Say what you like about Jeremy Clarkson, he knows his audience and he knows his brand. Today’s Sun column does more than just flirt with self-parody as he takes aim at cyclists.
London’s Boris Bikes are his main concern. He questions the worth of last year’s 10.3 million hires on the basis that “eagle-eyed researchers have discovered that nine of the ten most popular trips on the bikes in the past five years were around Hyde Park.”
His position therefore is that “the bikes are mainly being used by tourists who just want to pootle around looking at Mrs Queen’s swans.”
But then he broadens things out, asserting that “the only people who use bikes instead of cars are lunatics who are waging some kind of idiotic war with anyone normal.”
Odd, considering that Clarkson himself was out on his bike one day after being fired by the BBC.
He goes on to describe last week’s video of a truck driver losing it with a bunch of cyclists – one of whom had been hit after going straight on from a left-turn lane – and presents it as if it were a typical example of the kind of thing being targeted by West Midlands Police’s close-pass operation.
He describes the case of Dean Littleford, the truck driver who was baffled to become the operation’s first court conviction, and takes issue with the recommendation that drivers allow 1.5m when passing cyclists.
“So let’s just work that out,” he writes. “The bike needs to be two feet from the kerb to be safe. It is a foot wide and it needs five feet of clearance. That’s eight feet for a bicycle, which on most normal British roads leaves two feet for the car or truck to get past safely.”
You’d think after all his years of driving, Clarkson would have discovered that those broken white lines down the middle of the road aren’t actually impenetrable.
Or perhaps he’s just adopting an exaggerated and confrontational position purely for his column.
It’s worth remembering that the presenter has previously spoken effusively about the cycling-centric nature of Copenhagen and said that he would move there “in a heartbeat”.
Perhaps his position is best summed up by his assertion that in Britain “cycling is a political statement” whereas in Copenhagen “it’s just a pleasant way of getting about.”
Add new comment
48 comments
Now let's not go too far: I didn't say it was an *honest* living. And I don't disagree with your other points either. I wasn't defending him, just trying to explain him.
It occurs to me that a hundred years ago, newspapers would have been commenting that people buying automobiles were waging a war on normality. Just saying... "Normality" appears to be "whatever the majority of people do".
In the interests of accuracy can you please change the head line to read:
"Cyclists are.... - Jeremy Clarkson's ghostwriter"
Fair enough Brooksby, sorry you got caught in the backwash of my rant.
It was late, and you had to mention Katie Hopkins...
No problem
I was reminded of this thread on todays ride when white van man passed me with cm's to spare ( then turn off).
So it may not be real and just a front to sell clicks but thats not how its taken by the empty heads who read the nonsense.
Thing is, Jezza is right about a lot of it. As we know, there are thousands of cyclinsts in London who ride like complete assholes. So we shouldn't be surprised if there are people who dislike us because of it. And it is a political statement in a huge way here, in a way it's not in many other places. I don't know much about Copenhagen, but I lived in Bruge for a while, and cycling is a complete non-event. Virtually veryone does it as a way to get around, and many additionally as sport/exercise. And poor/anti social cycling is cubject to the same lack of tolleration and poor/anti social everything else. Talking about it is regarded as about as interesting as discussing the latest addition to one's toothpast top collection.
You lost me as soon as The Sun was mentioned.
Seems to be some truth in that. But 'normality' can always be changed if you have enough power.
http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern-moloch/
It's his followers I can't stand.
Ban Jeremy Clarkson
These are the ones who worry me. The ones who take what he says as gospel before going out on the roads in their cars...
If someone's entire projected persona involves being an arse, the person *really is* an arse.
Quite possibly. I do enjoy Clarkson's antics and don't want to see him silenced or conforming to certain standards as that's part of what makes him funny (as opposed to Katy Hopkins who just seemed to be filled with hate). If he's echoing some "common" opinions, then it's worthwhile investigating why people think that way and whether some education (e.g. public information films) should be funded to put across the actual facts.
Thing is, he isn't just passively 'echoing' those opinions; he's reinforcing and amplifying them. His high profile helps to normalise and entrench them. So people are thinking those things - and thinking it's ok to think those things - in part because he is saying them in these humorous ways and in these very public forums.
As for re-educating people; his 'humourous' persona means that if anyone seriously tries to challeneg those opinions - say through 'public information films' - he can just evade that challenge by refusing to take any of it seriously.
They greatest trick people like Clarkson ever pull is to write or say profoundly impacful things whilst all the while convincing the world that they're only joking.
Love him! He is the consumate idiot when he wants to be and has made a very good living out of being outragous for the sake of it. And now let us not forget who he is writing for - The Sun. Need I say more
Indeed. The sad thing is that this saloon bar boor persona is the one that makes him the most money, so he sticks with it. He can actually be a surprisingly articulate and engaging presenter when he isn't playing the twat. I saw a documentary about Arnhem presented by him and he was very good.
Is that to the tune of Seven Nation Army?
Baaan Je-re-my Claark-son
Baaan Je-re-my Claark-son
...
Pages