Clock News, Mr Thompson sank his teeth into the arms of a colleague in a canine-like display of workplace frustration.
The BBC yesterday played down the incident, which has been the subject of frenzied gossip within the BBC as the story was passed around by email this week, as "high jinks and horseplay".
But Mr Thompson's victim, a junior member of staff who went on to be Kate Adie's producer, has disclosed that he considered making a formal complaint about the incident at the time"
www.theguardian.com/media/2005/mar/24/broadcasting...c
The BBC is two faced.. who would have thought it? :-)
|
Fact is, Clarkson's reaction to there not being a hot meal for him was way out of proportion for what happened. We might have been upset and angry. That would have been enough.
|
I am surprised there are still some here who are still supporting Clarkson and dismissing this as either a minor incident or somehow justified. If you were to rant, shout obscenties, intimidate publicly someone who is innocent of any wrong doing for 20 minutes and then go to physically assault him in full view of the public, guess what, you'd probably be thrown in a cell and be had up before the magistrates the next day.
Much as I admire some of TG under his stewardship, Clarkson has hung himself with his own vanity and nastiness. The BBC obviously had a difficult time in coming to its decision, but in the end they are right. Bullying with violence has no place in their organisation.
Raising the Saville case is justified, ignore the behaviour and later it will be ten times worse. No one is above the law.
BBC will survive this, unlike Clarkson. The uniqueness of the BBC, not holding to sponsors or advertisers make for world class programming. The BBC has made it clear Clarkson has no value to them, so his price tag just got punctured, no bidding war. Imagine the old blokes trying to cobble the format on Sky with adverts every ten minutes and having to watch what they say about this make and that, its not going to work.
TG, like many other shows - Monty Python comes to mind, is a product of the BBC environment.
How about all the poor sods who worked for TG now out of work? And poor Oisin Tymon, possibly with a wrecked career (I hope not). These are the guys that truly make TG great. So many comments about the great filming etc, that's not Clarkson, its the production team that make it great.
|
It's not well said at all Trilogy because Brum is talking absolute nonsense from start to finish.
Firstly, the chances of you being in court the following day are zero, more like 3-6 months. Secondly, talent gets away with things the rest of us don't. Luis Suarez has bitten three people on live TV but earns millions playing for possibly the world's most prestigious football club.
The bit about the BBC is a bit rose tinted because their 'not holding to sponsors...' is another way of saying they don't have to work for their money. They can make whatever dross they want because we'll all go to prison if we don't finance it, they don't need us to watch it. Most of the BBC's programming is total trash.
It wasn't always like that. Forty years ago the BBC made some of the finest comedy ever seen in this country, but these days they don't. The BBC themselves produce very little of their own content anyway, pretty much all of it is contracted out to private production companies. That romantic view you have of the BBC is four decades out of date.
The BBC will suffer from this because they'll lose viewers. Clarkson will be fine, the other two will join him and take their 350 million viewers with them. BBC own the name, but it's worthless without the talent and TG is very unique in its reliance on the central talent. The BBC had TG before Clarkson. It was rubbish. He made it what it is and its dead without him.
The show may have great production values, though that's easier with the budget they have but great production values count for nothing if the content isn't worth producing. I don't see how Clarkson can be viewed as worthless by other broadcasters. He can guarantee them viewership in 200 countries and many millions in the bank. What have the BBC got? Nothing.
Lastly and most importantly, comparing Clarkson to Jimmy f***ing Saville is nothing less than a disgrace and if I was Clarkson I'd have every Internet keyboard warrior who links them in front of a judge on defamation charges.
Edited by jamie745 on 25/03/2015 at 23:20
|
Lastly and most importantly, comparing Clarkson to Jimmy f***ing Saville is nothing less than a disgrace and if I was Clarkson I'd have every Internet keyboard warrior who links them in front of a judge on defamation charges.
