A nice ad concept from 'we can solve it' : Unlikely Alliances
Here was my suggestion:
Do you guys get BBC's Top Gear? It would take something to get Jeremy Clarkson on that couch. Underneath the bluster and shock-jock is a keen mind and a definite soft-spot for engineering. Got a Lockheed green champ?
Ran out of space, but so long as the message is not too hairshirt, planet ban-it, JC might be up for it. Especially if he meets a science/inventor type he respects.
And if you get him onside, even a bit, you get a lot of fence-sitters to at least think more challengingly on the issues, which to me is more powerful than some green icon preaching to the converted.
Showing posts with label JEREMY CLARKSON. Show all posts
Showing posts with label JEREMY CLARKSON. Show all posts
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Sunday, April 27, 2008
QUOTE OF THE DAY - So there
I share this for no good reason at all, save that it does refer to my favourite quango, and shows Jeremy Clarkson to be every bit as adept at cruddy acronyms as me.
Though mine are often better...IMHO:
Potato heads are talking rot on food
'A sinister government agency called Wrap (We Rape and Pillage) has spent vast lumps of our money to determine that...' [actually he does specify something, but I'm happy enough to selectively edit here as it seems to apply]
The article is also quite fun, as much as for the comments it inspires. The Times use to allow links, but as it does so no longer I don't see much point, so I'll just lurk on and quote this one.
Though mine are often better...IMHO:
Potato heads are talking rot on food
'A sinister government agency called Wrap (We Rape and Pillage) has spent vast lumps of our money to determine that...' [actually he does specify something, but I'm happy enough to selectively edit here as it seems to apply]
The article is also quite fun, as much as for the comments it inspires. The Times use to allow links, but as it does so no longer I don't see much point, so I'll just lurk on and quote this one.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
A lot of things being said at once...
...Here: Clarkson stung after bank prank: Jeremy Clarkson found himself unexpectedly donating to charity
Where do I start?
a) Thanks heavens for folk with wit and a sense of humour
b) That they did it for charity
c) JC can be a plonker but at does at least own up and has the front to say when he's wrong
d) ID theft is real
e) All officialdom (from guv'ment to bans) are lying, cheating, derriere-covering numpties who will spin, hype and hide behind anything to avoid solving a problem first rather than dealing with it.
f) I can't believe he didn't limit his exposure with a dummy account and/or he and the bank stood guard post-publication in case.
g) The excuse given is PATHETIC!!!!!
ADDENDUM:
BEAM ME UP SCOTTIE...CELEBS NEED TO GET THEMSELVES OUT OF HERE!
I missed it too. I found out from the fall out, and have to say that his mea culpa or 'caveat didn't emptor enough' impressed. Probably did more for awareness than a £10M COI campaign.
Now there's a thought. Blow public dosh , or get a better result for free? Hmmn.
Having pondered a while I can't help but thing that those who did see it, and especially the man himself and his bank, seemed very chilled about a few minor advance precautions, such as limiting exposure with a new, not very full account, and a few flags... just in case.
Where do I start?
a) Thanks heavens for folk with wit and a sense of humour
b) That they did it for charity
c) JC can be a plonker but at does at least own up and has the front to say when he's wrong
d) ID theft is real
e) All officialdom (from guv'ment to bans) are lying, cheating, derriere-covering numpties who will spin, hype and hide behind anything to avoid solving a problem first rather than dealing with it.
f) I can't believe he didn't limit his exposure with a dummy account and/or he and the bank stood guard post-publication in case.
g) The excuse given is PATHETIC!!!!!
ADDENDUM:
BEAM ME UP SCOTTIE...CELEBS NEED TO GET THEMSELVES OUT OF HERE!
I missed it too. I found out from the fall out, and have to say that his mea culpa or 'caveat didn't emptor enough' impressed. Probably did more for awareness than a £10M COI campaign.
Now there's a thought. Blow public dosh , or get a better result for free? Hmmn.
Having pondered a while I can't help but thing that those who did see it, and especially the man himself and his bank, seemed very chilled about a few minor advance precautions, such as limiting exposure with a new, not very full account, and a few flags... just in case.
Monday, July 09, 2007
When the sh*t hits the pan
This doesn't look good: BBC's car show in salt pan storm
For an envirophile, I am often an odd defender of Jeremy Clarkson. But of late, and despite having money and profile and money enough not to need to stray as far into shock jock territory, he has rather persisted in saying some silly things just to keep the ratings up.
Now, it seems, he is party to doing them too.
In an era when conspicuous consumption is beginning to sink in as not necessarily the best plan in the world, for the world, whilst they exist for purchase I can still only defend his and his team's right to do whatever they want in the name of entertainment with ever more stupidly configured lumps of high-velocity tin. In fact, by such excess, it's possible that they may be adding ammo to the cause.
But this doesn't seem the smartest move coming, as it does, on top of the drive through pristine countryside here just to plonk a Land Rover atop an mountaintop.
Following that, you'd reckon they might just be sensitive to such issues, or maybe they thought no one would notice 'out there'.
The only thing that rings a little odd is the use of the word 'accused', which is media speak for 'perfectly legal but worth stirring up to see what sticks'. It is either a conservation area, or it isn't. And if it isn't, then while messing up some pretty scenery isn't that nice a thing to do, sadly there is not much one can do about it.
So I guess the best one get hope for is that it just doesn't look good. Like he would care.
For an envirophile, I am often an odd defender of Jeremy Clarkson. But of late, and despite having money and profile and money enough not to need to stray as far into shock jock territory, he has rather persisted in saying some silly things just to keep the ratings up.
Now, it seems, he is party to doing them too.
In an era when conspicuous consumption is beginning to sink in as not necessarily the best plan in the world, for the world, whilst they exist for purchase I can still only defend his and his team's right to do whatever they want in the name of entertainment with ever more stupidly configured lumps of high-velocity tin. In fact, by such excess, it's possible that they may be adding ammo to the cause.
But this doesn't seem the smartest move coming, as it does, on top of the drive through pristine countryside here just to plonk a Land Rover atop an mountaintop.
Following that, you'd reckon they might just be sensitive to such issues, or maybe they thought no one would notice 'out there'.
The only thing that rings a little odd is the use of the word 'accused', which is media speak for 'perfectly legal but worth stirring up to see what sticks'. It is either a conservation area, or it isn't. And if it isn't, then while messing up some pretty scenery isn't that nice a thing to do, sadly there is not much one can do about it.
So I guess the best one get hope for is that it just doesn't look good. Like he would care.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)