Jeremy Clarkson in The Sunday Times
Controversial, moi?
trytofly
Yes we all swear but I do not swear routinely and certainly only in the presence of company where it is acceptable.
On a very public bulletin board it neither looks good nor is it necessary.
I actually think it detracts from the point that the contributor is making.
I might be slightly old fashioned in thinking that we ought to maintain a certain level of moral standards. No doubt you will disagree.
Yes we all swear but I do not swear routinely and certainly only in the presence of company where it is acceptable.
On a very public bulletin board it neither looks good nor is it necessary.
I actually think it detracts from the point that the contributor is making.
I might be slightly old fashioned in thinking that we ought to maintain a certain level of moral standards. No doubt you will disagree.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wee Weasly: Clarkson has indeed parlayed his minimal talent into a lucrative career, and the vast majority of his cash has come from my taxes and yours... from the £12 million a day we are required to pay to the BBC for its decreasingly interesting tripe. Don't you just love to see these raging iconoclasts - Clarkson, Deayton and Hislop spring first to mind - standing there with their hands out for the public dole.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M.Mouse
No..I certainly do not disagree..at least not entirely.
Right time and place, and of course company, and even I do not swear routinely.
Personally, I think only once I saw swearing on this site that I thought was unnecessary, and somehow looked wrong / over the top. It was repetitive which made it worse.
That you think it distracts from the point I cannot quite grasp, but I wouldn't argue that with you. Opinions are just that.
Anyway.....if you see me swearing on this site again, try to take it as no more than a simple way of expressing myself. (Lazy - not thick). Never will you see me swear at or about anyone. If it still offends or upsets, I apologise and will accept another literary ticking off.
Morals ??? Not enough people have high morals and I beleive jc did not claim the moral high ground in this case. Had he kept it simple, non vindictive and to the point he would have walked it. Big mistake.
( My opinion only...see above !! )
No..I certainly do not disagree..at least not entirely.
Right time and place, and of course company, and even I do not swear routinely.
Personally, I think only once I saw swearing on this site that I thought was unnecessary, and somehow looked wrong / over the top. It was repetitive which made it worse.
That you think it distracts from the point I cannot quite grasp, but I wouldn't argue that with you. Opinions are just that.
Anyway.....if you see me swearing on this site again, try to take it as no more than a simple way of expressing myself. (Lazy - not thick). Never will you see me swear at or about anyone. If it still offends or upsets, I apologise and will accept another literary ticking off.
Morals ??? Not enough people have high morals and I beleive jc did not claim the moral high ground in this case. Had he kept it simple, non vindictive and to the point he would have walked it. Big mistake.
( My opinion only...see above !! )
t'aint - well when Jeremy took home from the BBC only a fraction of what they paid Dale Winton or Anthea Turner I hardly begrudge Jeremy his shilling.
Besides - he made the majority of his money by founding the prodution company that produced his Speed series (excellent Aviation content) plus his chatshow plus his video spin offs. Thats his own company founded with his own money at his own risk.
Have I Got News For You remains one of the best shows on television.
Last nights Top Gear underlined the lack of Jeremy effect now present - Quentin Wilson doesn't show up, Tiff gets 3 mins to rate a Proton 7/10 (like thats using his talents), Berry the Bike has dissapeared and all we get is a couple of blokes with hair gel displaying no specialist knowledge or indeed petrol-head appreciation of the cars about which they talk.
I am sure the focus groups love it but like many people and Forumla One these days - I can barely be bothered to watch.
Anyhows, I think this is off to Aircrew Notices very soon.
Cheers,
WWW
Besides - he made the majority of his money by founding the prodution company that produced his Speed series (excellent Aviation content) plus his chatshow plus his video spin offs. Thats his own company founded with his own money at his own risk.
Have I Got News For You remains one of the best shows on television.
Last nights Top Gear underlined the lack of Jeremy effect now present - Quentin Wilson doesn't show up, Tiff gets 3 mins to rate a Proton 7/10 (like thats using his talents), Berry the Bike has dissapeared and all we get is a couple of blokes with hair gel displaying no specialist knowledge or indeed petrol-head appreciation of the cars about which they talk.
I am sure the focus groups love it but like many people and Forumla One these days - I can barely be bothered to watch.
Anyhows, I think this is off to Aircrew Notices very soon.
Cheers,
WWW
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is getting way outside the scope of this forum, but perhaps "Taint's problem" can be summed up thus:
Are there any Americans on this thread? Do you realise that here in Britain, you must have a government licence to own a TV, and if you have a TV but no licence (license to you) you can go to prison? That Big Brother detector vans go about the country tracking down people who haven't paid their TV tax? And that this licence income, some US$6 billion per annum, is given to the State broadcaster to produce some of the world's worst and most expensive broadcast media? That this particular tax supports over 24,000 freeloaders? You'd think that if the taxpayer had £12 million to spare he'd equip a hospital, or build a school, instead of outbidding commercial TV for Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or otherwise bankrolling the BBC for a single day. Mr Deayton may indeed be worth US$75,000 for a single evening's work, buy why should the taxpayer pay when, having stumped up, the taxpayer then elected to watch commercial TV anyway? Yes, I resent every thousand pounds that that monochromatic pudden Clarkson takes from me and my ilk, and I would urge him to get off the public dole and try to make a living from somebody who wants to pay for his services.
