The National Union of Linekers . . . .

[Roger]

I''m sorry to miss MoD today and even, the laughable '606' review.

GL's comment on 'Twitter' was a foolish intervention - he was rightly reprimanded by the BBC IMO.

The other overpaid, entitled, privileged, virtue-signalling bunch then withdrew their 'labour'.

I think GL has been very lucky over the years with his massive earnings from advertising and then, a £1.7 million BBC salary (now £1.3 million). He has a job which thousands of people could do equally well and actually, for me, he doesn't actually contribute much at all to MoD - he's just an affable front with wisecracks.

So if GL and the others do not return to work promptly, let them ALL go - and replace them at salaries up to £200K.

GL's original comments on the Govt's policy in struggling to address illegal immigration, were IMO, out of order. It's against the spirit of his BBC 'employment' to indulge in Politics, because that's felt to be 'abusing the position' they are lucky to be in. Perhaps GL should now stand for Parliament - that'd be good to watch.

MMMMmmmm

[Roger]

In a nutshell for me - in the DT :-

"The row over Gary Lineker’s tweets is not about the right to free speech. Lineker is as entitled to his views as anyone else, even if some will have found his references to Nazi Germany deeply offensive. However, by accepting extremely well-paid employment from the BBC, he should have also accepted that this carries with it limitations on the exercise of that right and a requirement to stay out of political controversy.

Impartiality is one of the core principles of the BBC. It is written into the BBC’s mission and the maintenance of trust in the Corporation worldwide depends upon its reputation for factual accuracy and objectivity. Obviously that must apply above all to its journalists and news presenters."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/11/bbc-had-no-choice-suspend-gary-lineker-argues-former-culture/

[Teessider]

Should it also apply to those airing right wing views? For instance Alan Sugar?

[caller]

I'm not going to get into the left / right debate, at all. It's just a distraction.

But all of these people are freelancers and yesterdays action didn't affect me at all. The beebs live coverage of premier games carried on as normal, I saw the usual presenters on True's live coverage here in Thailand, most prominent of whom is Michael Owen. Wright and Shearer make regular appearances as well. I half expected them to turn up yesterday.

I cannot remember the last time I watched MOTD.

A few years ago, Gray and Keys got the boot from Sky, for basically getting too big for their boots. I think they are with BEIN now.  I would suggest its time for MOTD and Sky to do the same again. Hearing Neville and Gallagher, whose whiny utterings are a distraction, waffle on over and over again is tedious. And Gallagher is a vile character.  They have all become bigger than the shows they appear on and I think that's wrong.

[Roger]

Hello Teess - re. Alan Sugar, I'm not sure what you mean and I am not a fan of his ! Though I do remember AS asking why there weren't male commentators at the 2022 Women's Euros but I thought that was a very fair question. IMO Lineker's recent comments were wild and caused a different level of offence.

Caller I agree it's not a matter of right or left and I also agree that a good clear out at the BBC would be the best idea - the current bunch are too big for their boots too ! MoTD is a decent programme IMO and it does for me - I don't have a True package.

IMO there's a thousand Guys and Gals ready and able to replace this crew.

At the heart of this is that those who gain prominence from appearing on the BBC should not use their 'position' for overtly political purposes.

[Roger]

I was surprised to see this in my evening scan . . . . . .

"Match of the Day attracted 500,000 more viewers for Saturday night’s episode compared to the previous week as the BBC aired a shorter programme in the wake of Gary Lineker’s suspension.

The corporation confirmed Mr Lineker would “step back” from his presenting duties until an agreement on his social media use was reached after he compared the Government’s language around its small boats policy to Nazi Germany . . . . . "

. . . . . OMG  "Nadine Dorries, Tory MP and former culture secretary, urged the BBC to stick with the new format in the wake of the increased audience. “Maybe people just want to watch the footie and not listen to commentators waffling on stating the obvious week after week – ‘it’s a game of two halves, Gary’,” Ms Dorries wrote on Twitter. “The BBC should keep this commentary-free model going. It’s a hit.” "

This one will run and run . . . . . . . . . . . 

[Teessider]

Match of the Day kast night was an embarrassment. The BBC should be ashamed. Tim Dav8e and Richard Sharp should resign as their Tory party links casts doubt over their impartiality.

[Roger]

Oh Teess, IMO it's Lineker and his 'entitled' acolytes that should be ashamed    I'd like to see a full clearout of those who don't return to work right now and if that doesn't happen, then the positions of Davie and Sharp really should be in question 

Let's not forget, wherever you stand on this, it's the BBC that give Lineker and team their positions of prominence AND there's an ongoing need to fight for the political 'independence' in the BBC orbit.

