This Lineker thing

[Bentley Bullet]

Is Lord Sugar directly employed by the BBC?

[SydneyRover]

Is he employed by the bbc?

[DonnyOsmond]

Is Lord Sugar directly employed by the BBC?

Same as Lineker isn't he?

[SydneyRover]

It shouldn't matter, he is representing the bbc.

[Bentley Bullet]

Gary Lineker signed a five-year deal with the BBC in 2020, under which he agreed to adhere to their updated impartiality rules. The rules for news and current affairs journalists are very strict, with their personal accounts treated as if they are part of the BBC's output.

Lineker works in the sports department so he has a little bit more freedom, but he still has to avoid bringing the BBC into disrepute, and as a high-profile figure on the BBC, he has additional responsibilities.

[SydneyRover]

So why did they wait till now to do anything, if it was very strict?

[drfchound]

Why did they wait?

[DonnyOsmond]

Gary Lineker signed a five-year deal with the BBC in 2020, under which he agreed to adhere to their updated impartiality rules. The rules for news and current affairs journalists are very strict, with their personal accounts treated as if they are part of the BBC's output.

Lineker works in the sports department so he has a little bit more freedom, but he still has to avoid bringing the BBC into disrepute, and as a high-profile figure on the BBC, he has additional responsibilities.

In all honesty haven't the BBC done more over the last 48 hours to bring the BBC into disrepute than Gary Lineker?

[SydneyRover]

Can you imagine the absolute uproar and hysterics if anyone anywhere near the bbc had posted a photoshopped pic of a tory pm with hitler?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Lineker either thinks that everyone agrees with his views, or he wants a confrontation with those who don't. Even someone as out of touch with public opinion as him will know it's the latter. So, if he wants to cause confrontation he should be prepared to receive it, along with the consequences that go with it.

He's a jumped-up football pundit who should stick to talking about what he's famous for and not exploit his position by considering himself a political educator of the people.

Do you not believe in free speech ?

Yes, I believe in free speech, but sometimes when it causes upset you pay for it.

So you are a Cancel Culture supporter then.

[Bentley Bullet]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

[roverstillidie91]

Lineker either thinks that everyone agrees with his views, or he wants a confrontation with those who don't. Even someone as out of touch with public opinion as him will know it's the latter. So, if he wants to cause confrontation he should be prepared to receive it, along with the consequences that go with it.

He's a jumped-up football pundit who should stick to talking about what he's famous for and not exploit his position by considering himself a political educator of the people.

Do you not believe in free speech ?

Yes, I believe in free speech, but sometimes when it causes upset you pay for it.

So it should then apply across the board? i.e. lord sugar, andrew neill etc

[roverstillidie91]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

Are you a conservative voter?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

I guess what goes on in my head is that you apparently approve of Lineker being told to stop doing his job because he said something you didn't like?

 

[roverstillidie91]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

I guess what goes on in my head is that you apparently approve of Lineker being told to stop doing his job because he said something you didn't like?

 

Something along the lines of what Ricky Gervais said. A woke cancel culture where people aren't allowed to say anything people don't agree with

[belton rover]

I think the Sugar/Lineker debate is an interesting one. Just putting who said what to one side for a second, I see their relationships with the BBC almost incomparable: Sugar is the lead in a programme that happens to be on the BBC (a bit like Paul Hollywood who shifted from the BBC to Channel 4 to follow his baking programme, whereas Lineker is more of a Wogan-esque (not, of course to dear old Terry’s standards) ‘face of’ the BBC. An accolade that I am sure he relishes, and with which comes a responsibility that he ignores when being a Twitter warrior.
He can’t have his cake and eat it.
Sugar brings his own cakes to eat.
 

[Bentley Bullet]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

Are you a conservative voter?

Lineker either thinks that everyone agrees with his views, or he wants a confrontation with those who don't. Even someone as out of touch with public opinion as him will know it's the latter. So, if he wants to cause confrontation he should be prepared to receive it, along with the consequences that go with it.

He's a jumped-up football pundit who should stick to talking about what he's famous for and not exploit his position by considering himself a political educator of the people.

Do you not believe in free speech ?

Yes, I believe in free speech, but sometimes when it causes upset you pay for it.

So it should then apply across the board? i.e. lord sugar, andrew neill etc

Yes, I believe in free speech, and it should apply all across the board, and not just be used selectively for political agendas.

[Bentley Bullet]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

Are you a conservative voter?

Not really any of your business, but no, I'm not. The only time I would vote Tory is if the only option was Labour.