If someone at the BBC had had the courage to sack Saville when his behaviour was first reported, then he wouldn't have gone on to ruin so many peoples lives. Nobody is suggesting Clarkson is a sexual pervert, but he has shown he has serious behaviour issues that are inappropriate in any work place. Nipping this on the bud before it gets out of hand is a sensible decision.
As for Rose tinted glasses, maybe, only time will tell. The BBC is the oldest broadcaster on the world and is far more respected and recognised internationally than any other. I don't see that changing soon.
Lastly, I note your generous use of expletives, I don't think that's a very intelligent way of expressing your views....which now I see you have edited out.....
Edited by brum on 25/03/2015 at 23:36
|
Again you're making a nonsense comparison. If the BBC believes it's somehow redeemed itself for Savile by ending the most popular TV show on earth and giving the licence fee payer less value for its money then they're deranged. Unfortunately the BBC do chase this sort of thing now in desperate attempts to fix the past and claim moral high ground.
The fact is the BBC has the luxury of being able to take such an expensive decision because commercial income isn't everything to them. You and me still go to prison if we don't finance whatever they want to make so they don't have to care if we like it or not.
Don't get me wrong, they've made some of the best tv shows of all time, classic comedies like OnlyFools, Blackadder, Python and the rest but those days are gone. The BBCs reputation within Britain is at a record low. Historically the BBC have pretty much always been wrong about nearly everything. Don't forget they thought Hitler was a reasonable bloke so kept Churchill off the airwaves as long as possible.
There is one expletive in my post. The other was changed because I didn't know t o s h would activate the swear filter.
Edited by jamie745 on 25/03/2015 at 23:49
|
QUOTE: ""You and me still go to prison if we don't finance whatever they want to make so they don't have to care if we like it or not. ""
You and me would lose our job if we punched a colleague in the face, and it could also land us in prison.
|
|
"The BBC had TG before Clarkson. It was rubbish."
Jamie, many will disagree. It wasn't for all. It was a differnet style. For many years TG has been on the wrong channel and wrong time. Cbeebies at about 5.00pm. Trouble is TG has been trying to appeal to ten year olds, in addition to adults.
|
|
|
The worst BBC misjudgement ever was when they openly employed a convicted murderer to act in East-Enders.
As for Clarkson, he's go what he deserved. The man's a thug.
As for Top Gear, the 'brand' is now toxic and should be buried. The BBC needs to put together a new motoring programme with new presenters and a new name, aimed at a more intelligent audience.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 26/03/2015 at 00:01
|
The worst BBC misjudgement ever was when they openly employed a convicted murderer to act in East-Enders.
As for Clarkson, he's go what he deserved.
Actually, he hasn't. This lengthy thread, which digresses unhelpfully, has missed the essential point - the appalling state of the Britich legal and correctional service. If the man has committed a criminal offence (and it appears that he did) a criminal prosecution should have swiftly ensued. After several weeks it is only now that our dysfunctional fragmented legal guardian service is 'asking to see the BBC inquiry result'. Assault is not a civil matter where charges may or may not be brought - he should be on bail by now.
|
In my opinion criminal charges against Clarkson would be a travesty of justice. I was subjected to harassment over a period of 1 year by a smal gang of children. The police showed little interest. When I tried to get photos (quite legal) I was physically shoulder barged and verbally abused by one child and her older sister and then physically assaulted by the older brother, and a watch that had been a present from my late mother was destroyed during the assault (he gripped my wrist so tightly it broke non replaceable links). I suffered a sore neck for a week. The police pressed no charges. I reckon my case is typical. Prosecuting Clarkson would be the police making an example of him, rather than treating him as per the rest of us. If they do prosecute, then I'd like to know why they have singled him out.
|
In my opinion criminal charges against Clarkson would be a travesty of justice. I was subjected to harassment over a period of 1 year by a smal gang of children. The police showed little interest. When I tried to get photos (quite legal) I was physically shoulder barged and verbally abused by one child and her older sister and then physically assaulted by the older brother, and a watch that had been a present from my late mother was destroyed during the assault (he gripped my wrist so tightly it broke non replaceable links). I suffered a sore neck for a week. The police pressed no charges. I reckon my case is typical. Prosecuting Clarkson would be the police making an example of him, rather than treating him as per the rest of us. If they do prosecute, then I'd like to know why they have singled him out.
