Clarkson in trouble

[China Man]

Just imagine Top gear get pulled off air just after the first show...

 

we never needed "free speech hoo ha" in UK like America because we use common sense and digest information we receive, that's no longer the case.

 

tax money this tax money that, there are so many more issue more important then jokes being PC or not on television. NHS, War, benefits system, banks...

 

surely if you don't like edgy jokes you don't watch the programs, let their rating drop then show get cut or at least that is how I thought it was supposed to work.

[R Black]

There must be some uber fragile people out there, so why are they watching Top gear???

[Gaz Walker]

We would absoltuely condenm what he said about murdering prostitutes. It ebggars belief that those words can be broadcast on TV. The BBC is an institution that is paid for by the licence fee and they should not be allowing this kind of sick joke.

 

Who's he then?

[RiceRocket]

Only 188 people offended/complained out of 7 million viewers

[michael]

There must be some uber fragile people out there, so why are they watching Top gear???

 

They aren't, this is the problem.

 

The Russell Brand / Ross thing highlighted this perfectly, hardly anyone complained after listening to the actual show but thousands complained once it had been highlighted to them by the media. They then allowed themselves to be shocked over and over again from watching / listening / reading the content at various sources and complained from there.

 

I think they reported 2 complaints from ~500,00 listeners and then the rest were as a result of the media frenzy.

 

I pay my license fee for content like this and I'm sure others do too.

[marc_p]

I thought it was really funny.

 

Sticks and stones and all that.

[Firestorm]

I thought it was really funny.

 

Sticks and stones and all that.

 

man its starting to annoy me this country! people need to stop whinning and laugh.. who sits there and goes .. on no no no this upsets me i must complain!!! people who aint got a life.. i could understand if was sayaing suicide bombers are heroes.. but this was a joke!! grrrr:bang:

[Tannhauser]

They aren't, this is the problem.

 

The Russell Brand / Ross thing highlighted this perfectly, hardly anyone complained after listening to the actual show but thousands complained once it had been highlighted to them by the media. They then allowed themselves to be shocked over and over again from watching / listening / reading the content at various sources and complained from there.

 

I think they reported 2 complaints from ~500,00 listeners and then the rest were as a result of the media frenzy.

 

I don't understand why there is a distinction between hearing the original broadcast and complaining about it and having it pointed out to you and then complaining about it. Either way, you're making a statement about what you feel is unacceptable conduct for broadcast.

 

I understand that the tabloids in particular will be trying to deliberately whip up outrage. However, in this case, nobody needs to go on second hand information, because the broadcasts are widely available.

 

There is an alternative view to it being a media-orchestrated mob response. There are an awful lot of people who don't like Russell Brand/Jonathon Ross and the style of broadcasting they represent. Normally, they don't do anything -what can they do, after all? - but when an opportunity presents itself to make their feelings known, they take it. Bandwagon-jumping is just another way of saying 'collective action'.

 

 

I pay my license fee for content like this and I'm sure others do too.

 

That's not easily resolved. You can take the line, 'If you don't like it, just don't watch it. Let it be broadcast to those people who do want it'. But there still is a concept of 'public decency', even if it is much changed from days gone by.

 

For example, if the BBC showed a programme where starving Kenyans crawled across glass to get to food dangled in front of them by whooping American youths, accompanied by comedy banjo music, I would hope that most people on here would want it taken off the air and that the argument that 'you should have it available if you want to see it' wouldn't wash.

 

If I'm correct in that assumption, then there is a limit to what can be broadcast, whether or not a proportion would want to see it. The question is where that limit lies - how exploitative or unpleasant can broadcasting get in order to satisfy the comedic needs of a proportion of the population. And what happens if that proportion is in the majority?

[AndrewOW]

For example, if the BBC showed a programme where starving Kenyans crawled across glass to get to food dangled in front of them by whooping American youths, accompanied by comedy banjo music, I would hope that most people on here would want it taken off the air and that the argument that 'you should have it available if you want to see it' wouldn't wash.

