View Full Version : Top Gear being sued for libel. GOOD
BustedS13
03-30-2011, 02:27 PM
Tesla sues Top Gear for libel, New Stig unavailable for comment (update: BBC responds) -- Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/30/tesla-sues-top-gear-for-libel-new-stig-unavailable-for-comment/)
ABOUT FUCKING TIME.
Fans of a particular show featuring three middle-aged men with an unhealthy penchant for cars, plus a fourth individual whose interests are rather more elusive, probably remember a 2008 episode in which the Top Gear crew lambasted the Tesla Roadster (http://www.engadget.com/tag/tesla,roadster). (If not, a particularly low-quality recording is embedded below.) On that show, Jeremy Clarkson could be seen flogging one around the track, complaining about a range of only 55 miles before showing that car being pushed into the garage, supposedly out of charge. Not true, says Tesla, who has filed a lawsuit against the BBC for libel and malicious falsehood. Tesla claims that, among other things, two cars were provided and at all times at least one of them was ready and willing. Beyond that, Tesla knows that neither car ever dropped below 25 percent charge, meaning the whole pushing into the garage thing was, well, staged. It's hard to look at this as much more than a PR move, Tesla waiting over two years to file, but that doesn't mean the complaint isn't legit. Now it's time for the Beeb to roll out its crew of tame racing lawyers. Some say their suits are made of wool, and that their briefcases contain actual briefs. All we know is they're very well compensated.
lol, since when has Top Gear been a serious all business just the facts car reviewer. Tesla Motors just lost more cool points.......
BustedS13
03-30-2011, 02:44 PM
that's everybody's reaction now, after watching the show for several seasons. but when everybody was jerking off extra hard to it, i had to explain why a Corvette's leaf springs are not buggy springs at least a half dozen times, which was annoying. thanks for the first world problems, BBC
HyperTek
03-30-2011, 03:32 PM
jeremy clarkson can be annoying as fuck sometimes
sw20>>s14
03-30-2011, 03:39 PM
no doubt theyre trying to protect the reputation of, and/or fund the new sedan thats suppose to roll out soon...
shahabshaukat
03-30-2011, 03:49 PM
Looks like they are just trying to save face.........
gearhead55
03-30-2011, 04:03 PM
/\/\/\ naw i don't think so, i've read from multiple sources that the car didn't run out of charge at all. BBC came out and said that they were just showing "what could have happened". Sorry if the article posted says this, cause i'm too lazy to read it now.
Otto347
03-30-2011, 04:28 PM
that show blows anyway.
top gear can suck mad fat dicks bitch
singlecamslam
03-30-2011, 05:24 PM
top gear can suck mad fat dicks bitch
You mad?
That sentence didnt even make sense. I will continue watching top gear, cause if you watch top gear for a serious review you're an idiot. And tesla is being butt hurt, its not like tesla is the only car company they made fun of.
Phate
03-30-2011, 06:10 PM
You mad?
That sentence didnt even make sense. I will continue watching top gear, cause if you watch top gear for a serious review you're an idiot. And tesla is being butt hurt, its not like tesla is the only car company they made fun of.
Plus one. If you're going to try and insult someone/something, don't look like a retard while doing it.
Pretty much what I came in here to say about them not being serious all the time.
word sux
03-30-2011, 06:10 PM
sueing the bbc is like throwing ice cubes at the sun...
top gear rules
/thread
BustedS13
03-30-2011, 06:21 PM
top gear can suck mad fat dicks bitch
i endorse this statement
gearhead55
03-30-2011, 06:25 PM
sueing the bbc is like throwing ice cubes at the sun...
top gear rules
/thread
haha first statement is true, the second, not so much.
WanganRunner
03-30-2011, 07:47 PM
WHO CARES WHAT THEY SAY
If you're really making your car purchasing decisions based on something Jeremy Clarkson says, then you deserve whatever you get.
lucky7
03-30-2011, 08:02 PM
almost 3 years after the fact. statute of limitations running out? trying to get some press? yup and yup.
fuck tesla, fuck electric "sports cars".
