Great Rant from Jeremy Clarkson

[minestrone]

Well I have not seen the 2 of you defending every banned poster and saying they have a right to their opinon.

[Mich the Tester]

If you don't believe someone should be free to express their opinion, however stupid it is, then you obviously don't believe everyone else should be free to hear their opinion. That would seem somewhat silly and rather tyrannical.

[minestrone]

I respect the right for people not to hear free speech. And if that means disallowing free speech to do that then free speech has to be curtailed in some instances.

What those instances are can be debated but yes in some circumstances that has to be the case.

Anyway this is not an argument in this instance on free speech, it is an argument on what the press allow to be printed by their writers. 2 different things.

[TimberWolf]

I've expressed surprise that Clarkson was invited to write any articles for the Times here in the past. I thought the paper was meant to be better than that. Presumably its readers are expected to regard his articles as a bit of light-hearted buffoonery and him a loud mouthed moronic fool to laughed at; a part he plays to the full as he does on his shows. Scratch below the surface and I expect there is little more to him. It has made him rich though.

[minestrone]

I've expressed surprise that Clarkson was invited to write any articles for the Times here in the past. I thought the paper was meant to be better than that. Presumably its readers are expected to regard his articles as a bit of light-hearted buffoonery and him a loud mouthed moronic fool to laughed at; a part he plays to the full as he does on his shows. Scratch below the surface and I expect there is little more to him. It has made him rich though.

I agree fully with that, what surprises me is that people on here see his writings as credible.

[Zippy]

I've expressed surprise that Clarkson was invited to write any articles for the Times here in the past. I thought the paper was meant to be better than that. Presumably its readers are expected to regard his articles as a bit of light-hearted buffoonery and him a loud mouthed moronic fool to laughed at; a part he plays to the full as he does on his shows. Scratch below the surface and I expect there is little more to him. It has made him rich though.

I agree fully with that, what surprises me is that people on here see his writings as credible.

WTS.
He's a comedy act. Except a) I don't find him funny and b) I know too many people who take him seriously

[gingerjedi]

Well I have not seen the 2 of you defending every banned poster and saying they have a right to their opinon.

Everyone has the right to their opinion, just as you have the right not to listen.

[minestrone]

Everyone has the right to their opinion, just as you have the right not to listen.

You have back tracked from free speech to opinion.

[Spacecadet]

I've expressed surprise that Clarkson was invited to write any articles for the Times here in the past. I thought the paper was meant to be better than that. Presumably its readers are expected to regard his articles as a bit of light-hearted buffoonery and him a loud mouthed moronic fool to laughed at; a part he plays to the full as he does on his shows. Scratch below the surface and I expect there is little more to him. It has made him rich though.

It's an opinion piece and should not be confused with journalism
and as he is writing an opinion piece I would expect him to be opinionated!

[TimberWolf]

It's an opinion piece and should not be confused with journalism
and as he is writing an opinion piece I would expect him to be opinionated!

I never said it was journalism and nor did anyone else here that I recall. I could elaborate but I would be repeating myself.