Gary Lineker being reined in

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Personally think he should be allowed to post what he wants. Gina Carano got ditched from the mandalorian for a similar comparing **** to Nazis. Wish folk would stop getting offended at someone's point of view. Who gives a **** what he thinks. He's just presenting the football.

 

[SmallTown]

Well, do you think I am a Tory voter or something? Read my views on the 'stop the boats' thread. What makes you think I am upset by Lineker's views?

I don't think a thread about Gary Lineker is an odd place to air my views about Gary Lineker, or specifically the board's consensus view of Gary Lineker or indeed the BBC as a whole.

It seems to have derailed it. Not sure what your motivation was for that

 

[Norman_Conquest]

I don't dislike the man at all! I've met him 6 or 7 times and worked with him once or twice. He's a really nice bloke. Where are the digs?

Even if I thought he shouldn't criticise the government due to his role with the BBC (and I haven't said that) it wouldn't automatically mean I disliked him. Its most of this board who usually dislikes him, until he says something they agree with.

For someone you like, you have a funny way of showing it Have a read of some of your posts, it seems to me you are having a dig at him.

I'm liking the 'BBC Staff' should not show allegiances discussion......

Their Chairman:
has donated more than £400k to the Tory Party
has donated £20k to a right wing think tank
brokered an 800k loan for the ex PM - Johnson

The current Director General is a former Conservative Party Politician

It starts from at the top doesn't it?

I mentioned in my open post regarding the chairman and if the Tories have called a favour in.

 

[atypical_boro]

It seems to have derailed it. Not sure what your motivation was for that

I didn't intentionally derail the thread or have a particular single motivation/agenda/point to make. Maybe I've not been very succinct though, so to summarise my views:

• I don't like this government or this policy, and will continue to vote against them.
• I think BBC staff (and possibly regular on-air contributors) should voluntarily refrain from airing their political views or voting allegiances if they wish to protect the BBC brand from accusations from both Right and Left of lacking impartiality (whether they agree with my views or not). This obviously includes the chair, the DG and everyone else.
• I like Lineker as a presenter, and don't think he necessarily symbolises the things both he and the BBC are often criticised for on this board and in society (overpaid/bloated etc).
• I like him as a bloke, having worked with him once or twice many years ago and been in his presence a few more.

I don't think I've made any digs at him, but I did point out that his long-running MOTD gig has helped build his enormous media profile, for which he and the salary that goes with it is often criticised on here. Its up to him how he chooses to use that profile, but just because I like him or agree with him doesn't mean I think he is immune from any form of reflection.

If the BBC wants to build (rebuild?) trust with its audiences (which includes the enormous proportion of the UK's Right-leaning folk) I can understand why he (and many other on-air contributors) need to be reminded of the bigger picture occasionally. Just because he is having a dig at the government (as I have) doesn't mean I will abandon that view, even if I agree with the sentiment of what he is saying.

 

[1finny]

it's a weird one isn't it.

Presumably someone from the BBC can be sympathetic to people who are undergoing suffering of any sort?

If we take away the rights of human beings to have a fair hearing, increase their suffering et al then it's not unreasonable to have an opinion on that surely?

Or, is it suffering as a result of our government decisions that are off limits?
It's a bit of a 'wow' if that's what all the fuss is about

 

[Ziggy]

I'm liking the 'BBC Staff' should not show allegiances discussion......

Their Chairman:
has donated more than £400k to the Tory Party
has donated £20k to a right wing think tank
brokered an 800k loan for the ex PM - Johnson

The current Director General is a former Conservative Party Politician

It starts from at the top doesn't it?

Also the newly appointed Head of News previous position was doing the same job at
GB news

Together with those others mentioned, it’s obvious they’ve gone full Lenin.

“ The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.“

 

[atypical_boro]

Presumably someone from the BBC can be sympathetic to people who are undergoing suffering of any sort?

100%. I think the grey area is comparing the government to 1930's Germany. Whether or not you think this government are Nazis, on their way to being Nazis, fascist, would be as bad as Hitler if they were allowed to, or otherwise, the fact is that what he said was political and anyone who believes the BBC to be a Lefty mouthpiece (loads of Right wingers think this) will use it against it to discredit the BBC. I do believe the BBC has an important role to play and should do its best to remain impartial. We can't have it both ways.

 

[atypical_boro]

Also the newly appointed Head of News previous position was doing the same job at
GB news

Together with those others mentioned, it’s obvious they’ve gone full Lenin.

“ The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.“

You'll struggle to find anyone with experience of running a TV newsroom who has only ever worked for impartial organisations.

 

[Kelloe]

Has he been sacked yet?

 

[BoroMart]

I was referring to BoroMart's post about 'BBC staff' and how they don't need to remain impartial unless they work in News. I was just suggesting that they should try to remain impartial, not specifically Lineker who as noted isn't on staff.

But why should they remain impartial of they are not involved int eh production of news or political content? That's an impingement on their free speech.