BustedS13
03-30-2011, 08:06 PM
WHO CARES WHAT THEY SAY
If you're really making your car purchasing decisions based on something Jeremy Clarkson says, then you deserve whatever you get.
what if your stock falls because of something Jeremy Clarkson says? or his show stages?
LB.Motoring
03-30-2011, 08:38 PM
thats show biz yo. Its sad but true.
is it not true that Tesla has NEVER made money? i am shocked they can afford lawyers. ;x
FRpilot
03-30-2011, 09:32 PM
so this will be a start of a trend to sue everyone and everything that gives reviews about anything?
no more electronic review sites, no more siskel and ebert, no more yelp, no more personal reviews, etc.?
DS562
03-30-2011, 09:44 PM
eh, Tesla is just looking for some money to put into something not worth it.
LoneStarSilvia
03-30-2011, 10:14 PM
Wow. People will hate anything for bullshit reasons.
Really man, Tesla? Who gives a rats ass about Tesla. How can you 'slander' anelectric sports car, the term electric sports car slanders itself. Especially for how much they want for one of those.
Do you see them getting sued by Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley? They've bashed some of their cars and you don't hear about them going after the BBC.
TG offends and entertains people, that's what they do. Would you rather watch Car & Driver TV all day instead? Would you rather have someone say, oh I don't so much like this or that about this car... Or someone not afraid to call a car shit?
If you can find a more entertaining car show that goes WAY beyond just your normal car show, then let's see it.
If not, get off your weak ass soap box and just enjoy the damn show.
singlecamslam
03-30-2011, 10:25 PM
i hope they make fun of tesla more now. For being little fucking cry babies. They pretty much make fun of anything that isnt an aston martin. Deal with it, if your sales sucks, maybe the car you're making is a Pile of garbage? I know someone that owns a tesla, those things run out of juice really quick.
ZilviaKid
03-30-2011, 10:26 PM
what if your stock falls because of something Jeremy Clarkson says? or his show stages?
did your stock fall?
LoneStarSilvia
03-30-2011, 10:38 PM
Let's be real, if any of us was rich enough to sneeze away $109,000, show of hands, who here would think, man I'd love an ill handling, bloated Lotus that has a range 244 miles..... Oh perfect a Tesla!
BustedS13
03-30-2011, 10:38 PM
so this will be a start of a trend to sue everyone and everything that gives reviews about anything?
no more electronic review sites, no more siskel and ebert, no more yelp, no more personal reviews, etc.?
first of all, siskel is dead
second, roger ebert never filmed a fake version of a movie he didn't like and show it on television
not a perfect analogy but you know what i mean. bad top gear bad etc
worangejuice
03-30-2011, 10:40 PM
first el presidente of Mexico, now the ol' Tesla 2 years after the fact lawsuit?! the fuck, it's Top Gear..........
statickx991
03-30-2011, 10:41 PM
that is so stupid since they are suing him for talking about his experience with the cars. they need to face it. they look nice but they are a polished pos. dont get me wrong id love to have one and do like a sr swap in it ;)
hessianben
03-31-2011, 01:35 AM
whata buncha babies !!!
anyone that's ever seen the show knows that facts never enter into the equation.
when i saw the title, i thought for sure it was about Mexico asking for an apology about the bean-bashing in season 16 ! (it's ok, i'm all mexican an stuff)
word sux
03-31-2011, 01:54 AM
the problem is that people are fucking pussy's now a'days
instead of trying to improve their product so top gear can't bash them on their battery life they would rather sue them to make a quick buck and get some headlines out of it
guess what..
A CAR WITH A RANGE OF ONLY 55 MILES IS NOT PRACTICLE!
they were just proving a point. if you want to hate on top gear (the only decent car show in the world). your gonna have to find a better reason
Buc-town
03-31-2011, 02:02 AM
... Do you see them getting sued by Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley? They've bashed some of their cars and you don't hear about them going after the BBC.
TG offends and entertains people, that's what they do. Would you rather watch Car & Driver TV all day instead?