It sickens me to see the BBC apparently snivelling around bumptious King Gary who is wholly at fault for this teacup ! He should be sacked now unless he makes the immediate necessary undertakings to stop misusing his prominence for his personal and often banal views.

[Teessider]

The only time Gary has been political while doing his BBC job was the criticism of Qatar during the World Cup but this was not seen as breaching impartiality. IMHO the BBC has caved in to government pressure following his comments on the aptly named illegal migrants act.

[Roger]

Teess - with respect, 'Nazi gate' is the last in a succession of Lineker's breaches :-

"". . . Gary Lineker signed a five-year deal with the BBC in 2020, under which he agreed to adhere to their updated impartiality rules.

. . . Lineker is a vocal opponent of Brexit and in 2018 backed the campaign for another EU referendum, saying Brexit felt like it was "going very wrong indeed".

. . . In February 2022, Lineker tweeted about the Conservative Party taking money from "Russian donors".

 . . . A senior BBC journalist questioned Lineker's commitment to the BBC's impartiality rules after Lineker tweeted about sewage.

. . . Lineker opened the BBC's coverage of the Qatar World Cup with a scathing critique of the host country's record on human rights and treatment of migrant workers.

. . . In advance of the tournament, Lineker criticised Foreign Secretary James Cleverly after he suggested LGBT football fans should be "respectful" of Qatar, where homosexuality is illegal, if they visited for the World Cup.""

https://news.sky.com/story/a-history-of-gary-linekers-most-controversial-tweets-from-brexit-to-russian-donors-12829271

Gary has acquired 'influencer' status as a result of his position at the BBC and against the agreed terms of his engagement, he is using that to vent his political opinions on a range of subjects.

Whether we agree with what he says or not, is irrelevant.

As an update while you are sleeping - the DT suggests that the matter has been sorted and there's an announcement Monday.  ATB

[caller]

Whether we agree with what he says or not, is irrelevant.

It should be, but it isn't.

If his views were to the right, people would be screaming for him to be sacked. Instead they criticise those that are taking action against him. It's in Tees post and elsewhere. Conveniently forgetting the previous, recent, documented bias of the beeb, because, well, that was okay.

The point is, and it applies equally to the top level of the civil service, that has become shockingly political, is that Britain is not yet a totalitarian state. People are free to have differing political views. By and large, they are free to air those political views - depending on their role in society.

Civil servants have to be politicially neurtal when undertaking their duties and by and large that still works. It doesn't matter wheter left or right or extremes thereof, if they are a senior civil servant and they are required to implement a law that they are vehemently opposed to, they still have to do their job and not publicly state their opposition to it. That is implicit in their role. It's how Government works. If they feel so strongly about it, they can resign. Then if they still want to shout about it, the official secrets act they signed up to, can intervene if needed. We witnessed during Brexit, breaches of the impartiality rules by civil servants.

It's the same for Linekar and his 'I will not be silenced' stance. Fine, say what you want, but do not do it in a way that threatens the beebs charter and neutrality, If he can't get that. Then he should stand down or be sacked.

With respect to Tees and others this is where they are missing the point. They see it as a right winger trying to stifle the views of a (very wealthy) left winger. They are not. They are trying to uphold the beebs stance on neutrality. The beeb is respected thoughtout the World for this. I know Americans here, who perhaps naively, turn to the beeb for 'the truth'. They're stunned when I say, 'I'm not so sure about that anymore'. If the beeb simply becomes another Guardian or Daily Mail. It is finished as a news service of trust. It's as simple as that.

[Teessider]

Caller, do you think that if Lineker had tweeted in support of the bill he would stil have been suspended? I think not.

[Roger]

Teess you make a fair point there - but the point is that Lineker should not be commenting either way. Caller thanks for those insights.

*    *    *

I feel despair about this outcome BUT I am sure this is not over yet.

It's not a matter of right or left but of BBC being as independent as it can possibly be.


*     *     *

For me one of the worst and most harmful features of the modern World is celebrity culture, vapid 'influencers' and social media. Giving the license that Lineker has now been given, I shudder to think what the future holds . . . .

The prospects for democracy and rational political debate do not look enhanced by this outcome.

I hope the Govt will make immediate changes at the top of the BBC and that Lineker will be sacked outright if he refuses to observe the requirements as before. Perhaps he should stand for Parliament 

[Teessider]

Why shouldn't he be allowed to share his views? He is a freelancer, not directly employed by the BBC, and works in sport rather than news or politics. Is it because he is left?