 

 

Maybe so, but that's what Channel 4 is for

 

Don't give them any ideas!

[Scoboblio]

I find it curious that Clarkson comes across as such a biggot on top gear, when his journalism paints a very different picture.

 

Different content for different audiences I suppose, people expect controversy and he's made a lot of money out of giving them what they want.

[Shadow Beast]

I bet not one of those that complained is a lorry driver either

 

 

Proberley a prostitute:d

 

richie

[Tannhauser]

man its starting to annoy me this country! people need to stop whinning and laugh..

 

You mean laugh at what you find funny? But as you pointed out, there are some things you don't find funny or acceptable. So, if Jonathon Ross had said "We are here to remember the victims who lost limbs in the London bombings...let's give them a big hand", would that be OK? No? How about something about violating children? Still slapping your thigh with mirth? The point is that we all either have stuff we don't find funny or stuff we think is appropriate for sitting around sharing with your mates but not for broadcast to millions.

 

who sits there and goes .. on no no no this upsets me i must complain!!!

 

I do. I complained to OFCOM about a programme called '101 things removed from the human body' because the narrator consistently implied that accident victims (like a woman who suffered brain damage after getting some wood through her head during a hurricane) somehow deserved it. I thought that that was vile and exploitative, so I said so.

 

people who aint got a life..

 

Presumably people 'with a life' are those that are happily engaged with their own tiny world and wouldn't dream of complaining about anything that doesn't directly impinge on that. Great.

 

i could understand if was sayaing suicide bombers are heroes.. but this was a joke!!

 

As above. With a bit of imagination, it's possible to envisage the idea that jokes can be controversial. For example, in a heated exchange, forum member A might refer to forum member B as a knuckle-dragging semi-literate dolt, whose mouth works soundlessly as he puzzles out the words he is reading. This would entertain some of the BBS, but it doesn't mean it's rightfor A to say it, because it's not nice to be the butt of the joke.

[Lbm]

Just a bit more info...

 

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article5079350.ece

[China Man]

 

If I'm correct in that assumption, then there is a limit to what can be broadcast, whether or not a proportion would want to see it. The question is where that limit lies - how exploitative or unpleasant can broadcasting get in order to satisfy the comedic needs of a proportion of the population. And what happens if that proportion is in the majority?

 

 

I think the line should be drawn by how many people view the show. Millions of people tune in every week to see him making jokes like that and only hundreds people complain...democracy lose?

 

I for one look forward to Friday night with Ross every week and a bit pee off now because he got pulled off air. Let him go on TV and apologize for that bad taste and get on with the next joke.

[Tannhauser]

I find it curious that Clarkson comes across as such a biggot on top gear, when his journalism paints a very different picture.

 

Different content for different audiences I suppose, people expect controversy and he's made a lot of money out of giving them what they want.

 

I've noticed that about Jonathon Ross. Such a clever and witty guy, and you get some of that on the radio (despite the current debacle) and on the film review programme. But on his TV show, I can't watch him for more than ten seconds. Total one trick pony. That's why I'm glad he's having a holiday from the BBC: apart from whether the broadcast was right or not, the more ubiquitous he's got, the worse he's become.

 

Kind of like Robin Williams or Jim Carey. Personally, I think both are at their best when somebody else reigns them in a bit (e.g. for a film role). Otherwise, they quickly get irritating as they get locked into that cycle of becoming more and more manic.

[China Man]

lol just read this

 

Prostitute welfare groups said that the remarks were insensitive. A spokeswoman from English Collective of Prostitutes said: "This is a truly heartless comment

 

top tips from Top gear, if you want to have safe sex don't get pick up by kerb crawing lorry drivers

[China Man]

I've noticed that about Jonathon Ross. Such a clever and witty guy, and you get some of that on the radio (despite the current debacle) and on the film review programme. But on his TV show, I can't watch him for more than ten seconds. Total one trick pony. That's why I'm glad he's having a holiday from the BBC: apart from whether the broadcast was right or not, the more ubiquitous he's got, the worse he's become.