+1, I agree:boink:
rodneyfromtrini
03-31-2011, 02:12 AM
well clarkson had his foot down all the time while driving the car so u would think that would make the battery run down faster....top gear is a great show and if u watch it cuz u really want a review about a car then ur an ass...
raz0rbladez909
03-31-2011, 07:41 AM
I for one actually enjoy Top Gear, not for serious car reviews, but for entertainment. If you say that Top Gear sucks for not providing serious reviews, thats like being mad at Jersey Shore for not teaching life lessons and family values. If you didn't have Top Gear, what other car show would you watch? That shitty bull run show? lol
WanganRunner
03-31-2011, 08:56 AM
No one should be taking anything that cast says/does seriously.
They aren't in the business of reviewing, period. They're automotive entertainment, not automotive journalism.
This is the equivalent of someone suing Jon Stewart for making fun of them.
daryl337
03-31-2011, 10:19 AM
I love that show.
you can all suck dicks. Big ones.
tricky_ab
03-31-2011, 10:34 AM
So if you don't agree with your statement we can "suck a dick" huh? Are you sure you're really 25?
Anyways, if Top Gear out-right lied about certain aspects, I think that's a fair enough reason to sue for damages. We already know the show is scripted to hell and a shot of them pushing an electric car off the track was probably too hilarious to turn down.
(Used to love Top Gear, hate the shitty, scripted comedy-lite it is now and has been for a while)
lucky7
03-31-2011, 11:18 AM
scripted or not, Tesla is a fucking joke of a company. do you think they make any money selling cars? fuck no. they sell their carbon emission credits or whatever to companies that build/sell gas hogs.
BustedS13
03-31-2011, 12:00 PM
(Used to love Top Gear, hate the shitty, scripted comedy-lite it is now and has been for a while)
this, a thousand times this
Pure_JDM
03-31-2011, 12:07 PM
Tesla should get the fuck over it. Period. Thanks for the wasted site space though. Maybe we should start a whiny bitch thread... or a complaint of the day... or a useless information/facts thread...
didn't bently refuse to give them a car to test against the mercedes and rolls royce? that's what tesla should have done if they didn't want any bad press.
Daniel.
03-31-2011, 12:38 PM
This has been said before, but I just want to reiterate that this is most likely just a PR stunt.
Matej
03-31-2011, 08:31 PM
Mr. BustedS13, when did you become a car person?
Mr. BustedS13, when did you become a car person?
He just has a boner for Domestics. :keke:
BustedS13
03-31-2011, 10:30 PM
Mr. Matej: my dad took me to gokart tracks way too often when i was a kid
He just has a boner for Domestics. :keke:
i like em all bromeo
axiomatik
04-04-2011, 02:28 PM
You guys don't seem to know what libel is.
Defamation (libel) is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed
If Top Gear had simply stated that they don't like the car, and said why, there would be no case. Libel does not apply to opinion. But they factually mis-represented the Tesla by staging the event, preying on the general public's greatest misgivings about electric cars. This would be the same as reviewing a pickup truck and loading 700 lbs of bricks in it, and then showing a shot of a broken axle, even though the load didn't really do any damage at all. Then, later, trying to cover it up by saying "well, this is what could have happened". It was presented on the show as the actual outcome, that this $100k car can't even drive 60 miles on a charge, and thus, isn't at all practical for real driving. (Of course, they omitted the the fact that flogging any car around a track will greatly reduce its range, hell, a Veyron can only run for 15 minutes at top speed, which, coincidentally, is only 63 miles)
BBC Pockets > Telsa Pockets
BBC Lawyers > Telsa Lawyers
ronmcdon
04-04-2011, 02:54 PM
You guys don't seem to know what libel is.
If Top Gear had simply stated that they don't like the car, and said why, there would be no case. Libel does not apply to opinion. But they factually mis-represented the Tesla by staging the event, preying on the general public's greatest misgivings about electric cars. This would be the same as reviewing a pickup truck and loading 700 lbs of bricks in it, and then showing a shot of a broken axle, even though the load didn't really do any damage at all. Then, later, trying to cover it up by saying "well, this is what could have happened". It was presented on the show as the actual outcome, that this $100k can't even drive 60 miles on a charge, and thus, isn't at all practical for real driving. (Of course, they omitted the the fact that flogging any car around a track will greatly reduce its range, hell, a Veyron can only run for 15 minutes at top speed, which, coincidentally, is only 63 miles)
That's probably the best explanation yet, thanks.
