Friday Trolling Thread.....Clarkson: He's not wrong.

2

Comments

  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    SecretSam wrote:
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Having met him a few times, he's mostly like an excitable kid and a thoroughly nice guy, although he smokes like a chimney and has truly awful teeth. The latter two are probably connected!

    I thought he'd jacked in smoking?? So you've met 2/3 of the TG mob, as you've also met James May. One more and you get to be the Stig!!!!

    Met Hammond a good few times too. He's in our plane.
    FCN 7/1
    Viner Maxima, Tifosi CK7, Giant Bowery, Old commuter.
  • notsoblue
    notsoblue Posts: 5,756
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    I think the public perception is more that the frontline folk, nurses, doctors, firemen, police (to an extent - they receive more criticism) are hard-working types indeed. However, the desk driving muddle management pen-pushers.... not so much.

    The middle managers are needed to manage services handled by Serco.
    FCN 4 PX SL Pro SRAM Red
    FCN 8 Scott Sportster '05
  • notsoblue
    notsoblue Posts: 5,756
    btw, Tailwindhome is far too good at this...
    FCN 4 PX SL Pro SRAM Red
    FCN 8 Scott Sportster '05
  • t4tomo
    t4tomo Posts: 2,643
    SecretSam wrote:
    t4tomo wrote:
    Public sector worker are right up there with Mexicans when it comes to being work-shy feckless lazy layabouts.

    Clearly you've never worked with the same public sector as I have - the one that I work with (note: I'm private sector) is full of dedicated, extremely hard-working and high-quality people.

    Bear in mind that those work-shy feckless lazy layabouts are the same ones who will put you back together should you ever come off your bike. Or save you from a burning building, protect your person and property, provide defence of the land, maintain the roads on which you drive, provide the signs that you read, look after the street lights that light your way...do I need to go on?

    I think you missed the joke there Sam. For reference JC also insulted most of Mexico on Top Gear prompting the mexican ambassador to lodge an official complaint to the BBC. That isn't actually my opinion of public sector workers nor mexicans.
    Bianchi Infinito CV
    Bianchi Via Nirone 7 Ultegra
    Brompton S Type
    Carrera Vengeance Ultimate Ltd
    Gary Fisher Aquila '98
    Front half of a Viking Saratoga Tandem
  • BigJimmyB
    BigJimmyB Posts: 1,302
    notsoblue wrote:
    The middle managers are needed to manage services mishandled by Serco.

    FTFY
  • Coach H
    Coach H Posts: 1,092
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Clarkson's public sector anyway, isn't he? Employed by the BBC?

    I think you will find he is employed by the production company, that he part owns, which is the commissioned by the BBC to make Top Gear. So no, not public sector and not employed by the BBC
    Coach H. (Dont ask me for training advice - 'It's not about the bike')
  • notsoblue
    notsoblue Posts: 5,756
    Coach H wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Clarkson's public sector anyway, isn't he? Employed by the BBC?

    I think you will find he is employed by the production company, that he part owns, which is the commissioned by the BBC to make Top Gear. So no, not public sector and not employed by the BBC

    Still, its public money that pays much of his salary. ;)
    FCN 4 PX SL Pro SRAM Red
    FCN 8 Scott Sportster '05
  • t4tomo
    t4tomo Posts: 2,643
    notsoblue wrote:
    Coach H wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Clarkson's public sector anyway, isn't he? Employed by the BBC?

    I think you will find he is employed by the production company, that he part owns, which is the commissioned by the BBC to make Top Gear. So no, not public sector and not employed by the BBC

    Still, its public money that pays much of his salary. ;)


    Yes but very different being employed by the public sector than being employed / owning a company which the public sector procures services from.
    Bianchi Infinito CV
    Bianchi Via Nirone 7 Ultegra
    Brompton S Type
    Carrera Vengeance Ultimate Ltd
    Gary Fisher Aquila '98
    Front half of a Viking Saratoga Tandem
  • il_principe
    il_principe Posts: 9,155
    I doubt he gets most of his cash from the Beeb. The show is sold abroad plus he has his books, column, dvd's and Top Gear Live. He's certainly not lazy.

    Peoples reaction is both hilarious and pathetic. I best most of them haven't bothered to watch in context either. Shades of Ross/Brand.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    edited December 2011
    Coach H wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Clarkson's public sector anyway, isn't he? Employed by the BBC?

    I think you will find he is employed by the production company, that he part owns, which is the commissioned by the BBC to make Top Gear. So no, not public sector and not employed by the BBC

    Really? He's reported as being paid by the BBC and the show is made by (or at least on behalf of) the BBC.
  • CiB
    CiB Posts: 6,098
    notsoblue wrote:
    Coach H wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Clarkson's public sector anyway, isn't he? Employed by the BBC?

