Clarkson suspended by BBC

[Gardengirl]

Interesting interview just been on R4 with Alan Yentob.

[mint]

I might be setting myself up for a bit of aggrieved posting but I just so want to say that the BBC has gone up tremendously in my estimation.

It's done the right thing, as far as I am concerned, and put their money where their mouth is.

Now that it's all over, I must say that the 3 presenters represent everything that I dislike in a man.  And, no, I do NOT think it's clever or amusing or other than childish to be ranting and raving and saying things to gratuitously offend others.  Indeed, I think it's pathetic and imbecile to drive cars at dangerous speeds and that could never be tested by Joe Public on any roads anywhere in the world without risk to the drivers or to the public at large.

I am PROUD to be a bit stick-in-the-mud where offensive language and gestures are concerned.  I am no prude but I don't like bad language used gratuitously to provoke some sort of reaction. 

I believe my life is more sunny and loads better without encounters and language that do not enhance communication or preserve some form of civility.

[YCCMB]

More to the point, the BBC statement seems to be unequivocal in putting an end to a lot of the speculation and conspiracy-theorising (a fair percentage of it on here) about how there "must be more to the story" .

Well, it seems there wasn't. He threw a fit, acted like a bully and hit someone who seems (and the BBC confirmed it) to have acted with maturity and integrity throughout...contrary, again, to much earlier speculation on here.

The BBC, as a responsible employer, has gone through a formal disciplinary process, in line with correct policy, and done the only thing it could do. It's statement makes clear that it isn't unaware of the fact that it may be shooting itself in the foot, but, let's be honest, they are bang on about a line having been crossed, and I certainly think it would have been beyond appalling if Clarkson had "walked" , or, indeed, subjected to a sanction which differed in any way from that which would have been imposed on any other employee.

[vette]

I wonder why they didn't sack Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand?

Anyway, it's off to another TV channel for the 3 TG presenters I presume.

[YCCMB]

Well, they'd have had a job sacking Brand, as he had already fallen on his sword and resigned. Ross was suspended without pay for 12 weeks.

[lindal1000]

And as far as I know, Jonathan Ross was abusive but didn't actually hit anyone. Clarkson was already under a formal warning for episodes of verbal abuse, and he finished off with an assault that landed the other guy in hospital. Note that the events themselves are not disputed by Clarkson. Not sure the BBC could have acted in any other way.

[idun]

I did not obviously read the BBC statement as others did. It looked like flim flam to me, but there you go and I am very unhappy with the BBC and they have gone down in my estimation. mint, that you think the opposite is absolutely fine with me, I'd hate a world where we all act and the think the same.

James May was interviewed today and said that it had been a pity that something so minor had not simply been sorted out immediately and that it had gone so far. Strangely he had been there when this happened and called it minor.

And the A&E thing, well, frankly the way A&E is used in this part of the world (and for all I am not that close to Hawes, it is not that far away either), I will continue to pay little attention to that, unless ofcourse I could see photos and a full medical report of the beating it is suggested that the producer received. And where is the police report if there has been an assault?

The news is saying it was an unprovoked attack too. So what is provocative these days?

And it has me thinking, it is said that the tv producer did nothing, but wasn't that the problem, that he had done nothing, ie making sure that 'everything' was dealt with. Would I want him working for me after all this?

I do understand after a long day filming IF they found themselves in a pleasant pub and wanted a few pints, well, why not. These production teams, especially TG must have had huge budgets, simply took someone calling the hotel and basically saying to the hotel that they would be late and ask the chef to stay. In fact no matter where they were staying, I would, IF I had been in charge sorted that out in the beginning, and IF I had been running the hotel, would have made sure that I was paid accordingly.

The TG presenters are a rum old crew. The little'un and the long haired one take the mickey out of JC as he does with them. And they too take the mickey out of others. When we watch, we watch or turn off.

So I am not taking the BBC statement as good or reasonable. I suppose this is like divorce, it is never just one thing that makes people crack, is it? I do not believe that this is an end to it. And we the licence payers have now lost a great deal of income, which does not affect those of you who live in France and do not pay.

[lindal1000]

If JC had just had a hissy fit I'm not sure I'd be so bothered, but he hit someone, something he doesn't dispute. That's it as far as I'm concerned. I don't tolerate physical abuse from anyone..no matter how much money they could make for me.

You may be right about not hearing the last of it, as if I were the producer and one of my colleagues hit me I'd be pressing charges.

