Do you really believe that the government ordered the BBC to stand Lineker down from MOTD? If that was the case why haven’t they gagged the far more outspoken presenters on news and current affairs programmes? This whole episode is a ludicrous overreaction on both sides of the argument.
Do you believe Alan that the Government and their associates in the tabloids haven’t systematically sought to bully and intimidate the BBC in order to weaken scrutiny of their actions?
Might actually watch MOTD this evening if it's going to be without the drone/smugness/filler of the presenters.....maybe this is the way forward for footie shows?
@bargepole Clarkson was criticised for his column (even by his own daughter!) and the right-wing media was hysterically wetting it's underclothes when it was even hinted that ITV would not be renewing his contract or that Amazon had realised someone arguing with locals about expanding his car-park while publicising his 'non-organic' farm was not really picking up viewers in the USA in the same way that shouty men being slightly racist in cars does and were not planning to renew his contract. (The other two petrol heads seem to be gradually slinking back into that lefty BBC schedule though.)
Not sure Lineker is still 'selling crisps' but it's nice to see a blast from the past.
Like the myth that Jezza was pushed out for being woke when he was actually disciplined for punching an underling for not supplying him with a cooked dinner when he got off his helicopter from filming...and Boris was pushed out for having parties rather than his whole government resigning because he appointed a known young man grabber to a ministerial post...('Pincher by name Picher by nature...ho ho ho!) there is always a spin put on to blame 'progressives'. See also Piers Morgan, who did not like being challenged about his obsession with attacking Meghan Markle...which I would suggest was (and still is) lazy and boring...and stormed off in as Trumpian huff.
@LDF I think using the 'f' word is useful if only to irritate and put on the defensive, the people who champion the lazy and boring soundbites from the Goebbels playbook (who invented the word 'mainstream media' I understand) from Ms Braverman.
I had a colleague who used to say 'I cannot be racist as I have an Indian wife...' and though he did indeed have an Indian wife, he was still extremely racist. If Suella is offended that her partly Jewish children are upset by Gary Lineker, she should be aware that inflammatory language demonising immigrants to give the impression of tough action while there is a complete lack of any actual workable government policy can also be harmful.
It's all go in football innit?. Be aware though, you can't say anything on here as there are a whole lot of progessives who will silence you.
There's a bit of a revolving door of staff between Downing Street and the top of the Beeb which would suggest that it probably isn't.
Bit of an ask to believe people really go from championing and donating thousands to a party and actively campaigning for certain things in government to being wholly impartial when the staff pass changes.
I’m not sure what that means. But I am sure that the totally disproportionate headlining of Lineker’s (admittedly slightly OTT) off-air comments and his suspension by the BBC has been deliberately designed to divert attention and discussion from the government Bill itself.
Genuine question: have any other current bbc presenters made public statements either strongly in support of and/or opposed to government policy? I can’t recall any making such heavily critical remarks about government (or opposition party) policies, but happy to be proven wrong.
Quite a few examples I think. Karen Brady heavily laid into the appointment of the football regulator not long ago. Sugar is always jumping in on all sorts of topics. Andrew Neil managed to run a magazine heavily criticising all sorts of aspects of policy.
Alan Sugar and Andrew Neill for starters. Not that I think either should be procluded from stating opinions on social media, as much as I tend to disagree with them.
The way Lineker has been hounded for making IMO a perfectly reasonable observation would never happen to either of those two for something similar about Labour policy.
Fair enough. For what it’s worth I’d sack all of them. If we’re going to have a public service broadcaster then the presenters appearing on it need to remain politically impartial when they’re speaking in the public domain.
No I don’t for a minute believe they “ordered” the BBC to do so. What I do believe is that they have assisted/engaged with a orchestrated campaign against a highly respected and high profile individual who is openly (and correctly in my view but I accept others have different opinions) critical of the language currently used by our ‘leaders’ to demonise fellow human beings, the vast majority who have suffered intolerably.
The BBC, whose chair is (unbelievably) closely linked with one of the past masters of such deliberate use of language, have caved in to this pressure.
Your original comment reminded me of the Northern Ireland secretary (I think) on the Laura Kuenssberg show last Sunday who managed to say (with a straight face) that he genuinely believed that Boris Johnson was a completely honest person. Comedy gold.
Deborah Meaden is very active on Twitter and very critical of the government at times, so are some BBC actors, Samuel West is one who comes to mind. Unless you are taking part in news or politics programmes, you should be free to speak your mind, even if a 'big name'.
Comments
This has to be the funniest thing I’ve read on here in ages.
OK.
Do you really believe that the government ordered the BBC to stand Lineker down from MOTD? If that was the case why haven’t they gagged the far more outspoken presenters on news and current affairs programmes? This whole episode is a ludicrous overreaction on both sides of the argument.
Do you believe Alan that the Government and their associates in the tabloids haven’t systematically sought to bully and intimidate the BBC in order to weaken scrutiny of their actions?
Might actually watch MOTD this evening if it's going to be without the drone/smugness/filler of the presenters.....maybe this is the way forward for footie shows?
