Forum menu
"I wish that were true, but this is a good example of the echo chamber in action. Unfortunately if you read the comments in the Daily Mail and Telegraph you’ll see that the Tory’s target audience has fallen right in behind them.'
That target audience isn't big enough to win an election. They will need at least a few sentient voters to get on board if they even stood a chance.
And to a certain extent that target audience has no skin in this game, for the most part they have been tucked up in bed by their carers by the time MOTD airs.
Follow on story. But you look through the comments on stuff like this and realise we're doomed. Is this really representative of how people think?
When a story develops as quickly as this one does it presents an opportunity to show the naysayers as being falsifyably wrong on an almost minute by minute basis.
"Good riddance, get someone else in to replace the over paid divas' they said.
errr.....nope.
What we are witnessing here is the market deciding, the culture war is starting to crumble.
If a government mp can use an analogy to Nazi Germany then Gary can refer to 1930's Germany.
Unfortunately if you read the comments in the Daily Mail and Telegraph you’ll see that the Tory’s target audience has fallen right in behind them.
That really isn't their target audience. The people who post comments to Daily Mail articles are going to vote Tory next general election come what may.
They make up in part the 26% who are currently telling pollsters that they would vote Tory if there was a general election right now. The Tories aren't targeting them.
The Daily Telegraph doesn't provide for its readers to comment to news stories but you can be sure that their die-hard Tory readers also make up part of the 26%.
The very latest poll, taken after the "Stop The Boats" Tory campaign was launched, puts the Tories on 26%. There is currently no evidence that the Tories's latest gimmick is being backed by their target audience.
A 26% share of the vote in a general election would be the Tories's worse ever general election result.
A a person in a position of influence (although goodness knows why anyone should be influenced by such a person) he should not express his opinions. He should learn to be professional and keep his opinions to football.
He should learn to be professional and keep his opinions to football.
Isn't that exactly what he does on the telly?
I see that the LibDem leader Ed Davey has weighed into the debate, with some impressive nailhead knocking:
“This saga has shown failure at the very top of the BBC and the dire need to urgently protect their independence.
“We need leadership at the BBC that upholds our proud British values and can withstand today’s consistently turbulent politics and Conservative bullying tactics.
“Sadly, under Richard Sharp’s leadership, this has not been the case: his appointment and position are now totally untenable and he must resign.
“The BBC should be a champion of freedom of speech and must overhaul their current rules and judgment on impartiality. They can’t continue to play by rules that are so one-sided.
“The Conservative Government has systematically attacked and undermined the independence of our BBC. That’s not in the best interests of our country and our democracy and Liberal Democrats will fiercely stand up against this.”
The Conservative Government has systematically attacked and undermined the independence of our BBC
So did Labour. The BBC are co-responsible for the invasion of Iraq with Blair. The difference between the BBC reporting and German/French/Spanish channels was striking. Blair's personnal propaganda machine.
Edukator
Free Member
The Conservative Government has systematically attacked and undermined the independence of our BBCSo did Labour. The BBC are co-responsible for the invasion of Iraq with Blair. The difference between the BBC reporting and German/French/Spanish channels was striking. Blair’s personnal propaganda machine.
I don't ever remember any Labour ministers saying the BBC should only reflect the views of the government who are the only true voice of the people. Which is what the Tories are more or less saying.
I see that the LibDem leader Ed Davey has weighed into the debate
It's kinda hard to argue against any of those comments to be fair.
Are only the right wing starmer faction of the Labour party allowed to comment on the tories? Or maybe only the left wing 'corbynite' faction?
Are other political parties allowed to exist in your world? the 2 party flip-flop system between labour and conservative is a huge problem in this country, and answers a lot of questions as to why we never seem to make good progress as a nation.
So did Labour
And you think Ed Davey should have included that in his statement?
Do you believe that a long rambling convoluted history of the BBC and its impartiality would have provided a better level of support for Lineker and his right to have an opinion?
I said that I was impressed with the nailhead knocking because it did precisely that - it knocked all the nails on the head, directly. It didn't go off on a waffling tangent.
A a person in a position of influence (although goodness knows why anyone should be influenced by such a person) he should not express his opinions. He should learn to be professional and keep his opinions to football.
You think? We should only ever speak on matters around our expertise? Set that trend, why don't you?
Ernie and his bizarre questions trying to put words into people's mouths. 🙂 I'll try and answer:
Ed Davey didn't consult me before making the statement.
I can't make head nor tail of the second question so can't work out what I might believe about it.
I agree with Ed Davey's points but IMO (I have no idea about his beacause he doesn't adresse the issue) he fails to recognise that the BBC has produced the propaganda desired by every government since its creation not just the current Conservative government. It operates under a royal charter and answers to the head of state and his government. Any idea that the BBC is independant or impartial is an illusion and always has been.
A a person in a position of influence (although goodness knows why anyone should be influenced by such a person) he should not express his opinions. He should learn to be professional and keep his opinions to football.
Perhaps you could tell us your experience so we can understand how you have the experience to comment on this topic. Otherwise you are just a hypocrite trying to justify some obnoxious opinions
Ed Davey didn’t consult me before making the statement
I see the problem.
A a person in a position of influence (although goodness knows why anyone should be influenced by such a person) he should not express his opinions. He should learn to be professional and keep his opinions to football.
Anyone posting on social media is potentially in a 'position of influence'. You are offering some kind of opinion on journalistic ethics, so would it be fair to ask you to post up your qualifications for doing so?