I hear there's a vacancy with One Direction. Perhaps JC has his eye on that. Quite a coincidence don't you think that the vacancy has come up this time!

[Hoddy]

One of his fellow guests at the hotel said that he was forced to listen to a twenty minute rant full of the worst expletives English has to offer. The man was not amused as he was staying there with his young family.

Sadly, for his fans, Clarkson has just got to the point where he thinks the rules are for lesser mortals.

As for Yentob talking about 'managing' people like Clarkson - does that mean 'pussyfooting around him' and is that what causes the problem ?

Hoddy

[Quillan]

Well there are a couple of weird things here. Firstly Clarkson and Tymon were mates and had worked together for many years. Secondly Clarkson was the one who reported it. Thirdly, according to Hall Tymon did not consider taking it further. Nobody can justify that punching a work mate is acceptable under any circumstances but there is something thats just not right about all this. It seems they will need to completely remake the last three episodes now and the other two will not be renewing their contracts with the BBC. Also lets make it quite clear as Hall has said he has not been sacked but his contract will not be renewed. Has not stopped the BBC from showing his old shows on BBC3 mind you.

[Hoddy]

Perhaps Clarkson reported himself to the BBC because it was so public and it would just have been a matter of time until it got into the papers.

Hoddy

[Gardian]

On R4's Today programme a week or so ago, Lord Grade (at the end of being interviewed about something else) was asked what he thought about it all.

He said (and here I paraphrase somewhat) "In the overall scheme of current world affairs, this pales in to insignificance".

Sums it up for me.

[Chancer]

Maybe I have missed something in the last decade but what is all this talk about J.C. and Top Gear making, or perhaps now losing the BBC millions?

We are not talking about Enron or Amazon here, this is the BBC, wasnt it a non commercial organisation funded by the TV  license payers with a charter for producing non biased and diverse programming free from the pressures of advertisers , shareholders or political bias? Isnt that still the case?

Ok I know you can shoot me down on all of the above with loads of examples of where the BBC has lost its way but does it really matter whether someone is popular or makes the company loads of money when they have physically and verbally assaulted a co-worker?

I think the BBC have acted correctly, I also suspect that the whole thing has been engineered and started way back when J.C. and Mr Willman sold the rights to the BBC, thats when they were almost certainly tied into remaining with the show for X years, prevented from creating any similar program, and the time that J.C orchestrated the first of his public misdemeanours.

He wont go short of a shilling thats for sure, and in fact it saddens me, in a just world he would be unemployable as a public figure and were it not for his millions would have  to go back on the Tools like the rest of us would if we were  sacked in a public manner for doing the same thing.

[Théière]

[quote user="Quillan"]

Come on then, have you got a secret contact in the BBC? [;-)]

[/quote]

Then it wouldn't be a secret but maybe [;-)]

[quote user="Quillan"]

Seems the producer had to go to A&E. It

pains me to say this as I really like JC and I really enjoyed the way he

presented Top Gear but as one has to accept this as true then yes,

sadly, he has to go. There I didn't think I would actually say that but

you can't excuse anyone for putting another in A&E.

[/quote]

There is a difference between putting someone in A&E and a wuss taking himself to A&E where nothing was done, just a wimp!

[quote user="mint"]

It's done the right thing, as far as I am concerned, and put their money where their mouth is.

 And,

no, I do NOT think it's clever or amusing or other than childish to be

ranting and raving and saying things to gratuitously offend others. 

Indeed, I think it's pathetic and imbecile to drive cars at dangerous

speeds and that could never be tested by Joe Public on any roads

anywhere in the world without risk to the drivers or to the public at

large.

[/quote]

That will be putting OUR money where their mouth is, Better they not dare put up the licence fee now they have a hole in the budget.

I do hope you didn't support Charlie Hebdo Mint, As they were all about upsetting others and now they are dead, At least Jeremy didn't shoot him. (just a comment, no offense meant [kiss][kiss])

They do drive at ridiculous speeds though, in fact the only thing faster is the film crew in their bus. Oh simple minded fools, of course it's real [:D] Jeremy wins by a whisker, yeh right, that's when I get bored ZZZZZzzzzzzzz.

[quote user="You can call me Betty"]

The BBC, as a responsible employer, has gone through a formal

disciplinary process, in line with correct policy, and done the only

thing it could do. [/quote]

Even Auntie BEEB must abide by employment law. Conspiracy? well that one we will have to wait on to see if richer networks pick up the opportunity, they might if the BBC doesn't get the show on the road quickly enough. Time will tell.