 

Kind of like Robin Williams or Jim Carey. Personally, I think both are at their best when somebody else reigns them in a bit (e.g. for a film role). Otherwise, they quickly get irritating as they get locked into that cycle of becoming more and more manic.

 

May be you like Parkinson's type of interview show then? I like both but I enjoy a light friday night infront of the tv

[Tannhauser]

May be you like Parkinson's type of interview show then?

 

Nothing could be further from the truth. As TV interviewers, I think they are both really, really awful. Parky is such an a8se-licker and a classic 'over-laugher' - you know,one of those people who curl up in hysterics at something only mildly amusing. Totally boring.

 

Jonathon Ross interviews Jonathon Ross. Everything is subordinate to his ego. I find him embarrassing when he has attractive female guests on: a leering, priapic middle-aged leg humper. Again,does nothing for me. Then again, on the radio, he's not half as bad.

 

I guess one problem is that celebrities don't go on TV to be given a hard time. A bit of sexual innuendo and a*se-licking is fine, but anything a bit more challenging is out.

[3LL]

the whole nation has gone complaint crazy since all this crap with jonathan ross..

 

absolutely stupid.

 

if people cant take a joke, why do they watch / listen to these shows!

[marc_p]

I was always raised with the saying 'sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me' and people seemed to go fine sticking to that general way of thinking and it annoys me when people start complaing about what was SAID. Ok if Ross had held manuel down while Brand banged his grandaughter over his face and then came on his face or if Clarkson had actually reinacted the general lorrydriver and killed a prostitute then fair enough but they didn't IT WAS A F**KING JOKE PEOPLE.

[RedM]

Kind of like Robin Williams or Jim Carey. Personally, I think both are at their best when somebody else reigns them in a bit (e.g. for a film role). Otherwise, they quickly get irritating as they get locked into that cycle of becoming more and more manic.

 

Robin Williams was great in One Hour Photo and Insomnia. Not so great in Bicentennial Man.

 

His music career seems to have dried up after Rude Box though.

[marc_p]

Nothing could be further from the truth. As TV interviewers, I think they are both really, really awful. Parky is such an a8se-licker and a classic 'over-laugher' - you know,one of those people who curl up in hysterics at something only mildly amusing. Totally boring.

 

Jonathon Ross interviews Jonathon Ross. Everything is subordinate to his ego. I find him embarrassing when he has attractive female guests on: a leering, priapic middle-aged leg humper. Again,does nothing for me. Then again, on the radio, he's not half as bad.

 

I guess one problem is that celebrities don't go on TV to be given a hard time. A bit of sexual innuendo and a*se-licking is fine, but anything a bit more challenging is out.

 

Maybe you should just turn off the T.V.

[Lbm]

Robin Williams was great in One Hour Photo and Insomnia. Not so great in Bicentennial Man.

 

His music career seems to have dried up after Rude Box though.

 

*Looks for 'I see what you did there' Lolcat

[ivan]

Proberley a prostitute:d

 

richie

 

Nah, they wouldn't be sat inside watching TG of an evening.

[benkei]

I wonder what would happen if we complained about the complaints being made?

 

As previously quoted, people EXPECT that kind of thing from Clarkeson! If you feel that you may be offended by what he says, then don't watch the show, just in the same way you feel you might be eaten alive by sharks if you jump into the sea covered in cold cuts, don't do it! Not do it anyway and then look suprised when it happens and start complaining about the carniverous nature of the sharks and how they show take your stupidity into concideration.

I think it's time we took the bubble wrap off this molly-coddled granny state, and started to look at the bigger picture, not something someone said on TV once!