It's actually a benefit to have citizens prepared to attempt to be informed and express opinions about issues outside their professional life, whether it is politics, philosophy or cheese-making techniques. It's not necessarily a benefit to a paternalistic government that would like to avoid public scrutiny of highly-questionable or even illegal policies, though.
I’m crossing my fingers and toes that you’re right and I’m wrong! I just know how the blokes I speak to in the pub or Screwfix will react to this and it won’t be to say Gary Lineker is right.
Then just ask them how they'd feel about the government calling up their boss and getting them the sack for offering their opinions in said pub?
So where are you drawing that line Mattsccm?
There's a huge amount of art, literature, poetry, theatre, music...... you name it - we'd be a **** load worse off if the creators had to stick to the main trade or subject. I know describing twitter in the same way as the collected works of Orwell, Dylan, Hogarth, or Wilfred Owen, or Arthur Miller is a stretch but they're vehicles for expressing ideas and opinions.
I'm off to burn my Billy Bragg and Specials albums, how dare they have opinions and use their platform to express them.
martinhutch - you refer to paternalistic government; try autocratic.
Why not both? They want to create a docile unquestioning electorate which only looks where the government is pointing. If that works, they will do what they're told and vote the way they're told without the need for much outright autocratic behaviour.
I’d love to know who appoints anyone to be a ‘person of influence’ and what they’re basing the decision on to include footballers and ex-footballers?
It’s usually tabloid newspaper editors, isn’t it?
I can sort of see why you’d apply this to the enigmatic genius of Eric Cantona or a charity crusader like Marcus Rashford, but other than that….
A a person in a position of influence (although goodness knows why anyone should be influenced by such a person) he should not express his opinions. He should learn to be professional and keep his opinions to football.
I don't know you and am not going to bother trawling back through your posts to get a better handle, but I'm guessing our political stances and moral compasses are not very well aligned.....and I'm assuming GL's thoughts on Bravaman's words would not be yours....
But to double check your consistency - would you also condemn Alan Sugar's (a person of influence, though god knows why) tweets encouraging people to vote Tory and retweeting images of Corbyn photoshopped into a Naxi uniform. Because that's a whole other level from GL's words and he didn't get suspended from the Beeb.
This shit is going nuclear now. For the BBC, and hopefully the Tories, this looks increasingly like a PR meltdown.
Chris Morris once said if you wanted a terrorist attack that would truly bring the UK to its knees, just execute its top 100 celebrities.
Gary Lineker, Alan Shearer and other such sport pundits were previously part of the hegemony, quietly being immensely rich and presenting the footie every week. Having such popular figures in these positions suddenly go on strike is extraordinary.
You know the writing is on the wall when 6 Music are suddenly broadcasting a PR message from Sunak trying to distance himself from this. What utter morons they are.
You know the writing is on the wall
Ironically, it is, outside the BBC's front door.
https://twitter.com/carolvorders/status/1634511784026439681
Carol Vorderman as leading anti-corruption campaigner? Strange times we live in.
The 6Music reference made me think of Shaun Keaveny, who had a similar reprimand in 2019 over criticising Johnson's government on Twitter. The axe swung 2 years later, and I'm still annoyed for him. He's got an interesting take on the current situation:
https://twitter.com/shaunwkeaveny/status/1634472054807224320?cxt=HHwWgICz4ZHr564tAAAA
What happened on 6 music?
It’s just a matter of time before the army is drafted in to host MOTD.
The word on the street is Michelle Mone knows someone that can host. If you pay her £25M she'll sort it out
show reduced to 20 minutes tonight!
Strikes me that, as a public body, the BBC attempting to interfere with an individual's freedom of expression or private social media use would fall foul of a couple of articles of the EHRA.
Carol Vorderman has been a vociferous critic of dodgy/corrupt PPE contracts.
Unlikely, I know; similar to piers morgan shredding every minister who ventured onto Good Morning Britain during the pandemic.
Vorderman or Riley?
Me, I can't decide. Comparing both in their prime, how could one choose between them? Beautiful brainy ladies of the quiz-screen 😍
@jambourgie a wonderful contribution to the thread. You must feel very proud!
To be fair he does this sort of thing regularly for a reaction.
Incisive!
Nice piece by Adam Boulting:
Neatly makes the point about the sheer number of right wing 'presenticians' on TV. And yet Lineker is castigated for a tweet.
Tory snowflakes.
^^ Good piece that.👍
Tories are long since forever in next Tuesday territory.
Lineker is cool. He's just a bloke with a conscience.
Very few people are able to perform any kind of critical thinking. This is why society is screwed. The plebs rely on a cheap AF newspaper to give them their newsopinions. Bought my old man a copy of the Guardian and he laughed at the fact it cost three times more than the DM. He gets the DM twice a week and it's generally bought for him despite having a bigger income through his pension than he had whilst working. This is why the UK is on the path it is. Privileged old farkz.
MOTD is a much more pleasant experience without the commentary, almost like some sort of white noise app.
Watching Match of the Day now without the pundits which is a refreshing.
Brilliant! I like it very much. Let's hope it stays this way forever.
Woohoo ... just finished watching.
Reading stw without the trolls, which is a refreshing idea. Brilliant! I like it very much
Surprised to see the BBC have actually run an analytical piece of what the core issues are.
It's only a small piece but it does touch on things that I thought would be a no-go right now. Are they just trying to show they're not under govt control or have they genuinely realised the issue and are starting the journey back to where they should be?