So, I've never been much of a car person (as Kna will attest) and I've never really 'gotten into' Top Gear in a way that many of my mates have. But I watched the first episode of the new series and have become utterly hooked. It occurred to me that this was absolutely the most subjective, opinionated, baseless journalism in the world. Clarkson just says whatever he wants, and he has his lackeys to give some different perspectives. His slagging off of Rover is almost a running joke. But fundamentally, it's a hugely entertaining show and it provides real buying advice without fear of pissing people off. That Toyota segment was a great example: it really gave you plenty of reasons to buy the car, and a real idea of exactly what the car was about, and how it would work. Very few numbers, very many words and expressions. But to top it all, they told people to buy the Citroen because it was the same car £500 cheaper. Genius. The features they put together are designed to showcase the characteristics of something. They were interesting. So that got me thinking. Should we be putting together more objective, seemingly goofy features to showcase products? Should we be far more subjective and outrageously creative with our writing? Or should we stick to the objective, straight (mostly) writing style we have now? Is Top Gear just an example of a tabloid, opinionated piece of biased crap? Opinions please.
In a world where Mr Health and Safety rules supreme, all we want is to see someone enjoying themselves driving cars fast. That's what Top Gear is all about. It's not journalism, never was, it's entertainment, and sometimes they offer car buying advice.
Yeah Yoda's right, I don't think Top Gear is the way to base a computer related site around. Stick to what got you as big as you are today.
I think the way the site does its reviews at the moment are brilliant because when i read one, i want tech details etc, not a story or a laugh. Theres plenty of other sites out there that do that. Anyway i think proper journalism can be funny if done right, as i seem to remember your article on the Battery life activator nearly made my cry with laughter as you reviewed a crap product, and absolutly ripped its credibility to shreds with well researched facts. my 2 cents
I personally love the show: I get to see cars driven the way they were sometimes NEVER meant to be. I don't watch it so that I can be informed of individual cars: I can do that myself - the coolest part of Top Gear is that I can see cars put to the track. Also, they discuss THEIR view on cars, so its like getting a second opinion
i think you should get a challenger, and see how much mac stuff it can crush in 90 seconds. Then like get 100,000£ worth of mac mini's in a cluster, vrs 100,000£ of AMD64 systems, and £100,000 of Xeon. N see which one you can cook an egg on faster. Also you should then take the Mac mini's and give them to some erm, really manly men, and see how long it is before they buy a scooter.
Once upon a time it was about the cars alone - it was numbers, figures and a mild description. Now it's fantastic - top gear is my favourite program atm. It's become one of the most entertaining things on the TV where 3 journalists review cars, have fun, and say exactly what they think of them. It's a model of journalism for any creative person to follow.
if anyone has this recorded on a dvd or something do they wanna share (bit torrents good too). I was out at a leavers doo and forget to set sky+
The reviews should stay the way they are. As objective as possible. Use the numbers to compare products. And offcours a nicely written conclusion, so that I understand what all these numbers and graphs mean. But I would however love a subjective, funny-written column. I'm not saying that they aren't right now, but not top-gear-like. So that would be a nice read. But It shouldn't be meant to review a product. As apposing to cars, people buy hardware weekly/monthly, so they want to know how new hardware really is.. is it worth it.. etc.. etc.. When ur buying a new car, you won't run the dealer after seeing top gear and order a car.. it something you will consult alot more sources on .. and then still not be sure.. L
It's because Top Gear are BBC and can literally phone ANY car company up and go "we want your latest half a million pound supercar to burn out on our test track", or "we want a dozen of your toyotas to trash playing football". And they can say what they like, without having to be too diplomatic cause even if they piss people off they'll still get cars for next week. It's not like there's a thousand alternative top gear programs readily accessible on tv just like them, like we have to compete with here They do do what we do though - often review the fastest, most expensive kit out there for the wow factor and our forums tell people to buy "3000+ venices and overclock" because it's a better deal etcetc. So, in a way, we were like it first. EDIT: It's also hard to convey attitude over the internet and being funny has to be obvious and appeal to a worldwide audience not just a load of brits that tunr in on a sunday evening.
You cant buy that kind of air time though, that segment maybe cost toyota £100,000 they wouldnt get 30seconds on itv1 for that and that doesnt include making the advert. Let alone the fact the ASA wouldnt let them show the car footie!
I count 70k of cars and they would have just written them off as advertising budget. Was a nice two fingers up at the Mitsubishi Colt car football advert. *n
Exactly. Top Gear is great because they don't have to mince their words for anyone - it's the perfect platform for someone like Clarkson, who has opinions up the wazoo and a great delivery of them, and he manages to be an unashamed fan of some things and a hater of others without letting it impact his objectiveness too much ("It's a Merc so I should hate it. But I don't" or something of that ilk last night). And he's tempered so well by Richard and James, I reckon this Top Gear we have at the moment far surpasses the ones with Quentin and Tiff, as these three just gel so well. I still can't get over the fact that James May likes the look of the Honda Element though. Yuk. I think that the problem of doing something like this with bit-tech is as mentioned - can you afford to risk pissing companies off by playing fast and loose with their hardware, being completely unscientific in your testing methods, and offering first impression viewpoints? I don't think that many online publications, if any, can - if a policy decision like this was made it would be taking quite a large chance of being laughed off the internet. Or it could be the most important thing anyone's done in ten years. Who knows?
i think a good balance of the two would be awesome, showing how a product can be used for a more weird wacky adventurous way but also what it does do, how it does and why it does it well. That way the reader can weigh up the pro's and con's etc.
