U.K. Politics: Gary Lineker v the BBC

[Plym]

Is this another Black Mirror episode?

nah, just one of our rancid ****s

[greek_boy]

Is this another Black Mirror episode?

[jordi_89]

The UK isolating itself from Europe and the world is shotting itself in the foot imo.

[greek_boy]

a BBC guy was punished for telling the truth in his social media?

a land of individual freedom

To them, free speech applies only if you support the government and (extreme) right-wing ideology. Many right-wingers have expressed hateful opinions about immigration, yet they have been working for BBC and other media outlets and were not forced to step down. The problem here is that Gary (who is very influential with a big following) has openly criticised the government on his personal twitter account (not on BBC social media) and the snowflakes freaked out.

I remember some Karens thought that Jeremy Clarkson should not be fired after his horrific remarks against Meghan Markle and they claimed the freedom of speech...

[Artoo]

He isn't employed by the BBC though, he's a freelancer - by trying to exercise this level of control over its media personalities, the BBC creates itself a potential tax issue from an IR35 perspective (though that's another matter entirely).

Further still, the BBC can harp on all it likes about impartiality - it hasn't reinforced this so-called policy with other media personalities, who have gone further with their own political comments (people like Alan Sugar, Andrew Neil or even Gary himself, who politically criticised Qatar last year while fronting MOTD) - it's this that ultimately infuriates so many people. It isn't cut and dry that Gary shouldn't have publicly held political views, he made these via his own personal social media account and he works for the BBC in a non-political/news capacity - the BBC have ultimately handled this in the worst possible way and pandered to right wing pressure once again.

The BBC is one of our great institutions but so long as it panders (and caves) to right wing influences within its own senior management structure, it'll never be the organisation that it should be.

He’s a freelancer but is still in a direct contract with the BBC, thus subject to terms and conditions and public salary disclosure. He is the BBC’s highest paid presenter and the only one earning over £1M.

I agree there’s a discrepancy between how the BBC handles certain social media comments, but their hands are tied at times. For example, The Apprentice is not an in-house BBC production so Lord Sugar is not in contract with the BBC directly, and therefore they are not in a position to reprimand him (there’s also an argument to be made that buying a TV show fronted by a member of the House of Lords will result in political commentary).

In contrast, BBC News reader Martine Croxall was taken off-air whilst she investigated for impartiality towards the end of last year, after saying she was ‘gleeful’ Boris wasn’t running in the leadership race.

There’s also the issue of who is in contract and at what time - Gary presents a live TV show (or at least a show recorded same day). Most shows are pre-recorded months in advance so any contract is probably over by the time transmission comes around.

I don’t disagree with Gary, but the BBC is in a very difficult spot. It has to uphold and maintain its impartiality and balance that against its own integrity in the face of constant scrutiny from the government - a government that has already changed how it operates, and is minded to defund it in 2027 (should they remain in power).

Gary has been criticised for his political commentary before and continues to ignore the BBC’s position. It is right he is asked to step down, even if it’s temporarily, and he probably expected it - you can only poke a bear so many times. But the fact he keeps doing it shows a level of disrespect to the organisation he was contracted himself to, and no company puts up with that.

[Wayne]

That’s exactly what you agree to when you undertake employment with the BBC. Most companies have a social media policy nowadays. The BBC has to remain impartial and is a fundamental core principle, and with its very existence depending on the attitude of the government of the day.

Gary isn’t wrong in what he’s saying, but either he wants to be a football host and commentator for the BBC or an independent political commentator - he cannot be both.

He isn't employed by the BBC though, he's a freelancer - by trying to exercise this level of control over its media personalities, the BBC creates itself a potential tax issue from an IR35 perspective (though that's another matter entirely).

Further still, the BBC can harp on all it likes about impartiality - it hasn't reinforced this so-called policy with other media personalities, who have gone further with their own political comments (people like Alan Sugar, Andrew Neil or even Gary himself, who politically criticised Qatar last year while fronting MOTD) - it's this that ultimately infuriates so many people. It isn't cut and dry that Gary shouldn't have publicly held political views, he made these via his own personal social media account and he works for the BBC in a non-political/news capacity - the BBC have ultimately handled this in the worst possible way and pandered to right wing pressure once again.

The BBC is one of our great institutions but so long as it panders (and caves) to right wing influences within its own senior management structure, it'll never be the organisation that it should be.

[Artoo]

So basically if you work for the BBC you have no political opinion until your contract is up I guess lol

That’s exactly what you agree to when you undertake employment with the BBC. Most companies have a social media policy nowadays. The BBC has to remain impartial and is a fundamental core principle, and with its very existence depending on the attitude of the government of the day.