Anyway, Harry, how d'you know this mere entertainer gets more than me?
My last word on the subject (unless sorely provoked) Back to aviation, please.
Are there any Americans on this thread? Do you realise that here in Britain, you must have a government licence to own a TV, and if you have a TV but no licence (license to you) you can go to prison? That Big Brother detector vans go about the country tracking down people who haven't paid their TV tax? And that this licence income, some US$6 billion per annum, is given to the State broadcaster to produce some of the world's worst and most expensive broadcast media? That this particular tax supports over 24,000 freeloaders? You'd think that if the taxpayer had £12 million to spare he'd equip a hospital, or build a school, instead of outbidding commercial TV for Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or otherwise bankrolling the BBC for a single day. Mr Deayton may indeed be worth US$75,000 for a single evening's work, buy why should the taxpayer pay when, having stumped up, the taxpayer then elected to watch commercial TV anyway? Yes, I resent every thousand pounds that that monochromatic pudden Clarkson takes from me and my ilk, and I would urge him to get off the public dole and try to make a living from somebody who wants to pay for his services.
Anyway, Harry, how d'you know this mere entertainer gets more than me?
My last word on the subject (unless sorely provoked) Back to aviation, please.
And I suppose you never listen to Radio 4? In perfect FM from the Hebrides to Guernsey... Or any of the BBC Local radio stations or indeed World Service which reaches some 92% of the World Population I believe. That is an important national asset - the only truth known behind the Iron Curtain for more than a generation.
I suppose you think all those Open University, Childrens TV that isn't all cartoons, ethnic minority/specialist interest prgarammes would happen without the license fee? How come the UK is the ONLY country in the world to have digital radio nationwide in the very near future? Is it because - like colour and FM radio - only an *institution* can afford to make such investment without answering to shareholders with their yearly dividend demand.
If you want a completely Plebian populace then go ahead and sanction US style TV. I think the BBC is the most fantastic tax investment that I fund.
However this *is* really now Aircrew Notices at the very least so I shall move it henceforth.
WWW
I suppose you think all those Open University, Childrens TV that isn't all cartoons, ethnic minority/specialist interest prgarammes would happen without the license fee? How come the UK is the ONLY country in the world to have digital radio nationwide in the very near future? Is it because - like colour and FM radio - only an *institution* can afford to make such investment without answering to shareholders with their yearly dividend demand.
If you want a completely Plebian populace then go ahead and sanction US style TV. I think the BBC is the most fantastic tax investment that I fund.
However this *is* really now Aircrew Notices at the very least so I shall move it henceforth.
WWW
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Coventry, UK
Age: 39
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno if anyone has asked this - but does JC fly? He seems to have a real interest in aviation, just wondered if anyone knows if he has a PPL or anything.
Regards
Mike
Regards
Mike
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Englands newest City
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
t'aint natural
Sorry old boy, but the max penalty for TV licence evasion is £1000. No improsenment for this offence. The level of fines in my court is approx £100 and costs. Not cheap but it would be a darn sight better if everyone pays their dues. If you do not like it why don't you lobby your MP or better still stand for Parliement. If you really don't want to impose a fine on any one for this offence Apply to be a Magistrate. The answer is for you to decide.
Sorry old boy, but the max penalty for TV licence evasion is £1000. No improsenment for this offence. The level of fines in my court is approx £100 and costs. Not cheap but it would be a darn sight better if everyone pays their dues. If you do not like it why don't you lobby your MP or better still stand for Parliement. If you really don't want to impose a fine on any one for this offence Apply to be a Magistrate. The answer is for you to decide.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Down, Rover. That's the same mealy-mouthed claptrap the BBC spin doctors (some 280 press officers work for the BBC) uses as an excuse. Non-payment of fines for failing to buy a TV licence is an imprisonable offence, and there are sad people in jail now as a result of their failure to pay the BBC tax.
The BBC's cut of the tax take runs to £2.4 billion per annum in direct cash payments. In addition they are given, gratis, spectrum which would be worth some £1.5 billion in the commercial world, most of which they squander. Income from foreign sales and BBC Worldwide commercial activities is over half a billion pounds. There may be the odd sad old geezer who's happy with the drivel they manage to turn out for all this money, but I believe the taxpayer would be better off building seven new Millennium Domes each year, and leave the enrichment of people like Clarkson to the commercial world.
