Any show on a commercial broadcaster would be nothing like as edgy or outspoken.Merlin wrote:I think it will all blow over. Clarkson is Top Gear. If the BBC does fire him he'll probably end up at Sky making the same show and being paid 10x more.
Do you think a commercial channel would allow them to slag off all modern Peugeot's, the latest performance Jag and Lexus etc? No way - they wouldn't survive the aggro from the companies that buy their advert slots. Viewing figures are great, except when that doesn't then translate into advertising revenue...
I've read a suggestion about replacing Jezza with Evans. And you know what? I think that could work actually. The show could definitely still maintain its 'fun' and 'entertainment' factor under him, so who knows.
At the end of the day though, an incident like this isn't anything to do with public popularity and petitions etc. it's an entirely employment law matter. Assuming he's a direct employee of the BBC (rather than a contractor) then what's happened is just what I'd expect to happen on the allegation of physical assault in the workplace - suspension, followed by investigation (either under company grievance or disciplinary procedure, depending on how it was reported). Then depending on the outcome of the investigation, it would then either be dropped (no case to answer) or go to disciplinary panel, which could have a number of potential outcomes. That's the kind of process it will need to go through, same for any employee no matter who they are. Also to note, that just because he was on a 'final warning' for swearing before, it doesn't necessarily mean that has any relevance when assessing this incident (physical violence might not be considered a similar offence etc?) and final warning doesn't necessarily mean dismissal is the next step - could be suspension, reduction in grade (pay) etc. etc.
If he's a contractor, it would be pretty similar process, except there probably wouldn't be a disciplinary panel and it would be a straight decision over whether to terminate the 'services' contract or not.
Something like that, anyway. But either way, it doesn't surprise me and it just needs to work through the process and we'll see what comes out the other side...
I don't understand why the show couldn't be broadcast without him doing the 'live' bits this Sunday on the face of it thugh (could do it with the other 2 still there but not him). But then again, there might be something silly in their contracts that says they only work as a trio or something about image rights or something contractually complicated like that... We just don't know...
drokking annoying though - this series has definitely been the best for ages!