Gary isn’t wrong in what he’s saying, but either he wants to be a football host and commentator for the BBC or an independent political commentator - he cannot be both.

[zagan0401]

The BBC is a human heritage, played an indispensable role in the transmission of WWII events. I hope those angry with civilization don't destroy it.

[zagan0401]

Lineker has been pulled off air for tweeting about the government's new migration law and comparing language around it to that of 1930s Germany
The BBC said the Match of the Day host - its highest-paid star - breached its guidelines on use of social media
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said the issue is for the BBC and Gary Lineker to resolve but he stands by his immigration plan

a BBC guy was punished for telling the truth in his social media?

a land of individual freedom

[Thriller]

Yet plenty of other BBC faces have spouted their opinion on political matters and faced no consequence? Good on him for standing his ground and it’s good to see the support he’s getting from colleagues.

His comments, IMO, were fair - but it’s not really about that; it’s the way it presents the BBC as being an ally or puppet of the government. The fact the main story is about Gary and not about the actual issue at hand says everything anyway.

[Beautyisbeauty]

The whole thing is so ridiculous. I´d understand the fuss if he would have made those remarks on air because it affects directly their content as a network but on his own social media... such a restrictive interpretation of editorial guidelines. So basically if you work for the BBC you have no political opinion until your contract is up I guess lol

[Artoo]

Whilst Gary isn’t necessarily in the wrong, I just don’t think he realises (or cares) that the government are actively looking to destroy the BBC. Thus their impartiality is vital to their survival at the moment, and that has to extend to all employees.

[Wayne]

[Wayne]

[SholasBoy]

Will swap places with anyone who wants to come over, have my place, I want out.

[Rihab]

I've been saying for years that the EU should charter luxury cruise ships and send a fair share of the refugees arriving on our shores straight to the UK and the US. They've invaded, bombed and destabilized more countries than anyone else this century, but always leave it to Europe to deal with the consequences.

Similarly, they seem a little too happy right now to send more, deadlier and increasingly destructive weapons to Ukraine every week, but refuse to do their part to help the victims of the war, which is fought with their weapons. The number of Ukrainians, Syrians, Afghans etc in the UK and America is already disgustingly low compared to other (poorer and completely uninvolved) countries and now they're both saying they want even less? No, girls. You can't play world power and at the same time want to isolate yourselves from the rest of the world. The world is fed up.

If I ever ran for office, one of my major campaign promises would be to turn England and Florida into our Rwanda. And we'd get London and Washington to pay for the free champagne on board of the cruise ships headed their way.

[LittleLinda]

LOL, I know, who was this aimed at? Not the migrants for sure.

Suella Braverman is possibly even worse than Priti Patel - claiming there are “billions” of people who could possibly “invade” the UK despite the number being in the tens of thousands over the last 5 years.

And don’t even start with the “it costs the tax payer millions each day” argument when THIS government have been in power for 13 years, it’s THEIR policies that are causing the cost and THEY wasted billions during Covid and beyond.

The whole lot of them are utter gaslighting scum.

So lemme guess: Those “millions a day” saved from rejecting refugees will go into the NHS? Like all that money saved through Brexit?

[DnBLover]

This would be too fake if it was in a movie. The UK government is the dictionary definition of shitshow.

[Artoo]

The Tories are doing what they always do - falling back on trying to convince the public there’s an immigration problem that only they can solve. Is this because they cannot send people to Rwanda?

[Thriller]

i bet all those migrants on the boats are checking their twitter right now to see these latest updates

LOL, I know, who was this aimed at? Not the migrants for sure.

Suella Braverman is possibly even worse than Priti Patel - claiming there are “billions” of people who could possibly “invade” the UK despite the number being in the tens of thousands over the last 5 years.

And don’t even start with the “it costs the tax payer millions each day” argument when THIS government have been in power for 13 years, it’s THEIR policies that are causing the cost and THEY wasted billions during Covid and beyond.

The whole lot of them are utter gaslighting scum.

[Plym]

With just three words, the Tories have become UKIP.

i bet all those migrants on the boats are checking their twitter right now to see these latest updates

[Thriller]

With just three words, the Tories have become UKIP.

[zagan0401]

Wow this tweet is… something.

Modern slavary system

colonized bastard

[greek_boy]

what the...... thought it was photoshopped!!

[LittleLinda]

You “will be denied access to the UK’s modern slavery system”? Whoever worded that poster should have taken a pause, read it out loud and think about what those words are saying.

And, yes, I know what is actually meant by modern slavery system, I write our company’s MS statement every year. But lol at that wording.

That aside, openly denying someone human rights is certainly not something I’d shout from the rooftops loud and proud… but these are the times we live in, not just in the UK. He’ll get plenty of cheers for this one, and it’s depressing.