    I think you will find he is employed by the production company, that he part owns, which is the commissioned by the BBC to make Top Gear. So no, not public sector and not employed by the BBC

    Still, its public money that pays much of his salary. ;)
    Which should be seen as an investment; BBC pays out a shedload of cash to the independent production company to make TG, which also includes paying for Hammond, May, its v high production costs etc. TG is then sold by BBC Worldwide for a huge return on that investment. TG helps to keep the licence fee down by contributing a decent amount to the BBC's total income. JC's salary is a drop in the ocean compared to what it makes for them.

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    He missed a trick there, if he'd been really sharp he could have compared the strikers to mexicans, how much better would the bunfight have been then?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    CiB wrote:

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.

    Wait, wait - you're suggesting Clarkson had a nuanced argument?

    You're as bad as the people who care.

    It was a boring joke that went badly wrong.

    That was it.
    _
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    CiB wrote:

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.

    Wait, wait - you're suggesting Clarkson had a nuanced argument?

    You're as bad as the people who care.

    It was a boring joke that went badly wrong.

    That was it.

    You're a boring joke.

    That is it.
    FCN 7/1
    Viner Maxima, Tifosi CK7, Giant Bowery, Old commuter.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    Why such a rush to defend Clarkson? Trying to contextualise what he said is all well and good. Yes he was jokingly providing a 'counter' view but his 'comments' were just rambling - why shot in front of their families? Why not in front of the patients whose operations may have been cancelled, or the parents of schoolchildren who had to have the day off? At least that would have made some twisted sense. He needs to get a better writer. Predictbly, some people became unnecessarily outraged at his meanderings. Equally predictably some people have become outraged at this outrage
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    CiB wrote:

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.

    Wait, wait - you're suggesting Clarkson had a nuanced argument?

    You're as bad as the people who care.

    It was a boring joke that went badly wrong.

    That was it.

    You're a boring joke.

    That is it.
    :cry:
    _
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    CiB wrote:

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.

    Wait, wait - you're suggesting Clarkson had a nuanced argument?

    You're as bad as the people who care.

    It was a boring joke that went badly wrong.

    That was it.


    You're a boring joke.

    That is it.
    :cry:

    Dont be sad. She's established that she met him twice and he was nice. So you're criticising someone she's practically related to.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    That's it. I'm off to have a nosebleed.
    _
  • nozzac
    nozzac Posts: 408
    Paulie W wrote:
    Why such a rush to defend Clarkson? Trying to contextualise what he said is all well and good. Yes he was jokingly providing a 'counter' view but his 'comments' were just rambling - why shot in front of their families? Why not in front of the patients whose operations may have been cancelled, or the parents of schoolchildren who had to have the day off?

    Because none of that is funny.

    I don't see people "rushing" to defend him, nor "trying to contextualise" what he said. I see people reacting to ludicrous media and union hysteria and putting the comments in the context they were in. They were satirical comments from a man introduced onto the show as outrageous. "Take them outside and shoot them" is a common English phrase.

    What's amazing is a union leader calling for the immediate dismissal of a public sector worker without due process. If they did, maybe they'd have to go on strike again to get his reinstatement.

    BTW he IS a BBC employee as far as Top Gear goes. It's a BBC in house production and one of the most profitable they make.
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Paulie W wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    CiB wrote:

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.

    Wait, wait - you're suggesting Clarkson had a nuanced argument?

    You're as bad as the people who care.

    It was a boring joke that went badly wrong.

    That was it.


    You're a boring joke.

    That is it.
    :cry:

    Dont be sad. She's established that she met him twice and he was nice. So you're criticising someone she's practically related to.

    Do you work in the public sector by any chance? I'm gleaning this from your inability to perceive humour.
    FCN 7/1
    Viner Maxima, Tifosi CK7, Giant Bowery, Old commuter.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Do you work in the public sector by any chance? I'm gleaning this from your inability to perceive humour.
    Oooo!

    It's on!
    _
  • bigmat
    bigmat Posts: 5,134
    @ LiT, it came across as really quite unpleasant, to me at least. Perhaps this thread needs a humour reboot? Clarkson's comments don't really deserve so much attention, to the extent that there is any fault it is with the producers who allowed him to comment on such an inappropriate show. He was probably just wilfully courting controversy, let's be honest the guy is no satirist (although occasionally quite amusing).
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/41991871@N ... otostream/
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    NozzaC wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    Why such a rush to defend Clarkson? Trying to contextualise what he said is all well and good. Yes he was jokingly providing a 'counter' view but his 'comments' were just rambling - why shot in front of their families? Why not in front of the patients whose operations may have been cancelled, or the parents of schoolchildren who had to have the day off?

    Because none of that is funny.

    I don't see people "rushing" to defend him, nor "trying to contextualise" what he said. I see people reacting to ludicrous media and union hysteria and putting the comments in the context they were in. They were satirical comments from a man introduced onto the show as outrageous. "Take them outside and shoot them" is a common English phrase.

    What's amazing is a union leader calling for the immediate dismissal of a public sector worker without due process. If they did, maybe they'd have to go on strike again to get his reinstatement.

    BTW he IS a BBC employee as far as Top Gear goes. It's a BBC in house production and one of the most profitable they make.