Top Gear should definitely be held accountable on this instance.
Seems like too many posts here are about praising or bashing Top Gear, which is irrelevant.
codyace
04-04-2011, 03:06 PM
By the time this hits the courts, Tesla will be out of business. Who cares.
TO me, Top Gear is entertaining. Is it factual? No. Realistic? No. But what else is even close to it (car wise) that is entertaining? I get a kick out of the beater challenges, scripted or not. Trust me, I'd love to film our beater car challenges, and our woods racing and nitrous rental cars...but the bottom line is, the generic car audience wouldn't find it funny...only abotu 5% of us...
daryl337
04-04-2011, 04:58 PM
Are you sure you're really 25?
... and this comment reflects why you probably do not like top gear.
Your sense of humor is on par with a rock.
thrax
04-04-2011, 05:18 PM
Compared to some of the other lies and things the BBC has done this is pretty tame.
slowvia
04-04-2011, 09:13 PM
You guys don't seem to know what libel is.
If Top Gear had simply stated that they don't like the car, and said why, there would be no case. Libel does not apply to opinion. But they factually mis-represented the Tesla by staging the event, preying on the general public's greatest misgivings about electric cars. This would be the same as reviewing a pickup truck and loading 700 lbs of bricks in it, and then showing a shot of a broken axle, even though the load didn't really do any damage at all. Then, later, trying to cover it up by saying "well, this is what could have happened".
Kind of like the ASPCA commercials that show perfectly healthy animals and just play sad music? Guess we should sue them too.
Look, we all know that Top Gear is a terrible place to get information about a car. Weve all seen them test a car we really like, and then trash talk it because of some minor detail that Clarkson doesnt like.
Bottom line? Top Gear is entertainment TV, not journalism. AND, electric super cars COULD be the shit, just give it time and dont be such closed minded Americans.
/Rant
RNGWLD
04-04-2011, 09:46 PM
I love top gear. Own all the seasons, watch em regularly. Have repeated several episodes many times.
That doesnt mean Im a retard who needs to swing on Clarkson's balls. Change their british accent to a deep-south redneck one and you'll see how much of what they say when politics/personal opinion is involved is just retarded bullshit. "Global warming is faaakeee boohoo our country is the greateesstt" etc etc.
Im all for Tesla. Why would I be against a company that wants to make cool electric cars?
theicecreamdan
04-04-2011, 09:46 PM
You guys don't seem to know what libel is.
If Top Gear had simply stated that they don't like the car, and said why, there would be no case. Libel does not apply to opinion. But they factually mis-represented the Tesla by staging the event, preying on the general public's greatest misgivings about electric cars. This would be the same as reviewing a pickup truck and loading 700 lbs of bricks in it, and then showing a shot of a broken axle, even though the load didn't really do any damage at all. Then, later, trying to cover it up by saying "well, this is what could have happened". It was presented on the show as the actual outcome, that this $100k car can't even drive 60 miles on a charge, and thus, isn't at all practical for real driving. (Of course, they omitted the the fact that flogging any car around a track will greatly reduce its range, hell, a Veyron can only run for 15 minutes at top speed, which, coincidentally, is only 63 miles)
Second, that person must prove that the statement caused harm. Defamation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation)
Tesla is going to have to show that the episode caused harm.
does that rule even exist/pertain to them since they are in the uk?
This whole thing is gonna make for some great episodes. Remember when they held a grudge against the Morris Marina Owners Club, lol
gmagEjystrc
ericcastro
04-04-2011, 10:26 PM
Really man, Tesla? Who gives a rats ass about Tesla. How can you 'slander' anelectric sports car, the term electric sports car slanders itself.
I think maybe you should look at some of the electric sports cars out there.
things kick ass in drag.
And dont the new F1 cars run part electric charge engines with electric boost or some shit??
