0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.
When a new manger comes in surely he lays the laws down for 'new' standards, no? otherwise he wouldn't be a very good new manager aye?This does not go to answering the two even three distinct question surrounding this:The right to speak.Everyone with the same rights.What one says.
And yet 36 tory MPs have written a letter to the bbc demanding an inquiry about it.By the way CR it was DO who posted the tweet above.
“I think there is a general observation that I’d make, which is I think comparisons with Germany in the 1930s aren’t always the best way to make one’s argument."Sir Keir Starmer.
Quote from: SydneyRover on March 12, 2023, 11:43:58 pmWhen a new manger comes in surely he lays the laws down for 'new' standards, no? otherwise he wouldn't be a very good new manager aye?This does not go to answering the two even three distinct question surrounding this:The right to speak.Everyone with the same rights.What one says.I wasn’t attempting to answer those questions. I was giving a possible reason why Sugar wasn’t pulled up, but Lineker was, which is another question that has been asked.By the way, Sydney, what’s with the ‘aye’ in many of your responses?Is it to remind yourself you’re from Yorkshire, or is it a boys’ secret code, like in ‘P’tang Yang Kipperbang’?Either way, it’s really funny.
Quote from: ncRover on March 13, 2023, 06:13:59 amQuote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 05:36:53 am''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911Do you think it should have done?Was it true, is the question that should be asked, did the comment reflect the situation?
Quote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 05:36:53 am''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911Do you think it should have done?
''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911
Quote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 07:14:42 amQuote from: ncRover on March 13, 2023, 06:13:59 amQuote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 05:36:53 am''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911Do you think it should have done?Was it true, is the question that should be asked, did the comment reflect the situation?For the record I think Gary’s point was there to be made and he should be able to express it.We could argue all day on whether Gary’s views on Corbyn or Andrew Neil’s conservative views are true, and that is because they are opinions.I was just checking to see if you’re were being consistent with your views on Free Speech. If you want Gary to be able to air his views you should also not have a problem with Neil or Clarkson doing so previously either.
Quote from: ncRover on March 13, 2023, 06:13:59 amQuote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 05:36:53 am''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911Do you think it should have done?Was it true, is the question that should be asked, did the comment reflect the situation?
Quote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 05:36:53 am''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911Do you think it should have done?
''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911
Quote from: ncRover on March 13, 2023, 09:55:56 amQuote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 07:14:42 amQuote from: ncRover on March 13, 2023, 06:13:59 amQuote from: SydneyRover on March 13, 2023, 05:36:53 am''When Alan Sugar tweeted an image depicting Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi (or indeed, when Gary Lineker tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017), that didn't precipitate an internal crisis for BBC over its impartiality. Why?''https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1633749550719483911Do you think it should have done?Was it true, is the question that should be asked, did the comment reflect the situation?For the record I think Gary’s point was there to be made and he should be able to express it.We could argue all day on whether Gary’s views on Corbyn or Andrew Neil’s conservative views are true, and that is because they are opinions.I was just checking to see if you’re were being consistent with your views on Free Speech. If you want Gary to be able to air his views you should also not have a problem with Neil or Clarkson doing so previously either.I had no problem with Clarkson's political views.I did have a problem with me paying for him to trot out racist "jokes" on TV.
CR.The problem is that some folk have blown this up into a "Lineker says UK is like Nazi Germany" thing. That really doesn't help.A lot of the same people also don't seem to realise why Lineker was suspended. In the very words of the DG, it was about high profile BBC figures "getting into party politics". Not the precise wording of the tweet. That is a simply ridiculous stance by the BBC. A BBC that employed as its chief political interviewer, Andrew Neil who actually runs a magazine that regularly dives into party political issues, from a very right wing standpoint. I posted a link from a man who used to run the BBC's impartiality team. He hit the nail on the head. He asked: did anyone read Lineker's tweet and think "Oh, that's the BBC showing a lack of impartiality?" Of course they didn't. They thought that's Gary Lineker's opinion. That should have been the start and end of it.The problem for the BBC is that, with its senior management stuffed full of Tories, it looks very much like it reacted as it did because Tory ministers got up in arms about the tweet. That's a very dangerous look for a national broadcaster.
CR.The problem is that some folk have blown this up into a "Lineker says UK is like Nazi Germany" thing. That really doesn't help.A lot of the same people also don't seem to realise why Lineker was suspended. In the very words of the DG, it was about high profile BBC figures "getting into party politics". Not the precise wording of the tweet. That is a simply ridiculous stance by the BBC. A BBC that employed as its chief political interviewer, Andrew Neil who actually runs a magazine that regularly dives into party political issues, from a very right wing standpoint. I posted a link from a man who used to run the BBC's impartiality team. He hit the nail on the head. He asked: did anyone read Lineker's tweet and think "Oh, that's the BBC showing a lack of impartiality?" Of course they didn't. They thought that's Gary Lineker's opinion. That should have been the start and end of it.The problem for the BBC is that, with its senior management stuffed full of Tories, it looks very much like it reacted as it did because Tory ministers got up in arms about the tweet. That's a very dangerous look for a national broadcaster.
So after all the melodrama of the last few days it seems we are now back on terra firma, The BBC will apologise to Lineker, review and implement a new code of conduct for its "Staff" and freelancers. Lineker will be back at MOTD with his mates, eventually everything will start to settle down bar a few loose cannons on here determined to peruse this issue to within an inch of its usable life.So now if anything this episode has opened up the argument about the BBC and its place in UK broadcasting today and for the future, no doubt many will be now asking if in this day and age we can continue with the status quo, do we continue with the current funding model after the next review or does it go to fully commercial basis. is it even relevant anymore to peoples everyday lives and importantly with how people are stretched with the cost of living crisis is it desirable to have the current funding model.All these issues will no doubt be looked at by many and then the questions will really start to be asked of this service. In today's commercially aware world can this service even stand still and be considered value for money when its virtually lost all its live major sporting output and is having to make do with sloppy seconds from the table of other broadcasters couple with constant repeats and the cheapest new productions it can find. If it was not for it news channels output and revenues from worldwide sales of former shoes,productions and drama's it would be very much in the deepest red with regards to its balance of payments.Should we really be paying for a service that has so many issues with its governance, staff, output and perceived accountability? that now forms a a very small part of the media intake of a majority of licence holders in this country?
what about sugar?that's the thing about theory, you can have umpteen supporting text but need only one to disprove it.Branton, are you debating what was said or the right to be allowed to say it?