I'm afraid it's the commercial radio companies which are driving digital, much to their cost. The BBC's notion of wise investment is spending £110 million of taxpayers' money on websites, which simply replicate the work of commercial companies across Europe.
The BBC does not innovate, it merely copies. You may denigrate American TV, Weasly, but PBS services broadcast most of what's best of the BBC (precious little) and your contribution is voluntary. America innovates, the BBC follows lamely, years late. Would we have BBC News24 if it hadn't been for Ted Turner? Why, incidentally, is News24 four times more expensive than Sky News to produce? Ever since the BBC produced EastEnders as a clone of Coronation Street, the state broadcaster has been in the business of slavishly copying the commercial product.
There was a time, years ago, when the BBC produced a fig leaf of quality programmes behind which it hid its cast of 24,000 freeloaders and the billions they squander. Today, I can't think of a single product that is worth a penny of my taxes. I repeat, if the taxpayer has half a million quid to spare, should he equip a hospital or buy Wogan another house in Henley?
Think on: If the government can privatise ATC, why should the broadcasting of pop music, sport, soap opera and the rest of the nonsense that makes up the BBC's output remain a sacred public duty?
The BBC's cut of the tax take runs to £2.4 billion per annum in direct cash payments. In addition they are given, gratis, spectrum which would be worth some £1.5 billion in the commercial world, most of which they squander. Income from foreign sales and BBC Worldwide commercial activities is over half a billion pounds. There may be the odd sad old geezer who's happy with the drivel they manage to turn out for all this money, but I believe the taxpayer would be better off building seven new Millennium Domes each year, and leave the enrichment of people like Clarkson to the commercial world.
I'm afraid it's the commercial radio companies which are driving digital, much to their cost. The BBC's notion of wise investment is spending £110 million of taxpayers' money on websites, which simply replicate the work of commercial companies across Europe.
The BBC does not innovate, it merely copies. You may denigrate American TV, Weasly, but PBS services broadcast most of what's best of the BBC (precious little) and your contribution is voluntary. America innovates, the BBC follows lamely, years late. Would we have BBC News24 if it hadn't been for Ted Turner? Why, incidentally, is News24 four times more expensive than Sky News to produce? Ever since the BBC produced EastEnders as a clone of Coronation Street, the state broadcaster has been in the business of slavishly copying the commercial product.
There was a time, years ago, when the BBC produced a fig leaf of quality programmes behind which it hid its cast of 24,000 freeloaders and the billions they squander. Today, I can't think of a single product that is worth a penny of my taxes. I repeat, if the taxpayer has half a million quid to spare, should he equip a hospital or buy Wogan another house in Henley?
Think on: If the government can privatise ATC, why should the broadcasting of pop music, sport, soap opera and the rest of the nonsense that makes up the BBC's output remain a sacred public duty?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Englands newest City
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
t'aint natural
once again you misunderstood the gist of my reply. I do not in any shape or form think the British public should be made to pay a compulsory fee for the BBC. Although I dislike commercial breaks, I do believe that the BBC should sink or swim by its own devices. It should be allowed to take advertising.
I was just pointing out that the offence of TV licence evasion is in itself not imprisonable. However you are correct in saying that not to pay the fine then you risk going to jail.
The other side of the coin is that 99% of people who do not pay their fines end up in the defaulters court and have a good percentage of there fine remitted.
I personaly have never sent anyone to prison for fines default. Now that does not make me a good guy, but there really is no point in imprisoning someone for this offence. The jails, which are already getting toward capacity, would be stretched even further.
And just in case you misinterpret this that I would send them to jail, well I wouldn't.
once again you misunderstood the gist of my reply. I do not in any shape or form think the British public should be made to pay a compulsory fee for the BBC. Although I dislike commercial breaks, I do believe that the BBC should sink or swim by its own devices. It should be allowed to take advertising.
I was just pointing out that the offence of TV licence evasion is in itself not imprisonable. However you are correct in saying that not to pay the fine then you risk going to jail.
The other side of the coin is that 99% of people who do not pay their fines end up in the defaulters court and have a good percentage of there fine remitted.
I personaly have never sent anyone to prison for fines default. Now that does not make me a good guy, but there really is no point in imprisoning someone for this offence. The jails, which are already getting toward capacity, would be stretched even further.
And just in case you misinterpret this that I would send them to jail, well I wouldn't.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This debate was originally about that egregious freeloader Clarkson and has wandered wayyyy off... so no more (except to educate the Wee Welshman about the BBC World Service... that's not paid for from the BBC tax, that's paid out of your other pocket, as a direct subsidy to the BBC from the Foreign Office).
This time I'm really quitting, even if provoked.
This time I'm really quitting, even if provoked.
T'aint - you have your opinion and I mine. Which is fair enough. Jeremy holds no pilots license BTW and expresses no interest in gaining one.
WWW
WWW