[SydneyRover]

I think the Sugar/Lineker debate is an interesting one. Just putting who said what to one side for a second, I see their relationships with the BBC almost incomparable: Sugar is the lead in a programme that happens to be on the BBC (a bit like Paul Hollywood who shifted from the BBC to Channel 4 to follow his baking programme, whereas Lineker is more of a Wogan-esque (not, of course to dear old Terry’s standards) ‘face of’ the BBC. An accolade that I am sure he relishes, and with which comes a responsibility that he ignores when being a Twitter warrior.
He can’t have his cake and eat it.
Sugar brings his own cakes to eat.

Except the bbc bought the franchise and then hired sugar, immaterial in my view as either everyone can spout their views or nobody can.

[Bentley Bullet]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

I guess what goes on in my head is that you apparently approve of Lineker being told to stop doing his job because he said something you didn't like?

 

What also goes on in your head is that you apparently liked what Lineker said because it suited your obsessive agenda.

[roverstillidie91]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

Are you a conservative voter?

Not really any of your business, but no, I'm not. The only time I would vote Tory is if the only option was Labour.

I don't get the logic in your overall argument but with your tone of reaction I gather you are very much on the back foot with your argument

[BillyStubbsTears]

BB

You're doing that thing you do when you realise that your argument has brought you up against a brick wall.

YOU said that free speech sometimes has consequences.

I think that suggests you are in favour of Cancel Culture.

You can sort this out REALLY quickly by correcting me if I'm wrong, and actually you don't think Lineker should have been stood down for what he said.

Really simple. Should he or shouldn't he?

Do you actually believe in free speech or don't you?

No need to drag your obsession with what you incorrectly think I think into it. This is all about you.

[Bentley Bullet]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

Are you a conservative voter?

Not really any of your business, but no, I'm not. The only time I would vote Tory is if the only option was Labour.

I don't get the logic in your overall argument but with your tone of reaction I gather you are very much on the back foot with your argument

Well, let's face it, that's not the first time you've been wrong!

[roverstillidie91]

Who knows what goes off in your head to come to that conclusion? I'm certainly not qualified to go there. Anyway, isn't it time you sifted through Twitter to find another anti-government story to continue your hate campaign?

Times running out owd lad.

Are you a conservative voter?

Not really any of your business, but no, I'm not. The only time I would vote Tory is if the only option was Labour.

I don't get the logic in your overall argument but with your tone of reaction I gather you are very much on the back foot with your argument

Well, let's face it, that's not the first time you've been wrong!

Been wrong on what exactly?

[Bentley Bullet]

BB

You're doing that thing you do when you realise that your argument has brought you up against a brick wall.

YOU said that free speech sometimes has consequences.

I think that suggests you are in favour of Cancel Culture.

You can sort this out REALLY quickly by correcting me if I'm wrong, and actually you don't think Lineker should have been stood down for what he said.

Really simple. Should he or shouldn't he?

Do you actually believe in free speech or don't you?

No need to drag your obsession with what you incorrectly think I think into it. This is all about you. , and

BST.
 Are you saying free speech shouldn't have consequences?

[Branton Red]

Bentley

Any sane, reasonable person believes in the importance of free speech.

However the right to free speech can never legitimately be used as a defence against criticism if you, or someone you're defending, say something utterly appalling.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hope 0-3 Experience.

Simple yes/no question on a direct, concrete issue, BB and you can't answer it.

[Glyn_Wigley]

That's because he knows if he answers it he can't keep on arguing the toss as always. You can't do that once you've nailed your colours to the mast, you have to be able to stay slippery.

[ravenrover]

Wonder where the Govt is at on this list?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Someone said on the thread on this subject on the main Forum that it was ridiculous to talk about facism as the British would never put up with it.

I agree.

But part of that is calling it out when politicians make steps in that direction.

This Tory policy is a step in the direction of facism. Dehumanisation of The Other. Deliberate and wilful rejection of international standards of human rights. Calls to nationalism as being the highest imperative. The Home Secretary flatly refusing to criticise a mob that tried to storm an accommodation block housing asylum seekers. The use of language like "alien" "invasion" "disloyalty" "public will"[1].

These are all right out of the playbook of first steps towards facism.

The poster in the other thread was right. We British won't put up with that. Because we stand up and reject it when it starts to emerge.

At least, most of us do.

[1] This is the most insidious of the lot. What the Govt does here is to propose an illegal policy, then support it by saying it is what the people demand. They have no idea what the people demand. But they use this phrase to give their policy the appearance of normality. They use this phrase to steamroller through any objections, and to suggest to the weak and gullible that there's a swell of public opinion wanting this. Classic facism.