Jason Dawe?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Jeremy Clarkson and the future of Top Gear
- Thread starter Xenophon PCDGS
- Start date
- Status
Jason Dawe?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I'll watch the first episode and possibly the second episode before making my decision as to whether or not to continue watching. But whenever Clarkson, Hammond and May sort out what they're doing next I'll definitely be watching that no questions asked.
Bookies odds for the two other presenters:
1/3 Jodie Kidd
EVS Guy Martin
4/1 Dermot O'Leary
4/1 James Martin
4/1 Philip Glenister
4/1 Sue Perkins
4/1 Suzi Perry
5/1 Eddie Jordan
5/1 Steve Coogan
5/1 Vicky Butler-Henderson
8/1 Jake Humphrey
8/1 Jay Kay
8/1 Johnny Vaughan
8/1 Rowan Atkinson
8/1 Will MacDonald
10/1 Jimmy Carr
10/1 Stephen Fry
1/3 Jodie Kidd
EVS Guy Martin
4/1 Dermot O'Leary
4/1 James Martin
4/1 Philip Glenister
4/1 Sue Perkins
4/1 Suzi Perry
5/1 Eddie Jordan
5/1 Steve Coogan
5/1 Vicky Butler-Henderson
8/1 Jake Humphrey
8/1 Jay Kay
8/1 Johnny Vaughan
8/1 Rowan Atkinson
8/1 Will MacDonald
10/1 Jimmy Carr
10/1 Stephen Fry
There's a couple of "I really hope not" on that list.
Suzi Perry
Eddie Jordan
Two thirds of the worst presenting team the BBC have ever had for F1.
Most likely candidates for a future show appear to be Sky or Netflix. I already have Netflix and I can mooch off my mum's Sky subscription so I probably won't have to pay any extra to get it.
HilversumNS
Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 232
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Not sure why Guy Martin is in the frame. I like the guy but he's a biker and a truck mechanic, not a car person.
I'd love him to win a TT, but he needs to stay away from Top Gear.
I don't get the hate for Suzy Perry, though again I see her as more of a biker.
I'd love him to win a TT, but he needs to stay away from Top Gear.
I don't get the hate for Suzy Perry, though again I see her as more of a biker.
They did a pretty good version of Top of the Pops for cheridee once. I 'd watch that - particularly since Jeremy Clarkson, for his faults, has an excellent taste in music.
Butts
Veteran Member
Just seen Chris Evans on The One Show talking about his appointment.
Apparently May and Hammond were offered the chance to stay on and only after they declined did Evans step up to the mantle.
He was very complimentary about the outgoing team (including Clarkson), I think he may have the gravitas to carry it.
Even in The Digital Age the BBC is still the apex of broadcasting attainment - "You make it what it is " - remember that one
Apparently May and Hammond were offered the chance to stay on and only after they declined did Evans step up to the mantle.
He was very complimentary about the outgoing team (including Clarkson), I think he may have the gravitas to carry it.
Even in The Digital Age the BBC is still the apex of broadcasting attainment - "You make it what it is " - remember that one
The Beeb have played it so safe they have basically kissed goodbye to their £50m a year monster earner. It seems they are just going to continue with the similar format that Clarkson came up with. I will give it two seasons until it's axed completely. If they cannot come up with new ideas and are simply following the show model Clarkson created with May and Hammond it won't work as the 3 of them made the Top Gear brand.
Just seen Chris Evans on The One Show talking about his appointment.
Apparently May and Hammond were offered the chance to stay on and only after they declined did Evans step up to the mantle.
He was very complimentary about the outgoing team (including Clarkson), I think he may have the gravitas to carry it.
Even in The Digital Age the BBC is still the apex of broadcasting attainment - "You make it what it is " - remember that one
One of the prime benefits of the BBC is that its programming isn't interrupted by crapverts every five minutes. The Government ought to think on that before they embark on another one of their poorly thought through, ideologically based reorganisations.
I think it could go down the same road as the relaunched Top of The Pops presented by Tim Kash with Andi Peters as Executive Producer but then it may not.
EM2
Established Member
Even though he owns a 200mph Volvo Amazon estate, and has previously owned a BMW E46 M3 CSL, a Porsche GT3 RS and an Aston Martin Vantage V12...
Can Chris Evans sell the show overseas? Even where there's a local edition, I am pretty sure people still prefer to watch the UK version (with or without subtitles as necessary). The quality of the foreign ones always seemed somewhat cheaper.
If he isn't well received, or his co-presenters, then BBC Worldwide has a real problem. However if they are, it might not matter so much that some people here don't like him.
If he isn't well received, or his co-presenters, then BBC Worldwide has a real problem. However if they are, it might not matter so much that some people here don't like him.
And the major downside is that you are forced to pay for it whether you watch it or not - a choice with other channels is that you have the choice to watch the ads or not.
Searle
Established Member
Neither, I quite like her as well, she's doing just as well as Jake Humphreys did. I can see her being relatively good on it (others are better suited though), but I really cannot see Eddie Jordan being on it
TheNewNo2
Member
That's fine, I'll happily pay £200 a year for there not to be adverts in the programmes I do watch. I've been watching IndyCar racing on American TV recently, and the races have advert breaks literally evert five laps throughout a 90 lap race. So that's roughly one advert break every five minutes - it's insane.