Probably because he has money to pay the fines unlike the horrible scum that you was unfortunate enough to have encountered.
I also talk from experience of being harrassed by some scum that the police refused to do anything about, despite the fact they knew everything about their criminal going ons.
|
In my opinion criminal charges against Clarkson would be a travesty of justice. I was subjected to harassment over a period of 1 year by a smal gang of children. The police showed little interest. When I tried to get photos (quite legal) I was physically shoulder barged and verbally abused by one child and her older sister and then physically assaulted by the older brother, ...... I suffered a sore neck for a week. The police pressed no charges. I reckon my case is typical.
Leif, although you have my sympathy your experience is hardly comparable with a vicious punch in the face which apparently resulted in a bleeding wound requiring medical attention. Much as I enjoy Clarkson & Co's clownings he should be treated like anyone else who assaults someone causing significant injury.
|
In my opinion criminal charges against Clarkson would be a travesty of justice. I was subjected to harassment over a period of 1 year by a smal gang of children. The police showed little interest. When I tried to get photos (quite legal) I was physically shoulder barged and verbally abused by one child and her older sister and then physically assaulted by the older brother, ...... I suffered a sore neck for a week. The police pressed no charges. I reckon my case is typical.
Leif, although you have my sympathy your experience is hardly comparable with a vicious punch in the face which apparently resulted in a bleeding wound requiring medical attention. Much as I enjoy Clarkson & Co's clownings he should be treated like anyone else who assaults someone causing significant injury.
I disagree, sustained harassment over a year, and a physical assault by two people is worse than a one off assault. I was srrounded by abusive people, sceamng at me,one of them running at me and barging me. Clarkson's nehaviour was worse, but only because he was in a position of power, hence it was bullying. That is a matter for the employer. But your last sentence shows that we agree. My pointis thatthese days a minor assault does not warrant arrest, at best a verbal caution.
|
|
As for Top Gear, the 'brand' is now toxic and should be buried.
You're confusing the brand being toxic with your personal dislike of the programme. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean the world agrees with you.
If the brand was toxic, a million people (full in the knowledge Clarkson had lamped someone) wouldn't have signed a petition demanding his reinstatement. To put that in context, 1.4 million signed the petition against Road Pricing a decade ago and it's incredibly rare for an online petition to get even five figures, let alone a million.
Top Gear is still worth big money to any broadcaster who picks it up. Clarkson guarantees a broadcaster income. He guarantees a reach of 200 countries and a few hundred million viewers. His show (TG is his show) is broadcast in Russia. It's broadcast in Iran. It was even broadcast in Syria. He can reach parts of the World politicians could only dream of.
The BBC needs to put together a new motoring programme with new presenters and a new name, aimed at a more intelligent audience.
You've said that about 457 times and it's boring now, so I'll just say this; if there was any demand for this show you want made, somebody would've made it. The show you want to watch wouldn't get 350 million viewers in 200 countries. It would get about 5 viewers in North Yorkshire, which is what Old Top Gear got before Clarkson.
|
|
|
|
Jamie 745.
Its actually you that offends and talks rubbish.
Edited by xtrailman on 26/03/2015 at 07:08
|
|
|
Brum, I agree with most of that. The one point I will make is that humour is a key feature of TG, and it was Clarkson who wrote the scripts. Without Clarkson it would be different. The current format hangs on the characters and conflicts between the presenters. So TG on the BBC as it was has ceased to be, A Fifth Gear style programme would be dull. Maybe auntie can pull a rabbit from a hat.
|
|
|
|
My point was merely that if the producer had done his job properly (either arranging a late meal with the hotel or choosing another hotel which could do late meals), this whole thing would never have happened.