They actually got some pretty cool stuff going :)
that is so stupid since they are suing him for talking about his experience with the cars. they need to face it. they look nice but they are a polished pos. dont get me wrong id love to have one and do like a sr swap in it ;)
The show straight up lied.
They staged a bunch of BS about Tesla, and should be sued accordingly.
I am sure electric Tesla cars have computers in them, and GPS and all kinds of other shit that would let them know at Tesla that the car never ran under 25%.
And for me, i just got bored of top gear a couple years ago.
Dont really know why, havent really thought about it, just got boring.
And dont the new F1 cars run part electric charge engines with electric boost or some shit??
Sort of but not really. Its a Kinetic Energy Recovery System (KERS) and it just takes wasted brake energy and stores it in a battery where it can be used for an additional 80bhp boost to the rear wheels later. You are not required to run it, and not all cars are running it, you can design a faster car without it as designing a car around the system can be a handicap, and its not very green either. Its just the FIA doing it for PR.
More info than you care for I'm sure......
ericcastro
04-04-2011, 11:15 PM
Sort of but not really. Its a Kinetic Energy Recovery System (KERS) and it just takes wasted brake energy and stores it in a battery where it can be used for an additional 80bhp boost to the rear wheels later. You are not required to run it, and not all cars are running it, you can design a faster car without it as designing a car around the system can be a handicap, and its not very green either. Its just the FIA doing it for PR.
More info than you care for I'm sure......
I could use a 80 hp kintetic energy boost, lol
I will just trail brake all the way to the start line, free 80 hp, lol
;)
Walperstyle
04-05-2011, 01:39 AM
April Fools anyone? holy crap you all seriously fell for it.
BustedS13
04-05-2011, 01:49 AM
April Fools anyone? holy crap you all seriously fell for it.
does canada operate on a different calendar or something?
Prime
04-05-2011, 03:43 AM
I like Top Gear, I really do. And normally when they bash on a car, I take it with a shaker instead of a grain. But on this one, they outright LIED. They deserve it, and anyone who believes different needs to look at the big picture. Especially concerning a company like Tesla. Our hobby needs cars like that to succeed.
Walperstyle
04-05-2011, 05:52 AM
does canada operate on a different calendar or something?
You realize the time it was posted to the server may have been behind the time zone of the person posting it?
Or yeah, this is totally true :gives:
nathanong87
04-05-2011, 06:03 AM
Lol top gear is for pure entertainment value. To believe otherwise is pure idiocy
bb4_96
04-05-2011, 06:07 AM
Tesla suing Top Gear is like some butt hurt noob suing Zilvia. Nobody at Top Gear said the Tesla died they just showed with that scene that with only 60 miles range it's going to be a drawback. Maybe they can sue for all three units they didn't sell as a result and all 5 units they won't sell because of it.
ronmcdon
04-05-2011, 09:46 AM
Lol top gear is for pure entertainment value. To believe otherwise is pure idiocy
Yes, I believe that has already been said more than few times, lets move on please.
(not saying this to you in particular but everyone regurgitating the obvious)
axiomatik
04-05-2011, 10:31 AM
.....
Look, we all know that Top Gear is a terrible place to get information about a car. Weve all seen them test a car we really like, and then trash talk it because of some minor detail that Clarkson doesnt like.
Bottom line? Top Gear is entertainment TV, not journalism.
......
Just because it is an entertainment show doesn't mean that they can outright lie about a company's products.
The Daily Show can't go on air and declare "Eating Jolly Ranchers gives you cancer". Even though it is an entertainment show, outright lying about a company or product is subject to libel.
does that rule even exist/pertain to them since they are in the uk?
Yes, much of the US legal system was derived from UK laws and practices, libel has a long history in the UK.
Lol top gear is for pure entertainment value. To believe otherwise is pure idiocy
Doesn't mean entertainers are allowed to lie about companies/products. When they do, those companies have the right to charge libel.
daryl337
04-05-2011, 10:34 AM
The most interesting part is that, for all intents and purposes... Top Gear did not stretch the truth by a whole lot.
They drove the car 50 miles, and then portrayed them pushing it in as if it was out of batteries. Tesla QQ's and says "You still had 25% battery power left!!!"