    Maybe not funny - but then neither was Clarkson - but at least it would actually have been satirical (best check what satirical actually means).
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    lost_in_thought wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    CiB wrote:

    For the record Clarkson didn't accuse strikers of being lazy, idle & incompetent. He specifically referenced the strike in relation to their pension provisions. Why let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned union rant though? I can't wait to see the GMB picketing Clarkson.

    Wait, wait - you're suggesting Clarkson had a nuanced argument?

    You're as bad as the people who care.

    It was a boring joke that went badly wrong.

    That was it.


    You're a boring joke.

    That is it.
    :cry:

    Dont be sad. She's established that she met him twice and he was nice. So you're criticising someone she's practically related to.

    Do you work in the public sector by any chance? I'm gleaning this from your inability to perceive humour.

    Do you mean your humour or Clarkson's? Both are less than evident.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Paulie W wrote:
    lost_in_thought wrote:

    Do you work in the public sector by any chance? I'm gleaning this from your inability to perceive humour.

    Do you mean your humour or Clarkson's? Both are less than evident.


    Oooo!


    I think it's now safe to say,
    Donkey%20Kong.jpg
    _
  • nozzac
    nozzac Posts: 408
    Paulie W wrote:
    NozzaC wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    Why such a rush to defend Clarkson? Trying to contextualise what he said is all well and good. Yes he was jokingly providing a 'counter' view but his 'comments' were just rambling - why shot in front of their families? Why not in front of the patients whose operations may have been cancelled, or the parents of schoolchildren who had to have the day off?

    Because none of that is funny.

    I don't see people "rushing" to defend him, nor "trying to contextualise" what he said. I see people reacting to ludicrous media and union hysteria and putting the comments in the context they were in. They were satirical comments from a man introduced onto the show as outrageous. "Take them outside and shoot them" is a common English phrase.

    What's amazing is a union leader calling for the immediate dismissal of a public sector worker without due process. If they did, maybe they'd have to go on strike again to get his reinstatement.

    BTW he IS a BBC employee as far as Top Gear goes. It's a BBC in house production and one of the most profitable they make.

    Maybe not funny - but then neither was Clarkson - but at least it would actually have been satirical (best check what satirical actually means).

    It was straight Juvenalian satire by the definition I'm aware of - sarcasm, ridicule, angry invective. Yes your comments would be arguably even more satirical or maybe just more targetted. It's hard to define these things.

    I thought Clarkson was funny. Sense of humour is a personal thing.

    I happened to watch it and not only was Clarkson funny but the reaction of the goody-two-shoes hosts was even funnier. It was almost like a Larry David skit watching them squirm.

    What makes Clarkson funny, in my view, is that his crudely thought-out comments burst the politically correct pomposity of the BBC. I totally disagree with his anti-scientific stance on global warming and various other subjects but I still laugh at it.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    t4tomo wrote:
    notsoblue wrote:
    Coach H wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Clarkson's public sector anyway, isn't he? Employed by the BBC?

    I think you will find he is employed by the production company, that he part owns, which is the commissioned by the BBC to make Top Gear. So no, not public sector and not employed by the BBC

    Still, its public money that pays much of his salary. ;)


    Yes but very different being employed by the public sector than being employed / owning a company which the public sector procures services from.

    A good example of the over-simplification of the whole public/private sector thing - the incorrect presumption that the public sector doesn't infact employ the private sector and that by cutting the public sector, far from creating new private sector jobs, you actually lose more private sector jobs as well.

    PS - LiT, you are being mean. And your cute avatar has fallen off!
    Faster than a tent.......
  • NGale
    NGale Posts: 1,866
    Sketchley wrote:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15993558

    First he says about the strikes "I think they have been fantastic"
    Later he says "But we have to balance this though, because this is the BBC."
    Then he says "Frankly, I'd have them all shot"...
    Then one of the hosts says "of course those are Jeremy's views."
    To which he replies "They're not. I've just given two views for you."

    a BIG +1 to that!

    I saw the show that night and what I witnessed were two half witted presenters goading him into making 'controversial' comments after he showed ambivalence if not support towards the public sector strikes.

    of the 23,000 'complaints' made I wonder how many of those came from Daily Mail readers who were told to feel insulted and yet never watched the programme!
    Officers don't run, it's undignified and panics the men
  • jamesco
    jamesco Posts: 687
    Clarkson's become a parody of himself, which is a bit of a shame as he's obviously quick-witted and funny, but he's boxed himself into this simplistic, contrarian and obnoxious public persona. He should be got rid of from the beeb, not because he's gone too far this time, but because he's well & truly jumped the shark.

    Clarkson is the Tory Frankie Boyle.

    Written from my private-sector computer ;)
  • bunter
    bunter Posts: 327
    I get that it was a joke. I don't think it was funny but didn't take it seriously. I had to explain to my daughter why she had heard that someone on the telly thought her parents should be shot in front of her. That wasn't funny either.

    Personally I would be delighted to get rid of Clarkson and the News of the World in the same year.

Categories