 

[atypical_boro]

But why should they remain impartial of they are not involved int eh production of news or political content? That's an impingement on their free speech.

It is a personal choice if they should or shouldn't. I'm just giving my opinion of what I would do in their shoes, or what I think they should do. To me, if they want to contribute to the general perception of the BBC and help prolong its existence and role in society, they should consider the bigger picture is all I'm saying. This doesn't mean I "don't like" Lineker or even disagree with this view. You have to accept if you work for or with the BBC there are some sacrifices to be made.

 

[BoroMart]

I do believe the BBC has an important role to play and should do its best to remain impartial. We can't have it both ways.

The impartiality should be limited to those producing content for the BBC that is purely news or politics.

I mean what next Jo Whiley can't do a shift at a foodbank, Peter Capaldi has to hand in his labour party membership?? All while the head of the BBC News and Politics is shaping the rhetoric to be pro-Tory and giving money to Tory HQ??

People need to realise that the Beeb is a monolithic beast of an organisation, and the impartiality clause only applies to those that are involved in small section of it, the production of news and politics. You can't expect childrens TV presenters, music journalists, cameramen, catering staff or anyone else to keep schtum on politics because it's their right to promote what they want within the law.

 

[BoroMart]

You have to accept if you work for or with the BBC there are some sacrifices to be made.

Why do you have to accept that? I guess that's why there are no modern day Harry Enfields or Ben Elton's on the beeb this day. They've been removed to sanitize political challenge. While they promote the government of today

 

[Oooo]

But the guy in charge of the BBC is allowed to be openly right wing and that is not a problem?

 

[atypical_boro]

The impartiality should be limited to those producing content for the BBC that is purely news or politics.

I mean what next Jo Whiley can't do a shift at a foodbank, Peter Capaldi has to hand in his labour party membership?? All while the head of the BBC News and Politics is shaping the rhetoric to be pro-Tory and giving money to Tory HQ??

People need to realise that the Beeb is a monolithic beast of an organisation, and the impartiality clause only applies to those that are involved in small section of it, the production of news and politics. You can't expect childrens TV presenters, music journalists, cameramen, catering staff or anyone else to keep schtum on politics because it's their right to promote what they want within the law.

The impartiality, contractually, IS limited to those. I'm giving you my personal opinion of what I think they should do, I'm not saying it should be written into law.

I don't think Jo Whiley doing a shift at a foodbank is political tbh. Being a member of a political party is perfectly ok unless you advertise it overtly. Peter Capaldi is an actor with no special affiliation to the BBC anyway, it isn't the same as Whiley or Lineker who are long-standing weekly contributors and faces of the organisation's flagship content provisions.

"People need to realise that the Beeb is a monolithic beast of an organisation, and the impartiality clause only applies to those that are involved in small section of it" - you may be right about this but the fact is that they don't. Perception is increasingly important. You can sit the British public down and tell them why they’re wrong and why they should pay their licence fee but they won’t always agree with you, I DO believe a degree of empathy is necessary to remain impartial.

 

[atypical_boro]

But the guy in charge of the BBC is allowed to be openly right wing and that is not a problem?

Nope. Who said that was not a problem? That is an enormous problem and needs to be addressed.

 

[atypical_boro]

Why do you have to accept that? I guess that's why there are no modern day Harry Enfields or Ben Elton's on the beeb this day. They've been removed to sanitize political challenge. While they promote the government of today

This is all very subjective. If that’s your view fine but I don’t really agree with it. There are less Enfields/Eltons because complaints are much easier to register these days, in my view.

Although Enfield did do a special not long ago (autumn) that I thought was outstanding.

The Mash Report is very recent, as is Frankie Boyle’s new world order, and they challenge the government on all sorts of things in the same way as Enfield ever did. As does HIGNFY and it always has.

 

[Ziggy]

You'll struggle to find anyone with experience of running a TV newsroom who has only ever worked for impartial organisations.

But they’re appointed knowing exactly what the political line of the management is.
It’s not particularly surprising given the government stuffing the “sixth floor” to run the whole organisation…producing client journalists, managers and sycophants.
Think of BBC News and current affairs as the Daily Mail with moving pictures and sound.

 

[atypical_boro]

But they’re appointed knowing exactly what the political line of the management is.
It’s not particularly surprising given the government stuffing the “sixth floor” to run the whole organisation…producing client journalists, managers and sycophants.
Think of BBC News and current affairs as the Daily Mail with moving pictures and sound.

I really don’t see those similarities, personally, but if that’s your view fine.

 

[Smogonsea]

Surely Gary Lineker was expressing his own views as a human being? Not as part of the bbc. If he, as other people have said, aired these views on motd then he should absolutely be ‘talked to’. But posting a view on his own personal Twitter who people can follow or unfollow whenever they like doesn’t seem an issue. This just seems an attack on free speech which is exactly what the 1930’s German government would do.