- This topic has 90 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
He’s just said that he isn’t on MOTD but, if he was he would be supporting Lineker….
On the issue of freedom of speech, some people do have restrictions placed on it. Take the civil service, for example. Under the Civil Service code which all civil servants are bound by, they may not make political statements in the course of their duties. They must act impartially and be seen to be impartial.
BBC employees are in effect civil servants, paid out of taxation. They are bound by those rules. Other BBC staff have pointed out they are expected to abide by those rules.
Lineker has no defence. If he wants to be a political activist, he has to resign from his public role. Just like Sue Gray has had to do to take up her role as Starmer’s Chief of Staff.
Cas he isn’t a political activist , he,a just giving his opinion , there is a world of difference between a civil servant and someone presenting football on the telly
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
Journalism is normally a cut throat business , the fact so many are backing him and refusing to go on Tom nights show shows the respect hes got
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
HDLG: In case you missed it, Lineker’s agreement with the BBC states: “We expect these individuals to avoid taking sides on party political issues or political controversies and to take care when addressing public policy matters.”
Which bit of that is unclear?
Cas the top man can’t even do this how can be ask anyone else to , be prepared for a BBC stepdown , they,ve royally ****** up
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
‘Which bit of that is unclear?’
It’s very clear. So why didn’t the BBC suspend him immediately? Instead it waited until the Mail and chums had led a three day campaign demanding his removal.
I think this is the key thing.
It’s not the first time Lineker has spoken out, but it IS the first time the government and the centre-right media have kicked up a real stink about it.
Lineker wasn’t on air when he made the comments – it was a tweet on his private twitter.
And he hardly owes his profile to his work at the BBC.
Quite apart from being one of the country’s most famous ever international forwards, the BBC aren’t even the only media outlet he works for.
It looks like a cave in, not an independent decision, and I don’t pay a licence fee to have the BBC do what the government of the day and its media allies tells it to.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"“So why didn’t the BBC suspend him immediately?”
It ought to have done. But Lineker had got away with breaking the guidance plenty of times before. He had already been warned at least once but gave the impression he was not concerned. It looked like he had become bigger than the BBC and the Director General was either unwilling or unable to confront him.
I think the tweets in question were a case of the straw that broke the camel’s back. Invoking Nazi Germany was never going to go unchallenged. The storm it provoked forced the BBC to finally act. It would have been better if it had taken the initiative itself but it seemed to lack the will to do so.
That’s the problem, why have rules and guidelines if you’re only going to apply them when sections of the media and some politicians decide they don’t like it? If he’d come out and said ‘send all the immigrants home’ that would be equally wrong but how do you expect the press would react?
I don’t often venture onto Twitter but I’ve been sat here with my metaphorical popcorn this evening.
Worth reading the comments under this. Jeremy Clarkson has Tweeted in support of Ian Wright and his disciples are so confused bless them.
https://nitter.cz/JeremyClarkson/status/1634256054661029889#m
And just to show that we really are through the looking glass, here’s Piers Morgan saying something somewhat similar to what I did
Thanks for posting that info about the contract earlier CAS. It will be interesting to see how the situation develops.
Not specific to Lineker but, on the topic of impartiality, it seems to me as if society is on a slippery slope at present where impartiality is viewed by an increasing number of people as a bad thing. If you aren’t vocally in support of someone’s opinion, then you are viewed as their enemy.
I fear that impartiality is probably one of those concepts whose value is only truly appreciated once it has been lost.
Lineker didn’t invoke Nazi Germany. He said that the government was using the same sort of language that was being used in pre war Germany. Which they are.
Does Lineker’s manifest distaste for aspects of this Conservative government’s policy make him any less suitable to host BBC football broadcasts than: Alan Sugar of The Apprentice’s frequent attacks on people like Mick Lynch or Andrew Neil, in his time as a BBC Political Interviewer, simultaneously being Editor of The Spectator?
At least Andrew Marr waited until he left the BBC before joining The New Statesman.
The whole thing reeks of double standards and a cave in to the government of the day.
Anyway in summary, football presenter makes a private tweet comparing government policy to 1930s Germany during the rise of the Nazis.
Government response to that is to use its influence to get football presenter taken off air.
Which arguably stands even more comparison to 1930s Germany.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"I think you will find the Nazis came to power in 1933. That is pre-war and clearly what Lineker meant. Godwins Law in action.
If Lineker had been more moderate in his choice of language (as Thornberry suggested) the whole thing would probably have passed over without anyone noticing much.
“It seems to me as if society is on a slippery slope at present where impartiality is viewed by an increasing number of people as a bad thing. If you aren’t vocally in support of someone’s opinion, then you are viewed as their enemy.”
Agree Marlingford. I think this is partly a consequence of social media with complex issues being reduced to simplistic slogans. But it also seems to have got worse since the Brexit referendum, which is been so divisive. The quality of political discourse is at an all time low.
When seeing how toxic so much political debate has become now, I often think of W.B Yeats’s words: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity”.
Ian Davies said:
Which arguably stands even more comparison to 1930s Germany.
Exactly.
I wonder if anyone would have noticed had he cited Italy or Spain?I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
I've walked and I crawled on six crooked highwaysHonestly this country is getting more like Logan’s run every day …
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
….Chezza disputes that assertion as Chezza has yet to meet Jenny Agguter on Carousel, a state of affairs that is a constant irritant to Chezza.
I normally don’t like “Whataboutery,” but while I don’t necessarily dispute Lineker may have infringed his agreement with the BBC, I have to wonder why other past and present people on the BBC payroll – Clarkson, Sugar and Neil immediately spring to mind – weren’t subject to the same contractual constraints.
Lineker himself – clearly a moderate politically – has in fact been very critical of Jeremy Corbyn, but his comments there passed without comment.
It’s alright to speak out about and against anything on the left, but not alright to speak out about anything on the right seems to be the message.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.