Is it April already?
A government body? Common sense prevailing? Surely it's April 1st?
Ofcom has ruled that Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson was not in breach of the broadcasting code for a quip he made on the show alluding to lorry drivers murdering prostitutes. Clarkson, 48, was "taking part in a lorry-driving task" during the 2 November pre-watershed show when he said: "Change gear, change gear, check …
A government body? Common sense prevailing? Surely it's April 1st?
how much did it cost for ofcom to come up this this non-news?
Common sense actually prevailed!
...somebody in power showing some sense?
Or is this all a dream?
Finally a bit of sanity from Ofcom!
I'm fed up with knee jerk reactions to a few complaints fueled by the media.
up yours all those people who complained and did not even see the program,,,,
and JC for PM
mines the high visibility one
Is it possible?
Has sanity, balance, and common sense returned to the world of broadcasting?
Nope, I see that JR hasn't yet been reinstated (no, not the one from the crap yank soap, the funny one who ranks *cough* highly)
(I know the title doesn't contain only question marks, but is should, however, owing to an apparent bug in el Reg's comment system, the string "???" was not apparently recognised as a title)
I'm no lawyer but surely Clarkson can only have been found not guilty because lorry drivers DO kill prostitutes?
They pick them up in lay-bys and service stations and murder them - is this the message the BBC are sending out?!
Well if you live in London then just think the next time you pick a loaf of bread off a supermarket shelf that it was probably delivered in a lorry from the north. And while YOUR loaf was sitting there in the back of a cold lorry parked up around the back of the Watford Gap, a prostitite might have been getting herself murdered by the lorry driver in the front! I hope that bread tastes nice for you because it sure cost a lot more than £1.10.
Sorry, but if that is true I'll stop watching.
FFS, that's what makes the man so funny. It's programs like Have I Got News and Top Gear that still abhor the Politically Correct wave that has infested all other BBC programming, and their continued popularity demonstrates that there is still an intelligent audience left.
I suggest the program should be preceded with a warning:
Warning this program is broadcast after the watershed. If your nature cannot handle anything more than child level or you lack an operable sense of humour, your opportunity to change channel is now.
I must add this is different from the Brand/Ross row. There is a difference between joking and being quite simply grossly offensive. There is still such a thing as decency.
Pinch me, I must be dreaming!
It'll never catch on.
that reminds me of an Eddie Izzard skit about Pol Pot, jeez your diary must look odd,
wake up, death, death, death, afternoon tea, death, I hardly manage to get out of bed.
Good God. Don't tell me that some official body has actually shown some common sense!
I heard on the Beeb that apparently the Road Hauliers' Association and Eddie Stobart have also been dismissive of the complaints against Jezza. This is on a completely different scale and context to "Manuelgate", but just goes to prove you can't please all the people all the time - and some of those who aren't pleased will inevitably file a complaint...
Still can't see the IT angle though...
Do any of these people watch Mock the week?
They'd foam at the mouth and die at pretty much everything frankie boyle says
There's hope yet in the world.
Any way I thought there where only two reasons to watch Top Gear
1) To be offended by Clarkson
2) Watch the producers try and kill Richard Hammond.
I believe there is an other presenter but for some reason my mind drops into a stupor when he appears and I can't remember his name.
Is Britain being taken over by people with no humour.
I bet half of them found it on youtube.
Keep up the humour Clarkson
P.S, hope this is published and not dropped like my A380 comment.
Labour MP Chris Mole - JC 0-1
OFCOM Sense of Humour implant trials successful, rollout to Daily Mail subscribers mooted.
I'm a prostitute and now I know why
It was derogatory about TRUCKERS, not women. It didn't intimate in any possible form that truckers are allowed to murder women. So I never understood why it was "it's an insult to women" and "Hurtful to those who lost loved ones". If it had been a bunch of truckers or a trucker union complaining that their members were being maligned, I could understand.
Icon for obvious reasons.
a point for common sense!
give em hell jezza... if you cant take a joke can you please fuck off!
Common sense prevails
Shurely theres some mistake?!
They never bother getting a headcount of people who are happy with the comment.
Glad he ain't going. But maybe its because I dislike lorry drivers. Not all of them, just the ones that tailgate you in heavy traffic and carve you up on the roads.
Charlie Brookers Screenwipe had a great bit about this.
He said that the moronic public had become so accustomed to controlling TV shows with phone votes, thanks to pretty much every show having phone polls now, that they feel that all TV is under their control.
And after the Ross/Brand fiasco the phone gimps just couldn't wait to exercise some more power over the gogglebox and try and influence a show.
Charlie then said that we should have a counter-vote system. Everyone who phones up and says "i wasn't offended" cancels out a moan from the mouth-breathers.
...and you are left with something similar to the clearly inferior 5th Gear.
Clarkson for President!
You thought I was a libby for a second there, didn't you!
Common sense prevails.
but if he had suggested that all lorry drivers were rapists that might not have been considered exaggerated humour!
mine's the one with the head of a prozzy and a yorkie bar in the pocket
...Clarkson is different to Russel Brand.
Clarkson has the image and humour to tell a joke that is mildly offensive, but obviously a joke.
Brand on the other hand is just a talentless git who couldn't tell a joke to save his career.
