Jeremy Clarkson was already on a "final warning", then he thumped a colleague, so he got sacked. Which bit of that do people think is unreasonable?
The official investigation found:
"[Producer] Oisin Tymon was subject to an unprovoked physical and verbal attack by [Clarkson]."
The BBC has undoubtedly made the right decision yet the corporation is still being criticised. Of course it was going to be criticised whatever it did it, so better to be criticised for making the right decision.
Hopefully nobody really condones workplace violence or believes wealthy celebrities should be allowed to beat and bully 'the staff'. But it seems some people's judgement is so badly clouded by their need to see a hidden agenda in all the BBC does they have lost sight of reason.
Clarkson hasn't been sacked because he is a right-wing boor. The BBC has known that for years. He has been sacked because he hit a colleague.
It's the most sensible action anybody could take in the BBC's position.
Among those who disagree is Rupert Murdoch.
How stupid can BBC be in firing Jeremy Clarkson? Funny man with great expertise and huge following.— Rupert Murdoch (@rupertmurdoch) March 24, 2015
Murdoch has made it clear that he's not the sort to sack a man like Clarkson over a little workplace bullying and violence. Commercial interests would prevail. No doubt other commercial broadcasters and media owners would also stand by Clarkson for the same reason and one of them will now snap him up.