swee'pea99
Legendary Member
It is a big decision, but I don't think protecting its staff is really the issue. I'm sure 'the victim' will survive anything meted out to him by lard-arse. The issue is the BBC's credibility and integrity as the public service broadcaster of this country.So, whining and fawning versus a final warning. Which will win?
Big decision for the BBC, which has a clear responsibility to protect its staff and also a need to earn its own money.
Personally I was revolted by the Mexican episode, thought the 'slope' comment was beyond the pale ('slope' being simply the east-asian version of 'nigger' has no business being used 'humorously' on the BBC), and was disgusted by the whole Argentina plates episode. (Anyone who bought the protestations that they 'never noticed' is an idiot; and anyone who thinks a recent war that resulted in over 900 deaths and is still an open wound in the country hosting them at the time is a good opportunity for a laugh is an idiot and a scumbag.)
No, Clarkson's whole 'what are we like?' schtick has been getting increasingly toxic (as well as just plain tired), for some time now, and the BBC really owes it to itself to pull the plug. They're not some right wing radio broadcaster in Montana, or even the commercial vehicle of a ruthless Aussie geriatric. They are the public service broadcaster of an, on the whole tolerant, decent and fair-minded nation, paid for by resident Vietnamese, Mexicans and Argentinians among others, and it's high time they said enough is enough. This is not who we are; you are bringing us into disrepute. And you are no longer welcome to drag our name through the mud. Even if it does cost us some revenues in the short term.
And I speak as a one-time fan, who believes that underneath it all, Clarkson remains one of our more intelligent, engaging and amusing tv personalities. It's just a shame he's also a daffodil.