Jeremy Clarkson Petition Urging ITV Not To Sack Him Reaches More Than 40,000 Signatures

After the news that Jeremy Clarkson has been axed by Amazon, many Prime customers decided to cancel their subscriptions in protest.

And now, more than 40,000 fans have signed a petition to save him from the dreaded fate of being sacked from his ITV gigs too. Namely, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, which the presenter has hosted since 2018.

If you didn’t know, the news comes after the sixty-two-year-old’s controversial comments regarding Meghan Markle last month.

In case you missed it, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex finally released the full 6 episodes of their bombshell docuseries Harry & Meghan on Netflix. As a result, the pair have been in the headlines solidly for the past couple of months.

Pinned as an “unprecedented and in-depth” look at the pair’s love story, it explores the “clandestine days of their early courtship and the challenges that led to them feeling forced to step back from their full-time roles in the institution.”

However, Clarkson didn’t seem to like it at all.

The former Top Gear host spoke out in an op-ed for The Sun. In the piece, Clarkson had some pretty damning things to say about the documentary, and, in particular, Markle.

“I hate her. Not like I hate Nicola Sturgeon or Rose West. I hate her on a cellular level,” he said of Markle.

“At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant ‘Shame!’ and thrown lumps of excrement at her.

“Everyone who’s my age thinks the same way,” he added.

Further commentary from the presenter included comments that “younger people, especially girls, think [Markle’s] pretty cool,” which makes him feel even “angrier”.

After the news came out, many criticized Clarkson’s comments.

Credit: Netflix/Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Even Clarkson’s own daughter, Emily had something to say about his controversial column. She took to her Instagram stories to share her perspective, per The Independent.

“My views are and have always been clear when it comes to misogyny, bullying and the treatment of women by the media.

“I want to make it very clear that I stand against everything that my dad wrote about Meghan Markle and I remain standing in support of those that are targeted with online hatred.”

Then, a month after Clarkson’s column was published, it was revealed that the star had been axed by Amazon Prime.

Although fans were happy to know that they are still going ahead with the second and third series, per Variety, Prime won’t be working with Clarkson on anything further than the series of The Grand Tour and Clarkson’s Farm that have already been commissioned.

This means that both shows are expected to end in 2024, when their final seasons are anticipated to end.

When fans caught wind of the news, many took to social media to announce they would be cancelling their subscriptions in protest.

One person said: “So Amazon has dropped Jeremy Clarkson. Well, I’ve just cancelled my Amazon Prime account.”

While a second added: “That’s my Amazon Prime cancelled #IStandWithJeremyClarkson.”

But the latest news involves petition on, set up in Clarkson’s favour in an attempt to prevent the star getting axed from his jobs at ITV too.

It has reached a whopping 40,354 signatures at the time of writing, and calls the move “an example of cancel culture at its worst.”

The petition set up by the Free Speech Union urges ITV boss, Carolyn McCall, “please don’t fire Jeremy Clarkson” and claims they “do not appear to really believe Mr Clarkson’s remarks put anyone at risk.”

They added that he has already been “punished” and that the “negative reaction has been completely disproportionate.”

They concluded the petition, “we would ask you to bear in mind the price Jeremy Clarkson has already paid for his remarks. Amazon has indicated it will not commission any more seasons of Clarkson’s Farm or The Grand Tour and his Sun column has not appeared in the newspaper again, suggesting he has lost that, too.

“Is he to be punished even further by losing his only other main source of income? The punishment is already completely disproportionate to the crime, without you compounding his humiliation.”

What do you think?

Leave a Reply