25%. 25% of battery power. Its not like the car was able to go another 100+ miles on this charge. Top Gear drove the car fast, and saw it was almost out of a charge.
If you were to drive a car that used up 3/4 of the entire gas tank of a vehicle in 50 miles, you would immediately note "man, you don't really get a whole lot of mileage out of this thing". Sure, perhaps they were pushing on the car purely for flare. But assuming they continued the test until it did run out, they would have travelled a total of an additional 16.6 miles. Whoopdy do. Suing over libel over an additional 16 miles will be much harder to prove.
If Tesla wanted the review to reflect their claimed 200 mile charge, they should never have agreed to have them test it on the test track under (practically) 100% WOT.
dsastr_clan
04-05-2011, 10:55 AM
i think Top Gear is a great show, look how many countries out there have shows that are trying to mimic Top Gear that must mean something
fact, estimated gas mileage is under optimal conditions. that is why they revised the system to reflect closer to real world driving. but even then it is off. of course racing a car is going to kill efficiency.
Tesla's Roadster rolls 241 miles on single charge, annoys petrol pumps -- Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/teslas-roadster-rolls-241-miles-on-single-charge-annoys-petrol/) time to sue engadget.
slowvia
04-05-2011, 04:11 PM
Just because it is an entertainment show doesn't mean that they can outright lie about a company's products.
The Daily Show can't go on air and declare "Eating Jolly Ranchers gives you cancer". Even though it is an entertainment show, outright lying about a company or product is subject to libel.
I hear you, but thats an entirely different situation. In that scenario The Daily Show would actually be causing a panic (this is America, yes people would shit bricks). Whereas Top Gear is really just stretching the truth in order to create a more humorous situation. Is it lying? Sure. But what TV show hasnt exaggerated to make something sound more interesting?
You want a real incident where JOURNALISTS have been caught lying? Look no further than Fox News. Fair and balanced my ass.
YouTube - Fox News BUSTED 'For Lying Yet AGAIN!... Now with Anti-Gaddafi Propaganda!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9RHqkfYPcE)
Imola_s4
04-05-2011, 04:21 PM
^^^ Exactly!!!!.... top gear is for shits and giggles....
axiomatik
04-06-2011, 10:30 AM
fact, estimated gas mileage is under optimal conditions. that is why they revised the system to reflect closer to real world driving. but even then it is off. of course racing a car is going to kill efficiency.
Tesla's Roadster rolls 241 miles on single charge, annoys petrol pumps -- Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/teslas-roadster-rolls-241-miles-on-single-charge-annoys-petrol/) time to sue engadget.
Notice how the sentence is written:
"you'll probably only get around 125 miles out of it before things slowly grind to a halt."
It is written as a guess, not a statement of fact. Beyond that, the article goes on to discuss how far the car actually traveled (much farther) in a recent event. Engadget could be sued for libel if it stated "The Tesla can only drive 125 mile before dying." That is stating something false as a fact.
I hear you, but thats an entirely different situation. In that scenario The Daily Show would actually be causing a panic (this is America, yes people would shit bricks). Whereas Top Gear is really just stretching the truth in order to create a more humorous situation. Is it lying? Sure. But what TV show hasnt exaggerated to make something sound more interesting?
Don't' focus on the potential panic, libel deals with false statements. So instead of my jolly rancher example, consider this statement: "Apple's Ipods are assembled by 8 year old orphans in Vietnamese labor camps". If that statement were declared on television, regardless if it's an entertainment or news show, there is a case for libel. Such a statement would damage the reputation of the company/product, and could hurt sales.
Apple could also sue if a program said they visited the factory where Ipods are assembled, and then cut to a faked scene where kids are assembling ipods. The scene is implied to be factual, and is damaging to the company's reputation.
However, if the television program stated "We have been told that Apple's Ipods are assembled by 8 year old orphans in Vietnamese labor camps", there is no case for libel. The program isn't stating it as fact. "We have been told" informs the viewer that the information is secondhand, and that it has not been verified. Obviously, in such a scenario, Apple would respond to such an accusation with a press release, or a video of their actual manufacturing facility to refute the claim, but they couldn't sue for libel because the claim wasn't presented as a fact.