Mines the one with the Clarkson DVDs and books in the pocket.
Sensible decisions from OfCom???
Bring on the Daily Fail 'Sack OfCom' campaign....
freaking pinko lefty communist thought police. grow a spine.
Compared to what your average car driver has to say about Lorry drivers- Clarkson was being very kind.
I think Lorrys should be banned from overtaking each other - clogging up the overtaking lane for 5 minutes in the process - only to travel exactly the same speed before overtaking.
Lorry drivers should be banned from UK trains - let's move goods with trains and small vans - and let's not give Lorry drivers an excuse for existing.
Ban Lorrys from overtaking.
Double the fuel tax on HGV.
Use Airships to deliver goods instead and let the car driver have carte blanch on the road.
To echo almost everyone else.
Must be very cold in Hell today !
That is all
common sense prevails
Quick, somebody check to see if it's the 1st of April.
Offcom rules that complaints prompted by rivals of the BBC (The Murdock and Barclay Brothers' press/Telly) are not baseless. Good on em.
2 other possible sub-headings:
1) Committee make a sensible, reasoned decision backed up with common sense SHOCKER!
2) Labour MP makes bad call SHOCK!
The worrying part is that only number 1 is sincere.
Is it actually possible, a gov't ("INDEPENDENT") panel has used common sense, maybe there is hope for the world.
Common sense just prevail? Think i'm going to have to read this again .... and again....
That almost sounds like....sense!
I have to go lie down.
I went to check a number that always bothered me yesterday and this is as good a car related article to rant at as any.
Remember the claim that there is an 80% survival chance for a collision between pedestrian and car at 30mph, but only 10% survival at 40mph?
(Source Ashton and Mackay 1979)
It comes from a study from 1979, there's something flawed going on here revealed by this FOI request:
Notice the graph on page 3, notice that the MAJORITY OF ACCIDENTS HAPPEN AT LOW SPEEDS.
PR = Probability of accident being fatal
NF = Number of fatal accidents at a given speed
NT = Total number of accidents at a given speed
PR = NF/NT
You are given the impression that as speed goes up, NF, the number of fatal accidents increases dramatically, but that is not true, as speed goes up NT, the *total* number of accidents DECREASES dramatically. The real data shows NF hardly changes, it's the total number of accidents that changes.
AS A RATIO the probability of an accident being fatal increases, but actually the probability of accidents decreases as speeds increase.
Obviously the faster roads are in places with fewer pedestrians and so have fewer accidents making the deaths as a ratio of speed increase dramatically. It is not that forcing drivers to slow down to 30mph reduces deaths from 80% to 10%, it does not. It increases the number of non fatal accidents because there are more pedestrians in slower speed limit zones!
The info shows the way to reduce traffic accidents is to keep cars and people separated, e.g. railing at crossings, cul-de-sacs, designated crossing, cycleways separate from roads, etc. but this government want the lower speed limit as the fix, so they misrepresent the numbers and instead we have speed cams (make you look out for the cameras and at your speedo, rather than the road) and speed humps (a jolt to distract you from pedestrians) and traffic calming (my pet hate, you CANNOT see the road ahead because it swerves left and right with parked cars alternately left and right to block the view ahead, and children can't see the oncoming cars for the same reason = lots more blind corners created by these zig-zag layouts).
The end result of this bullshit? A slight increase in road deaths the last two years.
That is all.
"To restrict humour only to material which does not cause offence would be an unnecessary restriction of freedom of expression."
Now can people stop crying over nothing?
And one in the eye for whiny self righteous fucktards everywhere. Yay Offcom.
I'm off to dance on Mary Whitehouse's grave to celebrate. It's been a while.
I got Bumped into!... as apposed to Bumped OFF! by Steve Write.
(he was driving that purple mondeo at the time)
]:) he needed a new front bumper after ramming me on a pedestrian crossing. TOWBAR 4 The Win! :)
hehehe i even got his address details in Ipswich :)
as soon as he'd sorted out the paperwork and the excuses that his misses would KILL! him
(if she found out he was back in Norwich),
he was off trawling the local kerb krawling hotspots for girls....
Funny, i didn't see that girl on the streets again, that he was chatting to ;p
looks like it was a close shave for me ;)
"I believe there is an other presenter but for some reason my mind drops into a stupor when he appears and I can't remember his name."
That'll be James May. The guy with the long hair.
339 people complained. 5,999,661 didn't (based on 6m viewing figures).
If such a small minority could cause havoc by complaining when the vast majority were in favour then it would have said something about the future of mankind. With this decision, there is at least some hope.
When JC becomes PM, at least.
So let me get this straight. Slower speeds equal more accidents, higher speeds equal less.
A 70mph speed limit outside my son's nursery would therefore be a better thing than the traffic calming measures that are there now. Then all the idiot drivers can have their extra 5 minutes in bed on a morning, safe in the knowledge that the faster they go the less likely they are to kill anyone. Excellent, problem solved.
"It is not that forcing drivers to slow down to 30mph reduces deaths from 80% to 10%, it does not. It increases the number of non fatal accidents because there are more pedestrians in slower speed limit zones!"
Maybe it increases the number of non fatal accidents because less pedestrians are killed.
As for keeping cars and people separated, I've always thought a better solution is to keep idiots separated from their cars.