DonFerrari said:
Mr_No said:
DonFerrari said:
Funny thing is...
Someone rob and murder someone there are outcries for forgiviness and how the person is really the victm.
There is a discussion and an altercation (that we don't know all the details or even the emotional state of Jeremy) and some folks want terminal measures... you could fine him, give him a time-off, send him to therapeut, social services, make amends and a lot of other things... firing him isn't the only option (altough the network have all the right to decide as they want) |
Pretty much this. I've read around some sites and noticed that the ones who wanted Clarkson out haven't considered any of those options. Sure, BBC reserves the right to do whatever they want, but they should've put some thought on this because it's bad business. The producer is the victim here, I won't deny that. But firing Jeremy made him a target.
I believe that the only thing needed was a fine and some disciplinary measures, but nothing as brash as firing him.
|
Even more when the decision is bad for everyone, the victim, the network, his coleagues and customers.
But yes some people loves to do the moral talk but can't think straight even if their lives depend on that. They just want to push an agenda.
|
It doesn't matter how influential or successful the TV celebrity is, nowadays the BBC - or any company, institution or whatever, can no longer be seen to turn a blind eye based on how big and influential that celebrity is.
A guy attacked his colleague, and his behaviour was bad enough to be fired over, and bad enough for the police to have wanted to investigate further.