You want a real incident where JOURNALISTS have been caught lying? Look no further than Fox News. Fair and balanced my ass.
YouTube - Fox News BUSTED 'For Lying Yet AGAIN!... Now with Anti-Gaddafi Propaganda!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9RHqkfYPcE)
Not really pertinent, though I suppose Gaddhafi could sue Fox for Defamation. That isn't a case where the reputation of a company or product is being harmed.
BustedS13
04-06-2011, 10:58 AM
look guys the point is you can't sue people who talk in that sexy accent. sue fox news instead.
Camille Waner
08-06-2011, 01:51 AM
Did you know that there's an issue about Nissan and Top Gear. In the news they have mentioned that The hosts of “Top Gear,” the favored British car show, are famous for courting conflict. They also seldom have anything good to claim about electric vehicles. The Nissan motor corporation is not amused by a recent report on the Nissan Leaf that the show broadcast recently.Top Gear starts new electric car quarrel over Nissan Leaf. (http://www.cardealexpert.com/news-information/auto-news/top-gear-nissan-leaf/) Most of what we saw on T.V. is typically scripted. Before the show was aired on Television, the presenter of the show is given scripts to memorize then when the show starts that the time where he or she will present.But, in the this case the presenter of the Top Gear presents a negative script about Nissan leaf. Through this, he must be sued of defamation.
LoneStarSilvia
08-06-2011, 02:21 AM
What? I watched their road test of the Leaf, I don't remember them saying too many negative things about it other than the fact its expensive as hell and takes an insane amount of time to fully charge, and like everything these days, batteries lose their charge over time and need to be replaced.
nathanong87
08-06-2011, 05:36 AM
whoa blast from the past.... but yea. if i were to believe everything that top gear presented as the truth, essentially all british cars are supreme, and all german cars suck.
car companies are mad*.
how many dudes watch top gear for their car reviews and then BUY the car they are reviewing.... teslas are like 100k+ or more? clarkson doesn't review peasant mobiles on the reg.
dontxploitme
08-06-2011, 01:34 PM
Top Gear is awesome lol but if you watch it to learn facts about cars you're an idiot. That show is all about entertainment despite anyone. It's just like Family Guy or South Park getting sued for saying something false about a celebrity.
Seems only good shows get sued haha
DS562
08-06-2011, 05:52 PM
the american tour through the south was pretty funny. james wrote "nascar sucks" on the side of his pick up and almost got lynched at a gas station
BustedS13
08-06-2011, 05:55 PM
the american tour through the south was pretty funny. james wrote "nascar sucks" on the side of his pick up and almost got lynched at a gas station
yeah, that wasn't 100% fabricated or anything.
DS562
08-06-2011, 06:54 PM
i know, right?
its funny because thats exactly what would happen if you were shit talk nascar in florida.
BustedS13
08-07-2011, 12:15 AM
i know, right?
its funny because thats exactly what would happen if you were shit talk nascar in florida.
spoken like a true nineteen year old.
not like a sagely 26 year old like me.
lucky7
08-07-2011, 07:00 AM
Wow, this thread is still going? I remember that episode, and I'm still really surprised that Clarkson even bothered with an electric "sports car". I sure as hell wouldn't.
I was talking about this sort of thing with a friend of mine yesterday. We're both in our late twenties, and talking about the old school guys, the ones that think that carbs are still the way to go. The ones that think big blocks and straight lines are what cars are about, and that new cars are ruining that. They're traditionalists - all the things that they like are relevant to their generation. As younger guys, my friend and I own, and have owned FWD, 4 cylinder, turbo cars, etc. But we both feel strongly that all cars should come with a manual transmission, and should all be gas powered. I could not even fathom myself even buying a hybrid, let alone a full out electric car. That just sounds silly. And the thought of "electric sports car" is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard of.
As far as going back to topic here, I believe I've mentioned it once before in this thread, but shame on you Tesla. You should have done your homework. Anyone that's seen a few shows could see exactly where that one was going to go. If anything, i think they were much nicer than I imagined they'd be reviewing that car. Lol, Tesla....
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.