The acount suggested the producer did exactly that. A hot meal was planned for 20:00, after filming was finished for the day.
Clarkson et al then stayed in pub for two hours, keeping the helicopter and its pilot waiting. It's probable that during that period the producer phoned Cl and told him deadline for meal was approaching.
The producer then did best he could in circs and secured cold platters. What was he supposed to do? Commit a vast sum of 'licence payer's money' to keep kitch staff on overtime on off chance that Jezza wanted a steak?
|
I have been watching Top Gear since the very first show and up until recently had enjoyed it very much in all its formats. The occasional slot where they raced a lawn mower against a Eurofighter from John o' groats to Lands End was amusing but these stunts started to take over the show to a point where it was the whole show. So many of the incidents looked so staged as well. This is when I started to lose interest. Then I watched the show where JC was driving around a Supermarket, knocking over the shelves and displays. Even if all the damage is paid for, I didn't find that funny. That was it for me, I haven't watched a show since.
|
I would love to see this episode be the end of the BBC - about time the crap they churn out had to justify itself with the audience who are forced to pay for it whether they want it or not.
If the bbc can't survive on merit, then good b***** riddance.
As for JC, he made a mistake but the bbc reaction is disproportionate and inconsistent.
|
All good things come to an end. TG, in this form has had a very long run. It was going to end one day. How it has, time to move on. Who do we want next? How about an all girl crew? A real shake up. Suzi Perry, VBH and Sabine Schmitz?
TBH, I would like to see Chris Evans as anchor. Just because this last format had a team of three, it doesn't mean the next one has to replicate it. Jay Leno?
Could be 2 x Chris? Chris Harris. www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWB6vTboO5I
For those missing TG. TG Bloopers. www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6kOiuJY3GI
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY5w68VfyyU&list=PLY7X...3
Edited by Trilogy on 26/03/2015 at 13:43
|
IMO TG is dead without the current three presenters. You could create a new programme, maybe a car one, but Fifth Gear did not really work. You could create a chat show format, losely based round cars. I am sure it would work were they to be creative, but it would be different.
I think Auntie needs to think and create a new show format, rather than try and reheat a sausage stew which has lost its sausages.
|
TG is a recognisable brand worldwide. I'll be surprised if they abandon it.
|
TG is a recognisable brand worldwide. I'll be surprised if they abandon it.
Anutie has confirmed that it will be back next year with a new lead presenter, the Clarkson Mk 2. Whether or not Hammond and May will agree to co-present, that is another issue.
|
Doubt Richard and James will be back on a TG2. I would think, if another channel wants the guys, they will go as a package. Just my thoughts from what thye've inferred recently.
|
I think it could have continued if some terrible fate fell on a presenter as people would have sympathy and there would be no option but not in the current circumstances of killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
|
|
The BBC can bullishly say whatever they want - and they will - but Top Gear isn't coming back next year. They might make a programme called Top Gear, but that's where the similarities will end.
Hammond and May have already refused to do the show without Clarkson so there is absolutely no chance either will be involved and that's the BBC's problem. Top Gear doesn't have 350 million viewers because of it's name or production values, it has those viewers because of the presenters. Without the presenters, the BBC own nothing of value.
Clarkson, Hammond and May will go elsewhere and take their viewers with them. The only loser here is the BBC.
|
|
|
|
As for JC, he made a mistake but the bbc reaction is disproportionate and inconsistent.
If you punched someone where you work would you expect to be kept on when you are already on a last warning?
|
If you punched someone where you work would you expect to be kept on when you are already on a last warning?
