..to think that Ofcom investigating Jeremy Clarkson's comments is a waste of money?

[80sMum]

Everyone knows it was a joke, right? Granted, it was in very bad taste - but surely it doesn't warrant spending public money on an official investigation?

I can't see why there is so much fuss being made about these stupid 'jokes' that have now been taken out of context and blown up out of all proportion.

Surely no-one could possibly have taken Jeremy Clarkson's comments seriously, so why on earth is Ofcom invetsigating? It makes no sense. Don't they have more useful things to spend our money on?

"I bet you thought the same about the Russell Brand/Jonathan Ross thing as well... did you OP?"

Actually, no, I didn't feel the same about that one, ShirleyKnotChristmas. That was rather a different situation, in that the 'joke' was targeted at an individual and invaded their personal privacy and humiliated them. I thought it very inapropriate for national radio and was pleased that Russell and Jonathan were made to aplogise. However, I didn't feel strongly enough to make an official complaint about it.

I am actualle quite disturbed at the way it was published in the press. It's as if many especially the bbc were trying to provoke a reaction.

pugs - it would have been more concerning if the BBC made no reporting of it at all. They are publically accountable to us as licence fee-payers, and so it was their duty to report on their own issues.

I thought I read somewhere that Clarkson had been encouraged off-camera to be provocative - is it perhaps this that is being investigated?

Not that he would need much encouragement, he had a new book to sell, didn't he? As I expect he had every other time he's hit the headlines with his boorishness.

"Twenty years ago, no-one would have batted an eyelid at a comment like that. "
I disagree. On the whole, boundaries are pushed back/relaxed with time - I'd have expected a bigger reaction in 1991.

Reckon we need the print media counterpart to Ofcom and they should investigate this story for inflammatory out-of-context reporting, once they're done with all the more serious issues that need dealing with.

"I am actualle quite disturbed at the way it was published in the press."

Well obviously the Murdoch papers would make as much of it as they possibly can. They never miss an opportunity to bash the BBC

"Twenty years ago, no-one would have batted an eyelid at a comment like that. "
I disagree. On the whole, boundaries are pushed back/relaxed with time - I'd have expected a bigger reaction in 1991.

Not these kinds of boundaries, whereyouleftit. Our nation is far less tolerant of this sort of thing now than it used to be. Programs such as Not the Nine o'clock News, On the Hour, The Day Today, Brass Eye and many others would not be broadcast nowadays for fear of offending someone.

It was more the fact that the BBC website reported only the 'controversial' bit of what he said in the main bulk of the report. It was only those that could be bothered to read all the way to the end that would then find the whole clip explained!

Not what I'd expect from the BBC - mind you I have become increasingly upset by what they choose to show on the 6 o'clock news! Far too much to let my 9 year old watch anymore!!!

How did I guess?

?? Sorry, what point are you trying to make? please be more specific!

Just that it is what predictable that you would have found RB/JR to be outrageous and shocking and SOMETHING MUST BE DONE! and yet are about Jeremy Clarkson.

That's called hypocrisy in my book!

Hey, steady on Shirley! Didn't I say that I didn't feel strongly enough about the Brand/Ross thing to make a complaint? But I DID complain formally, to both Ofcom and the BBC about the ridiculous fuss being made over the Clarkson bad taste joke, which I think is completely over the top.
FWIW, I'm not keen on Jeremy Clarkson. He's too full of himself and too much of a puer aeternis.

Yanbu