That is a wholly different argument
@bargepole Clarkson was criticised for his column (even by his own daughter!) and the right-wing media was hysterically wetting it's underclothes when it was even hinted that ITV would not be renewing his contract or that Amazon had realised someone arguing with locals about expanding his car-park while publicising his 'non-organic' farm was not really picking up viewers in the USA in the same way that shouty men being slightly racist in cars does and were not planning to renew his contract. (The other two petrol heads seem to be gradually slinking back into that lefty BBC schedule though.)
Not sure Lineker is still 'selling crisps' but it's nice to see a blast from the past.
Like the myth that Jezza was pushed out for being woke when he was actually disciplined for punching an underling for not supplying him with a cooked dinner when he got off his helicopter from filming...and Boris was pushed out for having parties rather than his whole government resigning because he appointed a known young man grabber to a ministerial post...('Pincher by name Picher by nature...ho ho ho!) there is always a spin put on to blame 'progressives'. See also Piers Morgan, who did not like being challenged about his obsession with attacking Meghan Markle...which I would suggest was (and still is) lazy and boring...and stormed off in as Trumpian huff.
@LDF I think using the 'f' word is useful if only to irritate and put on the defensive, the people who champion the lazy and boring soundbites from the Goebbels playbook (who invented the word 'mainstream media' I understand) from Ms Braverman.
I had a colleague who used to say 'I cannot be racist as I have an Indian wife...' and though he did indeed have an Indian wife, he was still extremely racist. If Suella is offended that her partly Jewish children are upset by Gary Lineker, she should be aware that inflammatory language demonising immigrants to give the impression of tough action while there is a complete lack of any actual workable government policy can also be harmful.
It's all go in football innit?. Be aware though, you can't say anything on here as there are a whole lot of progessives who will silence you.
Calm down. It’s called debate. No-one’s cancelling your views before you start on that old chestnut.
I’d much rather be called a smug progressive champagne socialist than a grubby racist.
Not at all Alan. It is the crux of the issue. Could you answer the question please.
There's a bit of a revolving door of staff between Downing Street and the top of the Beeb which would suggest that it probably isn't.
Bit of an ask to believe people really go from championing and donating thousands to a party and actively campaigning for certain things in government to being wholly impartial when the staff pass changes.
I’m not sure what that means. But I am sure that the totally disproportionate headlining of Lineker’s (admittedly slightly OTT) off-air comments and his suspension by the BBC has been deliberately designed to divert attention and discussion from the government Bill itself.
Exactly
Could it possibly be that the views of Alan Sugar, Karen Brady, Andrew Neil, Pru Leith, Fiona Bruce etc tend to coincide with the Government’s?
@glasshalffull on a different note, you might want to look at the ‘gasroom playlist picks’ thread when you get a moment.
That might be what they hope, but people will think back to what made the Tory press go into meltdown in the first place.
Genuine question: have any other current bbc presenters made public statements either strongly in support of and/or opposed to government policy? I can’t recall any making such heavily critical remarks about government (or opposition party) policies, but happy to be proven wrong.
Quite a few examples I think. Karen Brady heavily laid into the appointment of the football regulator not long ago. Sugar is always jumping in on all sorts of topics. Andrew Neil managed to run a magazine heavily criticising all sorts of aspects of policy.
Andrew Neill was a BBC presenter until 2020 and regularly posted his political views on social media.
Gary Lineker posted the politicised tweet ‘Bin Corbyn’ in 2017.
Alan Sugar and Andrew Neill for starters. Not that I think either should be procluded from stating opinions on social media, as much as I tend to disagree with them.
The way Lineker has been hounded for making IMO a perfectly reasonable observation would never happen to either of those two for something similar about Labour policy.
Fair enough. For what it’s worth I’d sack all of them. If we’re going to have a public service broadcaster then the presenters appearing on it need to remain politically impartial when they’re speaking in the public domain.
Here is a direct comparison of Sugar likening Corbyn to Hitler just before the last election.
There are many more examples from Sugar alone.
And for what it’s worth, I don’t think any of the examples above should preclude any of them from working at the BBC.
Which is impossible while the organisation isn't politically impartial at the very highest level
Michael Portillo is a recent BBC presenter and a former Conservative MP.
https://twitter.com/Conorpope/status/1634564470792941573?t=r3DD8UzROcR873OhxbdD8A&s=19
No I don’t for a minute believe they “ordered” the BBC to do so. What I do believe is that they have assisted/engaged with a orchestrated campaign against a highly respected and high profile individual who is openly (and correctly in my view but I accept others have different opinions) critical of the language currently used by our ‘leaders’ to demonise fellow human beings, the vast majority who have suffered intolerably.
The BBC, whose chair is (unbelievably) closely linked with one of the past masters of such deliberate use of language, have caved in to this pressure.
Your original comment reminded me of the Northern Ireland secretary (I think) on the Laura Kuenssberg show last Sunday who managed to say (with a straight face) that he genuinely believed that Boris Johnson was a completely honest person. Comedy gold.
Deborah Meaden is very active on Twitter and very critical of the government at times, so are some BBC actors, Samuel West is one who comes to mind. Unless you are taking part in news or politics programmes, you should be free to speak your mind, even if a 'big name'.
It is genuinely great to have you back on here posting again.
Hear hear
Agree