Forum menu
His employer set the rules, he broke them, they stand their ground.
Any proof of that? Why are right wing people not held to the same rules?
One out! All out! ✊
I pinched my nose and had a look at comments in the Daily Mail articles. The poor conflicted readers are struggling with both celebrating Lineker being cancelled and complaining about the woke BBC cancelling Attenborough.
They really don't know who to be furious at.
chestrockwell
Full Member
Any proof of that? Why are right wing people not held to the same rules?
The external activities and public comments, for example on social media, of staff, presenters and others who contribute to our output can also affect perceptions of the BBC’s impartiality. Consequently, this section should be read in conjunction with Section 15: Conflicts of Interest.
BBC rules. I'm not a BBC or Tory apologist. Not even close.
I'm off to drink beer and eat pizza. I have no idea why I'm contributing to the thread to be honest, I'm really not that arsed.
My understanding is that his comments about FIFA and Quatar were cleared in advance by BBC as they would be broadcast live.
Fundamental difference is that his recent comments were on twitter and he was under no obligation to clear them in advance.
The comparison he drew was between the language used then and now.
Any right thinking person would agree with him.
BBC impartiality rules are directed at news/current affairs/political staff - not freelancers using their own twitter a/c to say what is undeniably true.
To those who are saying GL knows what he's doing and should face the consequences I'd add that he clearly knows what he is doing and seems more than prepared to face the consequences.
His actions have been guided by principle and those actions have induced pretty much the entire world of football punditry to show they have principles too.
If his intention was to hold the government to account then he's scored a hat-trick. His best performance since the Poland game at the 1986 World Cup in Mexico.
Overnight he has become the new meme for cancel culture. Whenever a RW pundit now harps on about cancel culture it will be met with the response; "you mean like Gary Lineker?"
The Twitter chatter is that Govt really pissed off with BBC statement - basically whilst Lineker was allowed to continue they could play the victim, but now the BBC have created a hero and as mentioned above an easy come back to the right wing free-speech, cancel culture whingers
If his intention was to hold the government to account then he’s scored a hat-trick. His best performance since the Poland game at the 1986 World Cup in Mexico.
I'm still not convinced this is the case. We, and most other people, are taking about Lineker and BBC, not the immorality of the proposed bill.
His employer set the rules, he broke them, they stand their ground
He isn’t employed by the BBC. He’s a freelancer. There are no clauses about social media use in his contract
It’s about the lack of consistency and applying rules selectively.
If you’re supportive of the Tories ( hello there Surallen) then you can say what the hell you like on social meedya, criticise them and the Tory plants now running the BBC, appointed by Boris, come for you
I think they’ve picked the wrong fight this time.
I loved the comment by some rent-a-gob Tory MP saying he owed his fame to the BBC. I’m guessing they never watched Mexico 86, Italia 90 or any other football in the 80s and 90’s, for that matter
****s!
I wonder if they could get the little 6year old girl from "Once upon a time in Iraq" to co host?
The little girl with shrapnel in her face from a roadside IED. Who opitomises why alot of people really do not want to live where they currently do , and would much rather live somewhere where there aren't dead dogs packed with C4.
Bruce clarified that it was a one-off as described by his friends, when she said it happened multiple times.
Why was it necessary to say that, and to use the expression "one off" in any context whatsoever?
I'm going to tell the BBC that I won't do MOTD either.
Why didn't Lineker just arrange a bit of a loan for poor little Rishi?* All would be fine then.
Ok, the loan would have to be around a billion rather than "little people money" AKA thousands, but still.
I hope there's a few renditions of Gary, Gary, Gary Lineker ringing out from the stands during the highlights during the next few MOTDs
However, he knew the rules that the BBC set when he accepted the role, salary or freelance,
It's quite clear to anyone following the story that the rules *don't* currently apply to him. He's only a freelance, not an employee.
The BBC wants to change the terms of his contract, and is sacking him if he doesn't (now) sign up to more restrictive conditions, that don't seem to apply to the likes of Sugar, Clarkson, not to mention their own management.
DrJ
Why was it necessary to say that, and to use the expression “one off” in any context whatsoever?
Hey, don't stone me just yet. I deleted the message a matter of seconds after posting it because I think you are likely entirely right and my assertion was wrong.
