By Tony O’Reilly–
Jeremy Clarkson(pictured) has no moral grounds to call media coverage on Schofield a witch hunt, given his chequered past. The controversial British television presenter and journalist, has cultivated a public persona characterized by provocative statements and questionable behaviour, making his attacks on the press hypocritical.
Ever since Clarkson spoke out for Schofield , a number of people, the last being Sarah Ferguson has cited him as grounds to join the numbers of those going on record for defending him.
Why? Because the actions of those in the pubic eye have impact on its audiences, the precise reason influential personalities come out in the open to defend those they want to defend.
Jeremy Clarkson and Piers Morgan were recently described as stars by journalists at The Independent when making reference to their defence of Schofield, almost lending credibility to their support.
Jeremy Clarkson has a long-standing reputation for engaging in inappropriate behaviour both on and off-screen. His pattern of offensive remarks, physical altercations, and controversies demonstrates a disregard for social norms and professional conduct, but his fame and riches with all the accompanying contacts will always guarantee him a platform to express his views.
Clarkson’s has gone beyond ethical boundaries on many occasions, but never far enough to kick him off television completely.
Examples of his boundary crossing behaviour include his use of racial slurs during the filming of Top Gear, his physical assault on a producer, and his public endorsement of reckless driving. These instances not only reveal a lack of respect for others but also highlight a problematic attitude towards personal responsibility.
.A range of opinions from those in the bar to those on social media in response to the specific question of whether the former Top gear host can justify sticking up for Schofield do not stack up in his favour.
Clarkson’s consistent disregard for social norms and professionalism undermines his moral authority to criticize the press for exposing celebrity infidelity.
Interestingly enough, Clarkson has many fans among the British public, mostly from his presentation of Top Gear. Posing questions about Clarkson to members of the public will many times produce some level of affection for Jeremy Clarkson, but even most ardent fans say he has a responsibility to uphold certain standards of behaviour and be aware of the impact of his actions can have on society.
His reputation for engaging in inappropriate conduct, especially involving offensive language or physical violence, sets a poor example for his audience and can perpetuate harmful attitudes. By failing to recognize the importance of personal accountability, Clarkson undermines his ability to credibly comment on the actions of others.
”It reflects a selective outrage that Clarkson conveniently overlooks his own transgressions while scrutinizing the actions of the press of which he is a key member himself, Christopher Matthews, a teaching assistant said, when discussing the issue with him This undermines any credibility he may have in calling out the media for their practices and raises questions about his motivations”.
”Clarkson should be crucial to promoting a culture of accountability for public figures as part of quality journalism, but this is too much to expect of someone like him. I think he is best focusing on presented programmes, to be fair he is good at it until he starts misbehaving. In all fairness, nobody is perfect and Clarkson has a point that the age gap issue is common with many celebrities and the press mist show consistency in their criticisms, but Clarkson is the wrong person to express those views”.
Another view from data analyst, Hannah Hall , 26 was this: ” Clarkson is a chameleon. He presents himself nicely on television and comes across well, but then has in the past behaved shamefully. Is this not the same guy who was misogynistic against Meghan Markle when he said he wanted to see her naked in the streets with the pubic throwing excrements at her?
”I remember reading that article and thinking how bad and low it was to see that on a national newspaper. Meghan is not exactly my cup of tea, but the issue there was the way he was degrading a woman openly and kind of inciting more people to follow suit. The behaviour of public figures can influence people, and here he is again suggesting Schofield committed no offence , and suggesting hat there is a homophobic witch hunt against him.
”He overlooks the possibility this young man may have been groomed by Schofield. The fact Schofield insists there was no grooming, what evidence is there to support or deny that view’.
”Now, he has Ferguson and others quoting his wrong views which appears to have been expressed just to highlight himself, or to impress somebody in the industry, we don’t know”.