Neither, I quite like her as well, she's doing just as well as Jake Humphreys did. I can see her being relatively good on it (others are better suited though), but I really cannot see Eddie Jordan being on it
I prefer the Sky team, just because they don't have Eddie Jordan. I can somehow still hear him talking even when I mute it...
Butts
Veteran Member
Considering the breadth and quality of the BBC's offering for the price compared to Sky or Virgin, I don't know how they do it for the money
It's not the cost of keeping adverts off that's important - but rather the fact that adverts are kept off completely, which removes a very strong, and growing, influence of content produced.
The whole media is suffering immensely at the moment, especially online media (including newspapers), because people expect content for free - so they assume advertisers will fund it. But advertisers want to pay rock bottom, and also have a say in where their adverts appear - and certainly not have adverts on a site that may have said anything critical about the company.
There's now a huge conflict of interest throughout the industry, and newspapers are suffering because their only other income is from the newsstand - but people are giving up buying the papers and reading online. So far, the paywall idea hasn't really become the norm, and I imagine the exact same problems now afflict ITV and others too. (As in advertisers and sponsors want and expect to have a say in the programming).
Anyone from a TV company or paper can insist they don't allow it to happen, but you can be sure that an editor with integrity is going to be overruled by publishing directors and the like, because without revenue from advertisers you're effectively out of business. So you play along and keep a job, or stand firm and go bust.
Thus, for me, the BBC has to be protected from going down the same route.
The whole media is suffering immensely at the moment, especially online media (including newspapers), because people expect content for free - so they assume advertisers will fund it. But advertisers want to pay rock bottom, and also have a say in where their adverts appear - and certainly not have adverts on a site that may have said anything critical about the company.
There's now a huge conflict of interest throughout the industry, and newspapers are suffering because their only other income is from the newsstand - but people are giving up buying the papers and reading online. So far, the paywall idea hasn't really become the norm, and I imagine the exact same problems now afflict ITV and others too. (As in advertisers and sponsors want and expect to have a say in the programming).
Anyone from a TV company or paper can insist they don't allow it to happen, but you can be sure that an editor with integrity is going to be overruled by publishing directors and the like, because without revenue from advertisers you're effectively out of business. So you play along and keep a job, or stand firm and go bust.
Thus, for me, the BBC has to be protected from going down the same route.
EM2
Established Member
With the risk of the programme not being completely objective, so as not to upset the manufacturers of the products concerned.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Top Gear is a huge money-spinner for BBC Worldwide, which is a commercial channel. There isn't a shortage of advertisers either in the Top Gear magazine or for the repeats on Dave (which is 50% owned by BBC Worldwide). I think strong editors can still stand up to advertisers if their product is strong enough.
Not sure you understand Product Placement. It wouldn't mean BMW paying to get their cars reviewed but a company like Apple paying to get their CarPlay mentioned/shown. It could also be a company like Samsung paying so that their TV is shown in the lounge area when they do 'the news.'
Last edited by a moderator:
EM2
Established Member
And it means that the presenters can't be completely objective about CarPlay.
Yes, for something as big as Top Gear I agree.
Less so for consumer programmes, which besides the BBC, generally seem to prefer exposing rogue traders (not advertisers) than anything else. Well, the railway often takes a bashing, but that's probably one of only a few exceptions.
Through BBC Worldwide, it does have products it can sell as another source of income. Newspapers can't generally sell their editorial, or if they do then it becomes an advertorial - which confirms my point, and is becoming more common.
In two of my last jobs, I've had advertising agencies regularly 'asking' for editorial, and for it to be positioned nn pages away to appear impartial, or sometimes in a different edition.
From the early 1990s when a trade paper I worked on was paid for (with people paying an annual subscription that was worth a small fortune, making advertising pure profit and almost optional) it gradually ended up being free distribution and reliant solely on advertising - and management very gradually switched from telling advertisers to get stuffed, to telling editorial staff to be nice to them and not write anything too controversial - unless it was a significant story (and even then, you really had to fight hard to convince them).
I couldn't carry on working for a publisher that sold out, but it's happening everywhere. That guy from the Telegraph who blew the whistle is the tip of the iceberg.
I can't comment so much about commercial TV, but just look at the programming. Not a lot to risk offending (or exposing) anyone these days.
Please please BBC not Jodie Kidd as a presenter, while she knows cars and is an excellent driver her presentation skills are poor just watch that dreadful programme with Quentin Wilson, who I like as a presenter, and see for yourself even Quentin seemed to be embarrassed by the show at times. An example of how not to do a car show.
America is well renowned for it as is down under however our commercial channels are not as bad being about every 15 minutes.
Considering the breadth and quality of the BBC's offering for the price compared to Sky or Virgin, I don't know how they do it for the money
Tee hee though you cant fault some of the output on Sky Atlantic though - not that I pay for that either. BT is all I have now but I still see no justification for the license fee anymore
- Status