I'm fine with saying I'm wrong, even on STW.😉
GL only twittered what most of us have been thinking for a long time. It's totally unacceptible how immigrants are treated. A hotel near us still had some/or does now. They had to come in and out via the rear entrance - we were there for a funeral wake. but 'camps', then chucking a stack of cash at it to the ruddy French, whilst slashing active travel/train budgets.. FFS. It's madness that even the two doing this certainly have heritage else where and made a success - Rishi and his missus espeially - why stop others if they have a contribution to make. We're seriously short of employees here.
but ‘camps’, then chucking a stack of cash at it to the ruddy French, whilst slashing active travel/train budgets..
The Mail were gushing over Rishi's "victory" over the French on this very issue 2 days back.😐
I suspect the French will take this kind of "winning" all day, every day for half a billion a pop!😂 The UK (England anyway) is a bloody joke internationally now.
The BBC wants to change the terms of his contract, and is sacking him if he doesn’t (now) sign up to more restrictive conditions, that don’t seem to apply to the likes of Sugar, Clarkson, not to mention their own management
If they terminate his contract he’ll be able to take them to the ****ing cleaners, because legally they haven’t got a leg to stand on
I’m sure their lawyers are presently informing them of this uncomfortable fact 😂
see geebeebees are trying to confuse their followers
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1634286645598998548?cxt=HHwWqMC-wfPCk64tAAAA
Be great if instead of taking the knee all the premiership players put on cardboard Gary Lineker face masks and clapped to show their support before kick off.
Well I see MOTD is not going to have any presenters or pundits so presumably they'll just show the match(es). Be fun if the commentators also withdraw their services.
Or their commentary could just be: “player in red kicks ball to player in red…”
Now I am just waiting for Chris Kamara to work out what the hell is going on.
Unbelievable Geoff!
I've read the BBC rules linked earlier up the thread. As far as I can tell, the impartiality bit applies to news and current affairs presenters.
So I've asked the BBC to clarify exactly what rules he's supposedly conflicting with as part of my complaint.
Be great if instead of taking the knee all the premiership players put on cardboard Gary Lineker face masks and clapped to show their support before kick off.
Something to show support for refugees would be better, or at least to echo the disapproval of this government policy.
The Bbc hierarchy has no doubt had a look at his contract and discovered that he is not bound by the same terms as someone in the newsroom. I'm guessing head of sport agreed with this, hence the statement backing him yesterday, but the Tory appointees have since had another call from Suella or Rishi and are desperately backpedalling to try to please their masters.
The current beeb is in an awful state, the government doesn't need to scrap the license fee to trash it, they've found a better way.
the trouble with the BBC is when it's under pressure they tend to circle the wagons so it's difficult to spot the tory stooges from the corperation loyalists.
Roger Bolton, former BBC executive and presenter of Radio 4's Feedback programme, says the situation regarding Gary Lineker's position on Match of the Day is "a total mess", but the BBC was right in its decision to stand Lineker down.
Speaking on the BBC News Channel, Bolton says: "It's a total mess but I think in the end the BBC is right. Impartiality is desperately important, the impression of impartiality is desperately important, and if you do have a presenter talking not at great length, but on Twitter, about a matter of real controversy where the country's divided, then it does matter."
He says he thinks the BBC "should have resolved the matter much earlier by ensuring that [Lineker's] contract said he shouldn't tweet about such things... but in the end the BBC has taken, in my view, the right decision."
Asked whether Lineker should be held to the same impartiality standards as BBC employees like news presenters, Bolton responds by saying that Lineker is the most highly-paid presenter on the BBC, "and for many people he is the face of the BBC, and I think he has to acknowledge that."
"He also has the responsibility not to bring the BBC into disrepute or get it involved in controversy," he adds.
Feedback tends to be the Beeb is god and does no wrong.
Hmmm big problem is that BBC are being painted as the bad guys here. All this "cancelling my DD" is kind of playing into the govt hands.
I can see them using this situation to their advantage.
That all escalated quickly. From 'Stop the boats' to 'MOTD boycott' Shows the thirst for news in the digital age.
Next question for me would be 'why should I be forced to pay a licence fee?' I don't see how the BBC can ever be fully impartial.
As for GL, much credit to him, although he could walk into Sky/ITV tomorrow and get paid more.
but ‘camps’, then chucking a stack of cash at it to the ruddy French,
Its no "camps, but then..." its "camps and then..." The money is in the main for the creation of a detention camp. A detention camp on the French coast for foriegn people "we" don't accept in our country. Have a think about that for a minute.