As Mint said you can't go around striking people any more but I can tell you a few years back maybe out of the office workers gaze it went on.

Well that's the end of this fascinating saga which lets face it BBC2 has never been so lively and probably won't ever be again.  Back on Dave I watched an old episode where Lewis Hamilton, still in short trousers showed just why he is the talented driver he is today, back then it was still amusing but it had staled to tedium in the last few years so long live Top Gear, wherever it appears next.

[Quillan]

But there is one good thing to come out of it if only for a very small amount of time and that is knocking Cameron and Miliband off the top of the news. Indeed they are down to third place on the news programs thank god. And on that bombshell I bid you all goodnight. [:D]

[PaulT]

Idun you certainly do seem to have the hots for JC - seems he walks on water.

JC had threatened him that he would lose his job and perhaps he thought the way that the BBC treated JC with kid gloves that he would if he said anything.

And why did JC says something - because there were witnesses from outside the BBC. Now they could sell their story to the newspapers or make a complaint to the BBC. In addition, the hotel were perhaps not too pleased with the fracas which could affect regular clientele.

And Idun, what a wimp the victim was - he probably deserved it being such a cry baby - going to A&E just because someone smacked him in the nose........perhaps he was also looking as a little bit of self preservation should JC try to get him the sack, he could then put his side of the story including the need for medical treatment. In addition, if a worker is injured then the employer should ensure that relevant medical attention is received.

As for calling the hotel and 'ordering' them to keep the chef on duty, the chef might have said 'I am not prepared to extend my shift I have other things to do' or does JC require all to bow down to whatever he requires.

[Théière]

[quote user="PaulT"]

As for calling the hotel and 'ordering' them to keep the chef on duty, the chef might have said 'I am not prepared to extend my shift I have other things to do' or does JC require all to bow down to whatever he requires.[/quote]

Money normally talks but not if the Chef was French [:)] then if you aren't sat down by 7:30 sharp you'll go hungry.........[;-)]

[Sprogster]

Interesting questions raised by the BBC presenter of Newsnight this evening, in that the BBC might have some culpability, by putting undue pressure on Clarkson to increase the current series by four episodes, when they knew he was under considerable stress from the death of his mother, his marriage breakdown and recent illness and was as a result clearly losing it.

There is no excuse for what Clarkson did, but when an employee is clearly stressed out, a responsible employer does not increase the workload to the point they crack under the pressure.

[Clark Kent II]

[quote user="Sprogster"]Interesting questions raised by the BBC presenter of Newsnight this evening, in that the BBC might have some culpability, by putting undue pressure on Clarkson to increase the current series by four episodes, when they knew he was under considerable stress from the death of his mother, his marriage breakdown and recent illness and was as a result clearly losing it. There is no excuse for what Clarkson did, but when an employee is clearly stressed out, a responsible employer does not increase the workload to the point they crack under the pressure.[/quote]

And it seems the local constabulary are interested. A charge of ABH would look good on his CV.

 

[YCCMB]

It might...but I suspect he's just about reached the threshold for common assault.

[Théière]

[quote user="You can call me Betty"]It might...but I suspect he's just about reached the threshold for common assault.[/quote]

Yes marvelous isn't it, they have the investigation all carried out for them so plod can't mess it up. What a shame the same swift action couldn't have been taken against Saville, Brittan, Smith et al

Far more serious and wanting of time and money spent, if the producer doesn't want to press charges the the CPS won't bring any action so just a waste of time and money to placate the newspapers and other media lowlifes.

[Quillan]

Well somebody has to report it to the police (who were there) for a start and then the victim will have to ask for him charged so I think this may well turn out to be a waste of public money.

I agree with Théière "What a shame the same swift action couldn't have been taken against Saville, Brittan, Smith et al". In the general way of things as wrong as Clarkson was it is nothing compared to what those scum were doing, got away with and what others continue to do. What about the Catholic priests, the C of Vicars who police thought it better their respective churches dealt with the matter? Then of course there is Bradford. But then I guess Clarkson is an easy target and on front page so it will show the police in a good light. Trouble is we don't fall for that BS anymore.

[Théière]

I don't recall that other petrol head , two jags Prescott being done by the police for assault or losing his job!

[Chancer]

He is on the short list for the new presenter, he is perfectly qualified.

[Théière]

Nnooooooooooooo