Trouble for TopGear 2016 (source: The Sun, so take with salt)

D

D-Fence

Guest
There was trouble for Evans from the off. A show insider recalled: ?The first time Chris went round the Top Gear track he crashed the car.
?Unfortunately for him it was a brand new Jag that had been lent to the show.?

?The show has had to become a lot more PC following the Clarkson row. There is less leeway to do out-there stuff and Kim has become a bit of a nightmare.?
Her relationship with Evans, who is known for being a control freak, has also come under the spotlight.
In the summer, Shillinglaw admitted the ?unpredictable? star being host of Top Gear left her ?terrified?. To some, it has turned into a battle of egos.


BBC bosses are said to be far from happy with what they have seen from early production of Top Gear?s initial run of eight episodes ? something they have denied.
One source close to the show reportedly suggested pre-production had been ?more Tiswas than Top Gear? and added: ?They?ve brought in a production team that doesn?t know anything about cars. Writers from Top Gear magazine have had to be called over to suggest ideas.?


A BBC insider said: ?Bosses have been left open-mouthed by some of the announcements Chris has been making. Giving away the exact start date months before is a complete no-no, as it gives rivals the chance to try to damage the show.
?People at the BBC who should be in the loop have been finding stuff out from Chris on the radio, on Twitter, or when he is a guest on other shows.?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/6831197/Top-Gear-crisis-for-Chris-Evans.html
 
The way things are shaping up expect various FG members to be quoted in the press once the first episode has aired. Wouldn't be the first time.
 
The way things are shaping up expect various FG members to be quoted in the press once the first episode has aired. Wouldn't be the first time.

I could bet money on that that's exactly how the press got the wiff of that Chris Harris + Sabine as TG hosts story.
 
If true, none of this is a surprise. It's what many have suspected from the second Evans was announced.
 
I'm laughing so hard right now, all these PC intelligentsia knowitalls who pointed fingers at how terrible JC and TG are, all they do is infighting, politics and backstabbing coupled with an alarming (but hilarious) amount of incompetence. Compared to all that vitriol a simple but honest single knuckle sandwich (because for once in your whole career you got to a breaking point) seems rather civilised and timid.
 
Time will tell if this is true. Not hard for me to think it is, but we shall see.
 
I'm laughing so hard right now, all these PC intelligentsia knowitalls who pointed fingers at how terrible JC and TG are, all they do is infighting, politics and backstabbing coupled with an alarming (but hilarious) amount of incompetence. Compared to all that vitriol a simple but honest single knuckle sandwich (because for once in your whole career you got to a breaking point) seems rather civilised and timid.

The best part is (assuming this report is correct) that when the show inevitably fails, as nobody wants to watch such claptrap and is even less willing to buy rebroadcasting rights, they will blame everyone else but themselves. Here are some excuses I expect to hear:

1. CHM sabotaged us. (Method of sabotage not stated or given as utterly vague general causes.)
2. The audience was too lowbrow to understand the new show.
3. We didn't have enough tolerance, diversity and politically correct speech on display.
4. The Top Gear audience was a bunch of intolerant racist misogynists just like Jeremy Clarkson, they wouldn't watch tolerant and diverse shows.
5. Not enough green/eco/fairtrade cars.
 
6. Too niche. Sports cars are a dying breed.
 
The best part is (assuming this report is correct) that when the show inevitably fails, as nobody wants to watch such claptrap and is even less willing to buy rebroadcasting rights, they will blame everyone else but themselves. Here are some excuses I expect to hear:

1. CHM sabotaged us. (Method of sabotage not stated or given as utterly vague general causes.)
2. The audience was too lowbrow to understand the new show.
3. We didn't have enough tolerance, diversity and politically correct speech on display.
4. The Top Gear audience was a bunch of intolerant racist misogynists just like Jeremy Clarkson, they wouldn't watch tolerant and diverse shows.
5. Not enough green/eco/fairtrade cars.

You're a public broadcaster and that's what the people want.
BBC: But INCLUSIVENESS!
 
You're a public broadcaster and that's what the people want.
BBC: But INCLUSIVENESS!

That's exactly why (among other reasons) I want to see the BBC get kicked off government funding and have to depend directly on their viewers for funding. Similar though partial shortfalls in PBS station funding in the US has produced *significant* improvements in PBS show quality and reductions in lecturing/preachy programs of the type the BBC churned out so many of under people like now-thankfully-departed Cohen - the more limited funding and greater reliance on making their audience happy has forced them to produce/purchase more programs the people actually want to watch and kill off the rightthink-promoting garbage they don't.
 
Last edited:
That's exactly why (among other reasons) I want to see the BBC get kicked off government funding and have to depend directly on their viewers for funding. Similar though partial shortfalls in PBS station funding in the US has produced *significant* improvements in PBS show quality and reductions in lecturing/preachy programs of the type the BBC churned out so many of under people like now-thankfully-departed Cohen - the more limited funding and greater reliance on making their audience happy has forced them to produce/purchase more programs the people actually want to watch and kill off the rightthink-promoting garbage they don't.

What are these glorious PBS shows that are so much better than what the BBC is producing? Nobody watches PBS they just lie about it on surveys because they think people will assume their intelligent.
 
What are these glorious PBS shows that are so much better than what the BBC is producing? Nobody watches PBS they just lie about it on surveys because they think people will assume their intelligent.

Where did I say the PBS offerings were better than the BBC's? I said their programming had been improved, yes, but not to the extent that they rival the BBC except once in a blue moon.