No, but I don't earn my employer £50million every year. I don't have a worldwide fanbase of 350 million people and sacking me isn't going to cost my employer many hundreds of millions as a rival company benefits from my services.
|
Money is irrelevant. No one is bigger than the BBC.
|
Keep telling yourself that.
The BBC can afford for money to be irrelevant, because you and me are forced to fund them. We either finance their programming or we go to prison. No other broadcaster in this country has that luxury. Sky has to earn its money.
The BBC itself is nothing. It's all about the content. If they lose the content, they lose the viewership. It really is as simple as that. Nobody watches the BBC because it's the BBC, people just watch the shows they like.
I'm realistic enough to recognise showbiz is a different planet to the real world you and me inhabit. The entertainment business is an industry where you can bite football players and still earn £200k a week. You simply cannot apply real world rules to it.
The BBC have made a typically politically correct decision, which they can afford to make on account of never doing a days work in their collective lives. The BBC are also typically inconsistent because they'll handle their next scandal very differently, depending on what suits them at the time.
|
Jamie, it is only one programme and in the current format it was going to die one day. You just don't seem to be able to accept one day it could ever go. It has gone.
We are not forced to fund them. We can legally watch BBC programmes without having a TV licence. You should try it.
|
Well everything has to end at some point - except Coronation Street it would seem - but Top Gear hasn't ended. It'll simply move to another channel because the BBC can't show it anymore.
From my personal point of view, there is literally nothing worth watching on the entire BBC now I'm afraid. I'm flicking through their listings right now and there is absolutely nothing there.
It will leave a void when it is finally finished. It's been the BBC's anti-BBC programme for years. It's been the flagship, 'right wing', blokeish, anti-eco friendly, anti-political correctness, anti-health and safety programme in times where it doesn't (and some would say shouldn't) exist.
It's a bit like Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes - the only other decent shows the BBC's had this century - and the popularity of a character like Gene Hunt.
|
Top Gear is unsellable on commercial television with its current editorial license.
Can you imagine a Sky advertising exec contacting Peugeot to try and sell them advertising space after the episode a few weeks ago?
Top Gear has been running with the current three presenters since 2002, through 22 series encompassing a staggering 178 individual programmes
During that time, the 'left wing' BBC has kept it on air, despite controversies surrounding:
1) Homophobia
2)Cultural mockery - Germay, Romania, Mexico, Argentina
3) Racial slurs - Asian and Afro-Carribean derogatory terms
On commercial tv, any one of the above wouldve resulted in paying advertisers contacting the broadcaster to deal with the issue immediately, else lose their business. I dont think there's a single car manufacturer who hasnt been disparaged on Top Gear in some way, even Clarkson's beloved Range Rover are critcised for 'blinging Cheshire' associations and reliability concerns.
Clarkson knows this, he knows he couldnt do what he does on any other broadcaster, because no advertising revenue would come within a mile of his 'style' of broadcast.
So, the fabulous irony is that the 'liberal', 'left wing' BBC has supported this programme well beyond the tolerances of commercial tv, where the advertising revenue is all.
|
So, the fabulous irony is that the 'liberal', 'left wing' BBC has supported this programme well beyond the tolerances of commercial tv, where the advertising revenue is all.
One programme that is not politically correct and po faced? Take a look at the overall programming on the Beeb, then form a view. IMO there is nothing worth watching on the Beeb, except Top Gear, which is now a deceased TG, it has ceased to be ...And since TG is humour, look around. Marcus Brigstocke has his own half hour show which was no more than an extreme left wing rant, and quite unfunny. Jeremy hardy has had the same. It was a left wing rant, and sometimes funny, but he wasn't on form IMO. The new quiz is full of leftie stuff, as is the New Show etc etc etc etc. Now, Brigstocke and Hardy will happily call Tories 'b******s' or worse. Imagine calling poor people that, or gypsies, or gays. One rule for lefties, another rule for the rest of us. Look at Lord MacAlpine. He was a Tory, so obviously a bad un. It follows, dunnit? The poor man was falsely accused of paedophilia, by all the trendy leftie cuddly warm caring lefties, who then had to issue grovelling apologies.