BBC confirm that tomorrow's MOTD will go ahead without presenters or pundits.
Tories are clever, they know they have to 'blow this up'. Lineker posts anti Gov stuff daily, has done for years.
They've decided, (as the chap on QT pointed out) that 'stop the boats' is the new 'get Brexit done'. They know it's divisive and it plays to the sector of their audience that were threatening to drift back to UKIP.
You can tell it's a strategy decision, make EVERYTHING about the 'small boats'. It's nothing to do with Lineker, it's a co-ordinated media strategy that we're all being fed by the shovel.
Like others above I feel that this just going to open up a massive amount of pain for everyone involved. I'm not a football fan at all but this will definitely open up a massive can of worms, expect all sorts of inventive chants at games and maybe some protests on the pitch too. Really surreal to be witnessing this happening in the UK but here we are.
BBC public service broadcaster or state broadcaster?
We're watching the moment it morphs from one to the other.
I do find it ironic that in reacting to criticism of them acting like Germany in the 1930’s, they react like the Germans would have done in the 1930’s
If it wasn't so worrying it would be funny. Sadly it's very, very real.
To be fair to Lord Sugar, he resigned from the Labour party and no longer took the Labour whip when Corbyn became leader.
if he went to ITV he could confidently say
he hated Cruella Braverman on a “cellular level”, and added: “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!
with no repercussions ?
To be fair to Lord Sugar, he resigned from the Labour party and no longer took the Labour whip when Corbyn became leader.
Sugar was busy slagging Corbyn off at the last GE, whilst appearing on the Apprentice. But that's OK because it supported the government.
The external activities and public comments, for example on social media, of staff, presenters and others who contribute to our output can also affect perceptions of the BBC’s impartiality. Consequently, this section should be read in conjunction with Section 15: Conflicts of Interest.
Did you read the whole document? I did. Section 15.3.13 specifically seems to accept that "The risk is lower where an individual is expressing views publicly on an unrelated area, for example, a sports or science presenter expressing views on politics or the arts." Whilst the introduction to the section on impartiality states: "Due impartiality usually involves more than a simple matter of ‘balance’ between opposing viewpoints. We must be inclusive, considering the broad perspective and ensuring that the existence of a range of views is appropriately reflected. It does not require absolute neutrality on every issue or detachment from fundamental democratic principles, such as the right to vote, freedom of expression and the rule of law..." and it continues "We must always scrutinise arguments, question consensus and hold power to account with consistency and due impartiality." and then that section concludes: "Audiences expect artists, writers and entertainers to have freedom to explore subjects from one perspective and to create content that reflects their own distinctive voice. It must be clear to audiences where personal views are being expressed." Are you honestly suggesting that Gary's Twitter followers thought this was a BBC position rather than his own opinion?
they also making a rod for their own back, every tweet, facebook post etc from all staff will be scrutinized past, present and future.
To be fair to Lord Sugar, he resigned from the Labour party and no longer took the Labour whip when Corbyn became leader.
How is that relevant to the fact that Alan Sugar is allowed by the BBC to express his political opinions and yet Gary Lineker isn't?
Or are you responding to a particular point which I have missed?
ITN this evening has certainly focused on the apparent double standards by the BBC concerning the political freedom it gave Alan Sugar.
Robert peston seems to think he's not even under the BBC's guidelines...
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1634272812180426760?s=20
I think the penny is now starting to drop that they are ***ing with 2 national institutions here.
MOTD is an institution. But they think that Gary Lineker is just a presenter. He isn’t. Football is a religion in this country (whether you like that or not) and Lineker is one of this countries greatest exponents. He’s an icon. With very good reason.
I posted this photo before, but I’ll post it again, because this was a historic moment where someone showed their inherent decency and empathy, as well as leadership.
We love him for his present opinions and actions, but we really love him for this…
They really have picked the wrong fight this time
Even one of my very right wing ex football hooligan old 'freinds' who describes himself as slightly to the right of Ghengis Khan has deleted his negative statement about Gary Lineker. Which surprised me.
That may read like I'm an ex football hooligan. Hopefully not.
Yes curiously BBC never censured sugar for this
Whilst the MPs attacking linekar have second jobs as talk show hosts on GBNews taltk etc
Add to the money donated to the tories and funnelled to Johnson by the DG...
Hypocrisy is breathtaking