On the other hand, there *were* a couple seasons of CHM Top Gear where MotorWeek was actually better and less predictable. Not because of any improvement in MotorWeek, either.

Point is, becoming more accountable to your viewers is rarely a bad thing for programming quality.

Edit: For that matter, if they had been accountable to viewers for their money, heads would have been rolling like mad when the Jimmy Savile story came to light. Or Savile wouldn't have been able to go as far because people would have feared what would happen. Instead, arguably the worst pedophile in recent British history was aided and abetted in molesting hundreds of underage children by the BBC - and mysteriously nobody significant at the BBC got fired even though they knew or should have known. The BBC wouldn't have dared to try to sweep it under the rug or to get revenge on the people who reported the problem.
 
Last edited:
Where did I say the PBS offerings were better than the BBC's? I said their programming had been improved, yes, but not to the extent that they rival the BBC except once in a blue moon.

On the other hand, there *were* a couple seasons of CHM Top Gear where MotorWeek was actually better and less predictable. Not because of any improvement in MotorWeek, either.

Point is, becoming more accountable to your viewers is rarely a bad thing for programming quality.

Edit: For that matter, if they had been accountable to viewers for their money, heads would have been rolling like mad when the Jimmy Savile story came to light. Or Savile wouldn't have been able to go as far because people would have feared what would happen. Instead, arguably the worst pedophile in recent British history was aided and abetted in molesting hundreds of underage children by the BBC - and mysteriously nobody significant at the BBC got fired even though they knew or should have known. The BBC wouldn't have dared to try to sweep it under the rug or to get revenge on the people who reported the problem.

What's the evidence for this claim, You're not one of these libertarians are you who thinks that money makes people behave like saints because why wouldn't you be honest if money is on the line etc. etc. are you?
 
What's the evidence for this claim, You're not one of these libertarians are you who thinks that money makes people behave like saints because why wouldn't you be honest if money is on the line etc. etc. are you?

That's how it works in public and private TV here. The public TV stations fire people so they don't lose viewer support money, the private TV nets fire people so they don't lose advertiser revenue. Just ask Mary Mapes or Betsy West what happened to their careers for *lesser* offenses.

Non-consensual sexual assaults, as with Jimmy Savile - or even just harassment? Yup, you're outta here, you don't get coddled, protected and further facilitated by your broadcast network for decades. Some recent examples of just this behavior from North American networks:
http://www.cinemablend.com/televisi...rk-Amid-Sexual-Assault-Allegations-65067.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/27/w...n-radio-host-charged-with-sexual-assault.html

Moreover, on that last one? CBC fired their radio and HR heads as well because of it. No shuffling people around, no 'investigations' that go nowhere. Just terminations.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cbc-fires-radio-hr-heads-789239

When you are beholden to your viewers for funding, either directly in the case of public TV or slightly indirectly as with private TV networks (viewrs -> advertisers -> network) you take swift action when something like this comes around. If you don't have a government sugar daddy giving you nigh endless money, you tend to avoid doing things that piss off the people that *do* give you money.

Additionally, if you *don't* fire such people immediately upon such an incident coming to light, you are pretty much guaranteed to be a named party in the inevitable lawsuit that you are pretty much guaranteed to lose and have to pay out huge sums of money. Which makes you look really bad. Which means no viewer support and/or no advertiser revenue. No government aegis covers them, unlike with the BBC, so there's no sovereign immunity, and we're right back to 'being held responsible.'
 
Last edited:
Explain the reasons why the head of the Duck Dynasty group wasn't kicked off his show then.
 
Explain the reasons why the head of the Duck Dynasty group wasn't kicked off his show then.

They suspended him pending termination after the GQ interview (which, by the way, didn't involve any illegal or even unethical conduct, unlike Savile); that should bear out my point nicely about public and private TV networks dumping people ASAP. However, because the viewers were unhappy with his suspension and expressed their opinions to the advertisers and network, he was reinstated. Again, network responsible to viewers.
 
The best part is (assuming this report is correct) that when the show inevitably fails, as nobody wants to watch such claptrap and is even less willing to buy rebroadcasting rights, they will blame everyone else but themselves. Here are some excuses I expect to hear:

1. CHM sabotaged us. (Method of sabotage not stated or given as utterly vague general causes.)
2. The audience was too lowbrow to understand the new show.
3. We didn't have enough tolerance, diversity and politically correct speech on display.
4. The Top Gear audience was a bunch of intolerant racist misogynists just like Jeremy Clarkson, they wouldn't watch tolerant and diverse shows.
5. Not enough green/eco/fairtrade cars.

Then explain the success CHM will get once they air. It won't be the same as before but I'm sure ratings will be much better that BBC TG.
 
Then explain the success CHM will get once they air. It won't be the same as before but I'm sure ratings will be much better that BBC TG.

Dude, those are the excuses I'm expecting to hear from the BBC as to why their New New Top Gear failed. I'm not saying they're the actual reasons, just the lame ones I'm expecting the BBC to use to blame everyone else but themselves for their failure.
 
Dude, those are the excuses I'm expecting to hear from the BBC as to why their New New Top Gear failed. I'm not saying they're the actual reasons, just the lame ones I'm expecting the BBC to use to blame everyone else but themselves for their failure.

The BBC didn't punch Oisin, Clarkson did. The BBC isn't going to blame Clarkson if the new Top Gear fails.
 
Top