An alternative viewpoint is that TG is the most popular factual programme [adopts a Clarkson voice] IN THE WORLD [back to normal voice], and is sold to huge numbers of countries, including those supposedly mocked. I think the truth is that we know Clarkson is not a racist, he just makes fun of cultural sterotypes, knowing they are stereotypes. People around the world like humour, and recognise that he is making fun of sterotypes, which we know are more often than not false. They have had a few problems. They must have thought 'slope' was on a par with Frog, or k****, or Limey (I've been called a Limey in the states), and apparently it is more akin to wog i.e. very offensive.
|
Can you imagine a Sky advertising exec contacting Peugeot to try and sell them advertising space after the episode a few weeks ago?
I think cold hard cash could overcome that to be honest. Advertisers care about numbers and getting their name on Top Gear - positively or negatively - is publicity any advertiser would kill for. I wouldn't be surprised if Top Gear is the biggest advertising earner for Dave.
So, the fabulous irony is that the 'liberal', 'left wing' BBC has supported this programme well beyond the tolerances of commercial tv, where the advertising revenue is all.
If by 'supported' you mean 'earned £50million a year out of it' then yes they did. The BBC may be left wing but they're not stupid. They don't turn down a good earner. Remember the BBC didn't finance Top Gear. Top Gear was a cash cow for the BBC and they did very well from it.
I'll concede Top Gear had a unique advantage by being on the BBC, it meant it could do whatever it wanted, but it only earned that right by being good and popular. Top Gear whethered storms lesser shows would've been axed for by the BBC. If it was still a minority interest show on BBC Four it would've been axed years ago.
|
|
He's finally on his bike, literally.
|
Some more interesting information is slowly emerging
Allegedly, Clarkson was drunk, does he have an alcohol problem? Many a "star" fallen from grace that way.
He continued his expletive rant, for a long time after Oisin had left to go to hospital. Witnesses confirm Oisin did not retaliate.
Piers Morgan ( love him or loath him) has published a very balanced piece offering advice for his friend in the daily mail, Google it and read.
significantly, it seems Sky will not take Clarkson.
“We couldn’t put Jeremy Clarkson on any Sky channels, especially those which are part of a family package deal and then face another controversy round the corner,”
Meanwhile poor Oisin continues to be the target of intense abuse via social media by some of Clarkson's fans making life for him and family and friends miserable. He was apperently even forced to move of his home. I despair.
Edited by brum on 26/03/2015 at 23:55
|
Well what can you expect from the type of people that would sign a petition without having the full facts.
|
I believe he is going through a divorce from his wife of over 20 years. Maybe that is all we need to know.
|
I believe he is going through a divorce from his wife of over 20 years. Maybe that is all we need to know.
Brum asked above if JC has an alcohol problem. While not conclusive several of the profiles have referred to hi propensity for Rose wine in quantity. It's also a known fact that the reason he missed the meal was becuase he (and the other two) were in a pub.
As regards divorce the same profiles suggested his wife has been at end of her tether for some time. Several infideleities have been mentioned and I believe he's living with another woman.
It does look though as if his world's suddenly crashed down around his ears.
|
I heard thet are planning a new Reality TV motoring programme called Cars for Queers.
|
I have been on film sets some time ago and I can't stress how important it is to get the catering right. Early starts and late finishes meands that everyone is exhausted at the end of the day and the only way the film companies can alleviate this is by providing a round the clock canteen serving geat food.
The same applies to Formula One pits where mechanics work through the night. Oisen seems to have failed on this score IMHO.
Perhaps the BBC will create a new post for him as Director of Catering.
|
The same applies to Formula One pits where mechanics work through the night. Oisen seems to have failed on this score IMHO.