[Roger]

Hi Teess - "Gary has acquired 'influencer' status as a result of his position at the BBC and against the agreed terms of his engagement, he is using that privilege to vent his political opinions on a range of subjects".

Employed or not, Lineker was bound by the same rules as the others.

It's nothing to do with right or left - more to do with right and wrong   

[Teessider]

Yet it doesn't seem to apply to Alan Sugar?

[caller]

Caller, do you think that if Lineker had tweeted in support of the bill he would stil have been suspended? I think not.

I disagree with you. Whether he likes it or not, he is an influencer and he should keep out of politics whilst workinng for the beeb. That's basically what the beeb are saying. And he made the cardinal sin of referencing comparisons to nazism. Not commenting on the rights or wrongs of that, just saying it's a touchy subject, at best. Although I personally thought his comments were crass. 

[caller]

Why shouldn't he be allowed to share his views? He is a freelancer, not directly employed by the BBC, and works in sport rather than news or politics. Is it because he is left?

It is because to people all over the World, he is associated with the BBC. He is the BBC's focal point of their football coverage. He is a representative of the beeb and judging by some comments I have read, this is taken as the stance of the BBC.

When I talked of senior civil servants having to suppress their own politicial leanings to do their job, the same applies to employees of the beeb. If 'freelancers' are going to be treated differently. Then I would suggest that will cause more strife by direct employees who will argue, why should we be treated differently?

As for your comments about Sugar, it just goes to prove how much more high profile Linekar is, that by and large, Sugars comments were ignored by everyone until this issue arose, but yes, he should have been treated the same as Linekar. You don't have to go back that far to see the comments criticising Government or individuals within Government made by BBC employees, who are presenters and who were rebuked for their comments, so I would imagine, many are already asking the question why are higher profile and much higher paid 'freelancers' treated differently?

I see that both Wright and Shearer appeared together the next day as pundits on the Fulham - Arsenal game. So they obviously needed the money and looking to their future no doubt. Meanwhile, much lower paid freelancers lost their pay when the highly paid footballers all walked off in solidarity. I don't suppose they even gave that a thought. The National Union of Linekars are an exceptionally wealthy group, after all.

Anyway, I looked to see how the beeb reported Linekars tweet. Here it is:

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64889868

[Roger]

Charles Moore in the DT :-

"Although Lineker is undoubtedly an effective broadcaster, he has done the job a very long time. He may, in Jane Austen’s immortal phrase, have “delighted us long enough”. The main thing about football is the football itself, and it can be happily watched without Lineker. It may even be that people would prefer the sport to be less intermediated. Match of the Day viewing figures actually rose for last Saturday’s Lineker-free broadcast.

And if new commentary is needed, this country is full of outstanding football experts who would step up and do the job very competently while asking for a tiny fraction of the £1.35 million a year that Lineker receives. If you add to the Lineker pay packet the large, though lesser ones of his supporting colleagues, you reach a saving of well over £3  million a year if they all stayed out. Mr Davie had the perfect chance to call the bluff of the self-inflated “talent”. He has thrown it away."

'They think it's all over' - NOT yet IMO. More to come . . . .

[Roger]

Hi Teess - from your favourite journal   

"The BBC - in all its glorious ineptitude - missed a trick last weekend.

Rather than scrambling around trying to defuse a situation primarily of their own making, they should have booted out all those lemmings who went on mock strike at the treatment of the saintly Gary Lineker and given the next generation a chance.

Once the virtue-signalling Alan Shearer, Ian Wright and Mark Chapman refused to appear on the BBC last weekend, a herd mentality ensued and they all had to follow. If anyone had dared to stand up they would have been blackballed by the football gang.

It was like some deluded Wizard of Oz scenario, with Lineker in the Dorothy role accompanied by stooges fulfilling the parts of tin man, lion and scarecrow trying to get a heart, courage and brain.

All they really did was read the room and think: 'I'm getting out in front of this.' It was dressed up as solidarity, but it was really about self-preservation. Most likely, none of them understand Lineker's motivations, understand the observations he was making, or even considered the inappropriate language he used. They were simply doing what they thought was best for them.

There is a generation of potential broadcasters coming up behind these guys who can do just as good a job and are just as insightful. Not that that would be difficult mind you . . . . . . . "

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11864287/SIMON-JORDAN-BBC-BOOT-lemmings-went-strike-Gary-Lineker.html

It's worth watching Mark Chapman's video apology in that link . . . .