[Closed] Jeremys comments acceptable

Oh the ironing

They should be pistol whipped first

He sometimes says the most idiotic things...................................IN THE WORLD.

I dislike Clarkson immensely, but if you listen to the whole statement, there is no way it was meant to be serious, or could be considered offensive. Unless of course you read an excerpt in a tabloid and was told to be offended.

Hang a banker a week until the others improve

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/feb/17/ken-livingstone-hang-bankers-speech?newsfeed=true ]Really, what is the difference? Both are stupid, off the cuff remarks designed to provoke a positive or amused response with those who agree with the sentiment and a negative or OUTRAGED! one from those who don't.[/url]

MSP, you ever met him, or just going on his on screen persona, or what you read in the tabloids and are told to believe. 😯

In context they were fine, but even out of context if that what he thinks he should have the freedom to say it, and I'm one of the people he would have had shot. The man is a bloated throbber, but that is another matter.

Edit -

or just going on his on screen persona,

If you act like a bit of a cock, you just have to expect some people will think you are a cock, and I'm sure he is perfectly happy getting a rise from folk. He is just a bloke on the telly, it's not worth getting too excited about.

I can easily believe that there are 31,000 people in this country with nothing better to do with their empty futile lives than to waste their time and ours making spurious complaints about our national heroes.

The man is a bloated throbber.

What's your opinion of Clarkson, then? 😉

He's Clarkson, not a serious journalist, he says things for fun, to provoke a reaction, to amuse.

Frankie Boyle, now he's got some serious and valid opinions on him!

Massive over reaction if you listen, read the whole statement it's no way offensive.

regardless of what you think of Clarkson I think common sense has prevailed..

It's the obsession with helmets that really gets my goat...

Some say ..... "and on that bombshell.... "

I wonder how many of the complainants actually saw the programme and how many just jumped on the media bandwagon?

Anyway good programe last night with the mobility scooters and the injured servicemen.

I wonder how many of the complainants actually saw the programme and how many just jumped on the media bandwagon?

Surely that would only be relevant if they were complaining about the quality of the programme, and not about what Clarkson had said - no ?

Surely that would only be relevant if they were complaining about the quality of the programme, and not about what Clarkson had said - no ?

It's entirely relevant if they were basing their complaint on what was reported in the media and not on the entirety of what was actually said. I would guess that most people say something at some point which, when taken out of context and only partially quoted would cause offence to someone.

Mr-C beat me to it.

It's entirely relevant if they were basing their complaint on what was reported in the media and not on the entirety of what was actually said.

So you are assuming that they weren't aware of "the entirety of what was actually said", which isn't quite the same thing.

Because if for example I read in my newspaper that Clarkson had said on the television that all gay men should be castrated, then I think I would be entitled to complain to the BBC claiming that I considered the behaviour of one of their presenters to be unacceptable. Whether I had seen the actual programme would be irrelevant imo. Although obviously knowing the context in which it was said would be relevant.

In this particular example which the thread refers to I suspect most people were fully aware of the context. I certainly was by just reading the newspaper reports and watching repeated clips on the TV, I don't watch any programme which Clarkson appears on.

And no, I didn't complain. I saw it for what it was - an unfunny joke. Although I can understand how some people might perhaps overreact to what they see as the constant vilification of trade unionists in the media. Specially as in some parts of the world trade unionists are/have indeed been taken out and shot for striking.

It's just TV it's not real.

It's just TV it's not real.

What's that suppose to mean ? Like an internet forum 'isn't real' ? So you can say what you like ?

In most walks of life, if someone says something offensive to you, you can either try to stop them doing so again, or if you don't think they're worth the bother, walk away / turn off the TV / look at another thread.

Most people 'offended' by this also wouldn't think Clarkson is worth the bother. Probably best just to turn the telly off in that case (and then ask yourself why you were watching the One Show in the first place), rather than getting offended over an out-of-context quote in a tabloid.

I find him pretty unlikeable at the best of times but taken in context (i.e. with the preceding sentence) it was obviously meant to be humorous. Even then the butt of the joke were the BBC guidelines rather than the strikers, which incidentally included Mrs mW.

So you are assuming that they weren't aware of "the entirety of what was actually said", which isn't quite the same thing.

Not quite the same thing as what?

if for example I read in my newspaper that Clarkson had said on the television that all gay men should be castrated, then I think I would be entitled to complain to the BBC claiming that I considered the behaviour of one of their presenters to be unacceptable

Why would you be entitled to complain to the BBC. You didn't hear the alleged remark first hand you are simply responding to hearsay which may or may not be a complete quote or taken in context. What if he had actually said "I believe all gay men should be castrated as much as I believe the moon is made of green cheese" but the only bit the hysterical media reported was the first half of the statement.

Just to be clear I don't have any great love for Clarkson but I do find him vaguely entertaining as I don't believe he means most of what he says he just says it for effect. Instances such as this just provide more fuel to his fire in that he is trying to wind up the growing number of people who seem to be in a constant state of ire looking for something to be outraged about.

A few years ago I would have been one of the people he wanted shooting (had he actually meant that) and fully support the strikers.

31,000 complaints ! How many would actually complain if they had to make the slightest effort to do so ? take away the couple of clicks internet option,say write a letter and there'd be maybe 31.

Mr_C - Member

So you are assuming that they weren't aware of "the entirety of what was actually said", which isn't quite the same thing.

Not quite the same thing as what?

if for example I read in my newspaper that Clarkson had said on the television that all gay men should be castrated, then I think I would be entitled to complain to the BBC claiming that I considered the behaviour of one of their presenters to be unacceptable

Why would you be entitled to complain to the BBC. You didn't hear the alleged remark first hand you are simply responding to hearsay which may or may not be a complete quote or taken in context. What if he had actually said "I believe all gay men should be castrated as much as I believe the moon is made of green cheese" but the only bit the hysterical media reported was the first half of the statement.

Just to be clear I don't have any great love for Clarkson but I do find him vaguely entertaining as I don't believe he means most of what he says he just says it for effect. Instances such as this just provide more fuel to his fire in that he is trying to wind up the growing number of people who seem to be in a constant state of ire looking for something to be outraged about.

A few years ago I would have been one of the people he wanted shooting (had he actually meant that) and fully support the strikers.

I read my post - I explain fully the points which you raised.

TBH I wish there was someone I could write to and complain... "Dear stupid people's ombudsman, I was appalled to discover that people took what Jeremy Clarkson said seriously. Please arrange further beatings until this stops"

I am assuming the offense taken was driven by guilt, really.
If Jeremy were to tell me I was unclean and homely, I'd tell him he was old.
Both general facts.
Striking in a public sector.. less acceptable. About as acceptable as being upset by a comedian saying off the cuff things...

Clarkson is a knob

It's not illegal yet.

I'd assumed that the offence was taken by people who are worried about their pensions and are hearing comments like that from someone who will never need to worry about his.
Yes he's doing for effect but remember how this forum reacts when it's anti-cycling comments in the media.