To my mind your HO is way out of kilter with known facts.
A hot meal was available at the hotel for 20:00, after filming finished. A helicopter was provided to ferry the 'stars' from location back to hotel in time for meal.
Clarkson and co went instead to a pub for a couple of hours. Jezza at least got leathered. By the time they'd drunk up and got the (waiting) chopperback to hotel. As in most places k****** was closed at 22:00 so Oisin arranged cold platters to be available. Clarkson then kicked off.
What else was Oisin supposed to do. Spend thousands of 'licence payers money' on overtime for k****** staff?
|
Also, helicopters are rather expensive to hire, I wonder how much extra it cost to have it wait a couple of hours while Clarkson and his mates were in the pub?
|
|
|
If you punched someone where you work would you expect to be kept on when you are already on a last warning?
No, but I don't earn my employer £50million every year. I don't have a worldwide fanbase of 350 million people and sacking me isn't going to cost my employer many hundreds of millions as a rival company benefits from my services.
Money should not come into it - and in this case I'm glad the BBC did the right thing. It doesn't matter who you are or what you bring to the company you work for. It you punch someone then you are out and as I'm sure he would agree he only has himself to blame.
It's when people in power get away with things that everyone else would not is when it causes problems.
|
|
|
As for JC, he made a mistake but the bbc reaction is disproportionate and inconsistent.
If you punched someone where you work would you expect to be kept on when you are already on a last warning?
We only know half the story as usual, and the bbc only so hot on 'doing the right thing' when it suits them as has been mentioned several times.
The bbc is an archaic waste of time. Their content is mainly d***** and constantly looking for minorities to provide content for. And the way we pay for it is the most galling - where else in the world does a private company get its money extorted from the populatation under state law?
|
And the way we pay for it is the most galling - where else in the world does a private company get its money extorted from the populatation under state law?
It's not that uncommon a model for what is, for all the private company reference above, a state corporation. In fact the compulsory subscription model is incredibly widespread in one variation or another:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence
I'd pay £3 a week just for Radio 4.
|
|
Whatever the rights and wrongs of all this, and it would seem clear there that are plenty of both to be going on with, I shall miss the show. I've enjoyed most of them. Pity.
|
|
The bbc is an archaic waste of time. Their content is mainly d***** and constantly looking for minorities to provide content for.
The sad fact is that they do not provide content for minorities, far from it. What they do provide, on Radio 4 anyway, is a large number of trendy leftie often public school educated types pretending to speak for minorities. That is surely not the same thing. I would be happy to see more programmes catering for minorities, not that I know what that would be. Maybe Top Caravan for gypsies, perhaps we could have a competition for suitable programmes ...
|
The sad fact is that they do not provide content for minorities, far from it.
Are you not aware of BBC Asian Network, or BBC 1Xtra to name but two?
|
The sad fact is that they do not provide content for minorities, far from it.
Are you not aware of BBC Asian Network, or BBC 1Xtra to name but two?
I think there's just a bash BBC mode.
Facts are nothing.
|
The sad fact is that they do not provide content for minorities, far from it.
Are you not aware of BBC Asian Network, or BBC 1Xtra to name but two?
I think there's just a bash BBC mode.
Facts are nothing.
I disagree, facts are important.
|
|
The sad fact is that they do not provide content for minorities, far from it.
Are you not aware of BBC Asian Network, or BBC 1Xtra to name but two?
I know there is some radio, for some minorities, but TV?
|
Quite why anyone would want to eat at 10.00pm. Bit pointless to my mind, especially going to bed just having eaten a steak. If he'd still been married I have a feeling this would never have happened. Apparently his wife used to organise alot of stuff for him.
|
Bit naive, Trilogy.
Evidence:
1) It's late
2) He's hungry for meat and rich food
3) He's short of temper, loud of abuse, and ultimately violent when he doesnt get what he wants.
