GeoffL wrote:Clarkson actually said that he doesn't mind if cyclists want to use the road, but they must behave themselves - which doesn't seem unreasonable to me!
Why is it anything to do with Clarkson if cyclists are on the road or not? why is it anything to do with him how they behave?
GeoffL wrote:Clarkson actually said that he doesn't mind if cyclists want to use the road, but they must behave themselves - which doesn't seem unreasonable to me!
Why is it anything to do with Clarkson if cyclists are on the road or not? why is it anything to do with him how they behave?
He isn't a law maker, he isn't a Police officer.
Even though he is neither a law maker nor a police officer, as another road user he has IMO every right to comment on the way that cyclists behave just as we have every right to comment on the way that drivers behave.
That said, my point is that you possibly libelled him as what he actually said is a million miles from what you claimed he said.
meic wrote:I am not sure it is libel, not everything that is untrue is libel.
I believe it is actually called a mistake in this case.
In which case an apology is the appropriate recompense for the comment.
But 'a mistake' is not an excuse...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way.No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse. There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
I don't know too much about defamation, but as meic suggests, I think it tends to be pricey. I did read somewhere that the main issue is whether what was publish tended to lower the subject's reputation with others. It seems to me that his fans mght be disappointed to hear that he wasn't suggesting that cyclists shouyld all be destroyed. OTOH, I don't suppose the remainder could care less what he might have said.
Edwards wrote:Nutsey People have been telling you that there is something wrong and up until now you have not believed them. Now that you do seem to have a slight understanding of the disorder that you have and can appreciate that your illness will only get worse, you must seek medical intervention immediately. Such mental health problems could possibly get to the stage that it is imposable for you to functional as a near normal adult person. With my understanding of these issues and the treatment I have received I think you may be near the point of irreparable damage to your own health and well being.
You should also consider being voluntarily sectioned under the mental health act.
The above advice is given not as a health professional but as somebody receiving treatment. Hope you get help for your problem.
A very platonic friend.
Hi Eddie
I work in mental health a bit too. I just monitor them though. Did you know for example that Schizophrenia costs the NHS more bed days per year than giving birth does over 5 years? (or it may be schizoes and depression combined, can't remember)
Mental health is very costly to the taxpayer, as I keep pointing out at work. Something needs to change.
All the reviewers know that if they are after TG with a review car then it will not be roadworthy when they have finished with it.
The classic was the guy who lent them his £1 million classic C type Jaguar. It had been a LeMans winner in 1953 and Top Gear wanted to do a feature on it. When the car was handed back it had been wrecked doing hand "getaways", wheel spins and "donuts" in a car park!
Stripped tyres, burnt out clutch and damaged drive shafts were the result of Clarkson and a "guest driver" getting their hands on it.
Speaking to friends, I've realised that Top Gear is an entertainment programme based around cars. Personally I perceived this exchange as just a comedy routine and we as cyclists have more serious media (mis)representations to worry about than prattle between comedians on a comedy show.
NUKe wrote:If we follow this logic then we shouldn't complain when car drivers misbehave.
There's complaining to the Police and there's using your position as a TV presenter to broadcast your views to the nation. Two completely different things.
I don't think cyclists need Clarkson's blessing to use the public highway.
NUKe wrote:If we follow this logic then we shouldn't complain when car drivers misbehave.
There's complaining to the Police and there's using your position as a TV presenter to broadcast your views to the nation. Two completely different things.
I don't think cyclists need Clarkson's blessing to use the public highway.
They're not cyclists they're "victorian distractions" and he doesn't mind them on the road.
Great idea if you ask me - cyclists add character to the road - in a quaint way.
