Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fuss about nothing... two American presenters were

> driving round London and creating a racket for a

> TV show. They'd probably never even heard of the

> Cenotaph. Apologies have been made and the footage

> won't get used. End of.


American presenters never heard of the cenotaph? Really? The BBC should know, so you'd hope they might mention it. Twaterry in its purest form

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fuss about nothing... two American presenters were

> driving round London and creating a racket for a

> TV show. They'd probably never even heard of the

> Cenotaph. Apologies have been made and the footage

> won't get used. End of.


Agreed. I don't see what the fuss is about. They drove a car through central London. That said, it's a tedious show. People who obsess about their car seem weird to me.

The Cenotaph happened to be in the background (they weren't even all that close) while pulling doughnuts along Whitehall. All very banal, and I can see why some would consider it inappropriate. The producers probably should have stopped it. But honestly - barely newsworthy.

They drove down Whitehall that's all. Yes, they were driving like Tw8ts but apparently that's what people who watch Top Gear get exctited about. The fact that they passed a war memorial doesn't seem like reason to get upset to me. It wasn't as though the cenotaph was the focus of the 'stunt', it was incidental.


There is so much more about this incident which is in bad taste. For example, the more general issue of making an 'entertainment' programme that glorifies hooning it round the streets of London doing donuts.

Permission to get notable areas of the city closed down is usually tied to alleged benefit to UK PLC, hence Top Gear - with its massive overseas audience - has some clout.


That's why Bond films always scoop top city locations.


That said, I'm sad to say that even Top Gear beats the utterly dire 'Spectre'.

This made me chuckle http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/right-wing-dad-fails-to-see-irony-of-top-gear-cenotaph-stunt-20160315107152


"Estate agent and father-of-two Hobbs felt that American Matt LeBlanc driving near the Cenotaph was ?a step too far?, despite loving it when Clarkson went to foreign countries in big cars and antagonised them as much as legally possible.....?I blame that American ? when celebrities travel they should take time to learn about local culture and history before attempting to make so-called ?jokes? that could hurt people?s feelings.?


Hobbs, who laughed like a drain when Top Gear pissed off Mexicans, Romanians and Argentinians, added: ?This kind of crass, insensitive stunt is not funny and panders to utter morons. That LeBlanc is just a cocky millionaire posing as a maverick outsider.?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hello Did anyone see an accident about 15 minutes ago at the junction of Goodrich and Friern Road. A black car driven by a lady ran in to the side of my car as I was coming up Friern Road- instead of pulling over she drove off without providing her insurance information. If anyone happened to see this or has her license plate details please pm me. Thanks 
    • Hi everyone,  I have a few slots for next few days, if anyone need  a tidy or one off, please feel free to call, text, or WhatsApp as well. Thanks very much Fernando Pinto 
    • On what basis do you object to the economy spend numbers in the report and describe it as "extremely unlikely"? Is that objection based on data or is it vibes-based? Where does this estimate of "50-100 vehicles" come from? The objectors:supporters ratio doesn't speak volumes. Planning applications of this sort always receive objections from various curtain twitches and NIMBYs. It doesn't mean those objections are well-founded or sensible. The planning officers and councillors need to consider the issue objectively, not just count the letters. It's not a public vote. Saying the building is "out of character" is meaningless out of context. It's an unusual building on an unusual infill site. It's not supposed to be a model for future development across Dulwich as a whole.  We are in the middle of a housing crisis. London desperately needs more housing units. This is an opportunity to get a whole bunch of them on a small, unloved industrial site on top of a transit hub. Not building it because people like the Dulwich Society complains it's "visible" is crazy.
    • Not if someone wheels over it with a pram or a heavy footed person steps on it and it hasn't been tied up or is tied but explodes everywhere. Yuk! Agree we definitely need dog poo bins back again, particularly near Peckham Rye park, along Crystal Palace Road, and by Goose Green.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...