Conclusion:
Drunk (as suggested by the BBC exec's 'go to rehab' comment) and by his haggard glass-eyed appearance in recent times.
|
Isn't top gear for the minorities?
I'm very happy with what the BBC put out, although i would like them to show all the F1 shows, not half.
No adverts is always my preference, other channels i just watch on record.
|
Latest favourite. www.sc***horpetelegraph.co.uk/GEAR-Guy-Martin-favourite-ahead-Chris-Evans/story-26242089-detail/story.html
|
I don't know why they're bothering with this speculation because it arrogantly assumes Hammond & May will stay on and work with someone else. I just really don't think they will. If you sack one, you've sacked all three.
The current series still has three episodes to air. Three episodes worth of material already filmed and probably edited. I think May & Hammond could host those by themselves, show all the films and maybe have Clarkson on as the guest for the final episode then call it quits.
Yes the show has been 'reformatted' many times, but this incarnation of Top Gear has become so big that you simply can't apply that argument in this case. It's become something unique. Special. Unrepeatable. I think James May has been philosophical about it recently, noting he's one of the luckiest people on Earth who's had this wild ride completely by accident. It'll never happen again.
The BBC are deluding themselves if they believe they can simply slap a few new people on it, call it 'regeneration' and have it stay as popular as it is.
|
I don't know why they're bothering with this speculation because it arrogantly assumes Hammond & May will stay on and work with someone else. I just really don't think they will. If you sack one, you've sacked all three.
The current series still has three episodes to air. Three episodes worth of material already filmed and probably edited. I think May & Hammond could host those by themselves, show all the films and maybe have Clarkson on as the guest for the final episode then call it quits.
Those episodes are the property of the BBC under the existing contract.
May seems very downbeat and says he's always wanted to be a teacher.
As individuals, May may scrape a living doing those dumbed down engineering documentaries or voice overs. I can't see Hammond doing anything apart from going back to being a DJ. He'll pay the price for being Clarkson's patsy too long.
They say its down to ITV and Netflix.
|
I don't think that is fair. I dislike Hammond, but even I can see that both have been made into 'stars'. I enjoyed a recent series on cars by May. He also writes well on cars. I am sure Hammond has ability too, although I am not the one to judge. I am sure theyhave made a good wodge from TG and so on, and can live confortably.
|
They're all multi millionaires. None of them need to work again and none will be 'scraping' a living doing anything. Hammond is a professional media presenter, he's presented all sorts of things and will never be short of a gig. May admits he ended up on Top Gear by accident and Clarksons known nothing but TG for 25 years.
Good call on mentioning Netflix by the way because I think we're all looking at this completely wrong. All those people rejoicing that Clarkson is gone and 'commercial TV won't touch him' hasn't realised Netflix exists yet. They have a multi billion pound programming budget and do not answer to advertisers.
If Netflix could sign up Clarkson, Hammond, May and Wilman to make Top Gear for them it would completely change everything we believe about television. That would be the breakthrough for Internet TV and we could find a situation where the BBC then buys the rights for second showings from Netflix.
I want it to happen just because of the spitting rage his critics would slip into.
|
Latest favourite. www.sc***horpetelegraph.co.uk/GEAR-Guy-Martin-favourite-ahead-Chris-Evans/story-26242089-detail/story.html
Is this site's swear filter still so crude you can't say Sc***horpe or is the edit above a commercial one - giving publicity to rival newspaper publishers.
|
No it really is the swear filter. PATHETIC that I cannot name the town I once lived in.
|
Hmmm
Edited by brum on 27/03/2015 at 22:10
|
Try the Londoner's pronunciation: Scanthorpe :)
|
You can't say a***nal or Manchester f***ing United either. Both have the misfortune of containing naughty words.
Edited by jamie745 on 27/03/2015 at 21:58
|
A relative is a Titterngton.,does that get through?
As an aside, why is this web site almost unusable from an ipad?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|