Top Gear finally gets its comeuppance

[JohnH]

That it lasted 55 miles of track driving is a fact (or at least, I'm assuming that the Beeb would be able to prove it as such).

Ummm, I'm afraid not Mike. The "55 miles" claim was actually written before Clarkson ever got into the car...

The court documents, filed in the U.K. detail how Tesla’s former U.K. Director of Sales and Marketing expressed concern to the producers of the show after seeing a script on the day of the shoot before filming had even begun.

Describing everything from the car being filmed ‘running out of charge’ to the host’s conclusions of “It’s just a shame that in the real world, it absolutely doesn’t work.”, the Tesla employee reportedly confronted the show’s researcher who agreed that filming the $109,000 sportscar being pushed into a hangar having run out of charge was not acceptable, noting “We don’t want to be sued”.

Without Tesla's knowledge the shoot went on regardless with the script being stuck to rigorously. It wasn’t apparent until after the initial airing of the show in December 2008 just how many misleading accusations had been made by the motoring entertainment show about the car's performance and reliability.

Source: http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/105 ... efore-test

 

[David B]

Today, we turn on our TV to see who the most influential people are in this country. And it's people like Jeremy Clarkson; a half-witted gobshite who says anything he wants and doesn't give a damn about the consequences.

I remember him mercilessly ridiculing the sporty version of the Rover 75, after which he half-heartedly implored the (then) MD of Rover, John Towers, to tell the world whether Rover was in good shape or not. Did JC honestly think that his viewing audience of millions would be encouraged to order Rover cars when he said that the 75 should be fitted with "a wood burning stove and a thatched roof"? Where was the genuine concern for the shape that Rover was in when the cheap gags were being written?

Anyway, within months Rover closed and 6,500 brummies lost their jobs. We've gone from a country whose best-known people build industries to a country whose best-known people make cheap jokes as our industries die.

So yeah, I hope that Top Gear gets burned for this. I hope that the people who are trying to innovate, build brave new engineering projects and employ a workforce are victorious, while the sneerers and shit-stirrers get a good kicking.

Excellent post. Anti-cyclist, anti-environmentalist stuff aside, the incessant Rover-bashing is probably one of the main reasons I can't stand either Clarkson or Toss Gear. I grew up in the Black Country and umpteen firms there, including Dad's employers, felt the knock-on effect of Longbridge closing for some time afterwards. Clarkson comes across as having some sort of chip on his shoulder about my part of the world in general (best surmised as Midlanders = thick/lazy/incompetent), presumably due in part to his less than sparkling boarding school education in Staffordshire?

As for the 75 - Dad bought a 2nd-hand one a few years ago, and reckons that for the first time in an age - having first been behind a wheel on the comparatively quiet roads of the late 60s - he actually enjoys driving because of it!

David

 

[mikee]

top gear finally gets its comupance , do you not like it then?

Once upon a time Mikee, the people of this country were doers. The British scientific and industrial revolution invented the modern world that we now take for granted. My heroes are people like Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, Isambard Kingdom Brunel, James Watt, James Clerk Maxwell, Michael Faraday. These guys devoted their whole lives to improving the world that others lived in -- and they came from the UK.

Today, we turn on our TV to see who the most influential people are in this country. And it's people like Jeremy Clarkson; a half-witted gobshite who says anything he wants and doesn't give a damn about the consequences.

I remember him mercilessly ridiculing the sporty version of the Rover 75, after which he half-heartedly implored the (then) MD of Rover, John Towers, to tell the world whether Rover was in good shape or not. Did JC honestly think that his viewing audience of millions would be encouraged to order Rover cars when he said that the 75 should be fitted with "a wood burning stove and a thatched roof"? Where was the genuine concern for the shape that Rover was in when the cheap gags were being written?

Anyway, within months Rover closed and 6,500 brummies lost their jobs. We've gone from a country whose best-known people build industries to a country whose best-known people make cheap jokes as our industries die.

So yeah, I hope that Top Gear gets burned for this. I hope that the people who are trying to innovate, build brave new engineering projects and employ a workforce are victorious, while the sneerers and shit-stirrers get a good kicking.

as an engineer of a few years standing , i wonder how rover staggered on so long , their cars were rubbish even honda couldn't change the course of the company
i would say BMW were the real villans in the demise of rover not clarkson
the damage was done long before that
if you read some of the white papers published on the demise of rover
you'll see that the actions taken by our goverment helped shove it over the edge too

 

[pigman]

as an engineer of a few years standing , i wonder how rover staggered on so long , their cars were rubbish even honda couldn't change the course of the company
i would say BMW were the real villans in the demise of rover not clarkson
the damage was done long before that
if you read some of the white papers published on the demise of rover
you'll see that the actions taken by our goverment helped shove it over the edge too

you forgot Red robbo and his marxist cronies too. Every time a new model was launched, he got the workers out on the pretext of there being the wrong colour toilet rolls, to hold the management to ransom. The constant interupptions did nothing to further to quality or worker morale.

 

[mikee]

so not jeremy clarkson then ?

 

[MikeD]

Ummm, I'm afraid not Mike. The "55 miles" claim was actually written before Clarkson ever got into the car...

I've already posted that the "55 miles" thing appears to have been a hypothesis rather than an actual happening. Although the actual number doesn't appear in the documents, which are after all what Tesla says happened rather than necessarily what actually did, which is for the court to decide

 

[JohnH]

I've already posted that the "55 miles" thing appears to have been a hypothesis rather than an actual happening.

You're absolutely right, Mike. I was looking for a post that I could counterbalance with the update of Tesla having established that the whole "review" was written before the cars were delivered.

But I wasn't trying to "catch you out", since you probably innocently assumed that the BBC wouldn't stoop so low as to baldly fabricate a pack of lies and portray them as a genuine consumer report. We live and learn.

P.S. Thanks for the complement, David B!

 

[highlandsflyer]

I think the thing is that 90% of what they do on the show is contrived, openly.

Therefore when they dig into a product in such a way it comes from the perspective of a show that otherwise is never serious.

This makes it look shallow and opinionated, rather than objective and considered.

Fifth Gear really shows Top Gear up these days.

Proper drivers as well.

I have said it before, but Clarkson is an albatross round the show's neck. Get shot of him, get a couple of female presenters and start to do articles on cycling, bikes and everyday cars. Get rid of the 'challenges', and all the tongue in cheek ba's.

Get Dave Coulthard in or someone like that who can give updates and commentary on F1, things like that.

Link ups with the articles on their other shows worldwide might be interesting as well.

 

[MikeD]

Anyone watching Top Gear and assuming any of it constitutes a "genuine consumer report" is either spectacularly naive, or daft, or both.

It'll certainly be interesting to see where this all goes, anyway. And if it forces a bit of a format refresh, I don't think that'll be a bad thing

 

[highlandsflyer]

Anyone watching Top Gear and assuming any of it constitutes a "genuine consumer report" is either spectacularly naive, or daft, or both.

It'll certainly be interesting to see where this all goes, anyway. And if it forces a bit of a format refresh, I don't think that'll be a bad thing

That is kind of my point.

Anyone watching it might get that.

However a review like that has legs beyond its original vehicle.

Not everyone will see it in context, i.e. the opinion of a group of reactionary jokers.

Personally I think Tesla are daft to sue, it just publicises things further.