Being the pain I usually am, I've provided some "emphasis" for some of the text. George has stopped short of making some comments that he's almost GOT to be thinking, so I'm going to provide a few of my own in the stream of the article. You'll know it when you see it. lwo :)
Why is Top Gear apparently exempt from the BBC's editorial guidelines and the duty not to fake the facts?
• Tesla sues Top Gear over 'faked' electric car race• The Nissan Leaf electric car – review
 |
| Jeremy "Lying sack of bantha poodoo" Clarkson sabotages a test drive of the Leaf electric car Photograph: BBC |
What distinguishes the BBC from the rest of this country's media? There's the lack of advertising, and the lack of a proprietor with specific business interests to defend.
(lwo Note: I now watch Top Gear on BBC America, which does indeed produce revenue for BBC Worldwide; perhaps I should now assume that BBC has no standards for the BBC America services?)
But perhaps the most important factor is its editorial guidelines, which are supposed to ensure that the corporation achieves "the highest standards of due accuracy and impartiality and strive[s] to avoid knowingly and materially misleading our audiences."
Here's a few of the things they say:
"Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest."
"We will be rigorous in establishing the truth of the story and well informed when explaining it. Our specialist expertise will bring authority and analysis to the complex world in which we live."
"We will be open in acknowledging mistakes when they are made and encourage a culture of willingness to learn from them."
 |
| Top Gear Paradise? Image via Wikipedia |
Take, for example, Top Gear's line on electric cars. Casting aside any pretence of impartiality or rigour, it has set out to show that electric cars are useless. If the facts don't fit, it bends them until they do.
 |
| Tesla Roadster Image via Wikipedia |
Now it's been caught red-handed faking another trial, in this case of the Nissan LEAF.
 |
| Nissan Leaf Image via Wikipedia |
(lwo Note: But it's clear from Clarkson's Lists that he will whore out his reputation just to get a self serving edge with whomever he fancies at the moment. Here's a recent and from what I can tell, fairly accurate review of Clarkson's abilities found out on the "Ultimate Car" forum:
People enjoy Clarkson's hard opinions and dry sense of humour. However, they seem to forget that he knows nothing about how cars handle, nor has after 20 years of driving supercars has any skills behind the wheel. A good example is when he put the current ZR1 against an Audi R8 and constantly said that the ZR1 was impossible to drive faster than the R8. Then in the hands of the stig it blitzed the R8.In short, Jeremy Clarkson seems to emerge as the combined Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh of the automotive
I also remember him slagging off the Carrera GT calling it bland and uninteresting, reviewing it against the Enzo Ferrari.
andAND Clarkson's comments are about getting readers/viewers attention and to sell his column, mag, book, video, tv show.
andThis guy has driven every major badass ultimately exotic supercar on this planet and he puts a Mazda CX7 on his top 25? Nothing against the CX7, is a nice SUV or crossover, or whatever, I drove it myself when I was checking them out a few months ago while considering one for my wife, but come on... Jeremy Clarkson's top 25?
