The Match of the Day Thread

[scaramanga]

Linekar effectively suspended for thinking human rights are a good thing, wow!

Fair play to Ian Wright who is not going to appear on the show in solidarity with Gary. Not cool on here to show kudos to ex gooners but he's one of the good ones..

This is nothing to do with Lineker holding the political opinions of an idealistic, teenage halfwit.

He has a contract with the BBC that they believe requires political impartiality. He's been warned by them twice already for over stepping that mark. He's done it again and got suspended.

Whether you agree with his opinions or not, surely you can see the peril in employees of what is essentially a state broadcaster being unable to avoid political entanglements.

 

[Grays_1890]

This is nothing to do with Lineker holding the political opinions of an idealistic, teenage halfwit.

He has a contract with the BBC that they believe requires political impartiality. He's been warned by them twice already for over stepping that mark. He's done it again and got suspended.

Whether you agree with his opinions or not, surely you can see the peril in employees of what is essentially a state broadcaster being unable to avoid political entanglements.

Agree to an extent but how many people saw his tweet and aligned it to the BBC until the BBC stepped in? I think most rational people saw it and associated it with Lineker not the BBC. I know by the guidelines it might not matter etc but ironically there was very little controversy our optics on the BBC till they got involved themselves

The whole migrant crisis is one that probably extends further than one tweet also so not sure it can be assumed to be more political than say an hours programming where you will see the carefully worded views of an Andrew Neil or Laura Kuenssberg

Out of interest where would a show like Have I got News for You where Hislop regularly calls someone a criminal or crook? Are their "satirical" loopholes for comedy?

The Guidelines state apparently state according to the news earlier that:

The corporation’s guidelines state that the impartiality must be “adequate and appropriate to the output, taking account of the subject and nature of the content, the likely audience expectation and any signposting that may influence that expectation”.

It adds that BBC output must always “scrutinise arguments, question consensus and hold power to account” with both consistency and due impartiality.

Surely these guidelines relate to their programming, and within primarily the news and correspondence sphere and not the personal tweets of contractors?

 

[DubSpur]

This is nothing to do with Lineker holding the political opinions of an idealistic, teenage halfwit.

He has a contract with the BBC that they believe requires political impartiality. He's been warned by them twice already for over stepping that mark. He's done it again and got suspended.

Whether you agree with his opinions or not, surely you can see the peril in employees of what is essentially a state broadcaster being unable to avoid political entanglements.

That's fine if the BBC keep to those standards themselves. It was ok for Lineker to do a BBC piece slaughtering Qatar on their human rights record but it's different if he makes a small comment on the language of a government policy? It's ok for the BBC chairman to organise an 800k loan for Boris Johnson, that's not getting involved in politics?
The only reason they took this step is because the Tories start whining over it.

 

[Lilbaz]

Scrap the licence fee. Privatise the bbc. Let the pundits say whatever they want. Job done.

 

[scaramanga]

Agree to an extent but how many people saw his tweet and aligned it to the BBC until the BBC stepped in? I think most rational people saw it and associated it with Lineker not the BBC. I know by the guidelines it might not matter etc but ironically there was very little controversy our optics on the BBC till they got involved themselves

The whole migrant crisis is one that probably extends further than one tweet also so not sure it can be assumed to be more political than say an hours programming where you will see the carefully worded views of an Andrew Neil or Laura Kuenssberg

Out of interest where would a show like Have I got News for You where Hislop regularly calls someone a criminal or crook? Are their "satirical" loopholes for comedy?

The Guidelines state apparently state according to the news earlier that:

The corporation’s guidelines state that the impartiality must be “adequate and appropriate to the output, taking account of the subject and nature of the content, the likely audience expectation and any signposting that may influence that expectation”.

It adds that BBC output must always “scrutinise arguments, question consensus and hold power to account” with both consistency and due impartiality.

Surely these guidelines relate to their programming, and within primarily the news and correspondence sphere and not the personal tweets of contractors?

Much of Lineker's following on social media comes from the fact that he presents one of the BBC's biggest shows. The size of his platform is inextricably linked to his employment by the BBC.

Satire, I believe, has entirely different broadcasting standards to other forms of entertainment. But that's put out by the BBC so it is able to (and should) balance that with other programming.

 

[Kandi1977]

This is nothing to do with Lineker holding the political opinions of an idealistic, teenage halfwit.

He has a contract with the BBC that they believe requires political impartiality. He's been warned by them twice already for over stepping that mark. He's done it again and got suspended.

Whether you agree with his opinions or not, surely you can see the peril in employees of what is essentially a state broadcaster being unable to avoid political entanglements.

He's employed to host a football show and give football analysis. That is his area of work where he's expected to be impartial. His other personal views are not something the BBC should be concerned about. What they actually SHOULD cover, is the actual story GL gave his view on. THAT is the real story!

 

[scaramanga]

That's fine if the BBC keep to those standards themselves. It was ok for Lineker to do a BBC piece slaughtering Qatar on their human rights record but it's different if he makes a small comment on the language of a government policy? It's ok for the BBC chairman to organise an 800k loan for Boris Johnson, that's not getting involved in politics?
The only reason they took this step is because the Tories start whining over it.

I don't think it was ok. I think the stand taken should have been to boycott the eevnt.

 

[scaramanga]

He's employed to host a football show and give football analysis. That is his area of work where he's expected to be impartial. His other personal views are not something the BBC should be concerned about. What they actually SHOULD cover, is the actual story GL gave his view on. THAT is the real story!

That's not what the BBC claim his contract with them says.

 

[Kandi1977]

That's not what the BBC claim his contract with them says.

Well, neither me or you know what's in the contract, and GL obviously disagree with BBC on it. There's nothing controversial about what GL wrote, especially considering what the BBC themselves have brushed under the carpet before. It's ridiculous, and the BBC should instead cover the REAL news story in this.

 

[Glenda's Legs]

That's not what the BBC claim his contract with them says.

Have the BBC actually spoken about his contract and what it says? Or are they trying to impose impartiality rules on him that wouldn’t ordinarily apply?
I think the BBC have got themselves into a bit of a pickle with this one. Is there a measurement of celebrity above which personal tweets fall under the impartiality rules? As I said earlier saying something that brings the BBC into disrepute would be a fair issue but does what he said do that?

 

[jts1882]

The comparison of the proposed government policy with Nazi Germany is particularly crass and has been criticised by Jewish groups for trivialising the holocaust.

I wonder what people would be saying if Corbyn or Farage or Griffin had made such a comparison.

 

[Grays_1890]

The comparison of the proposed government policy with Nazi Germany is particularly crass and has been criticised by Jewish groups for trivialising the holocaust.

I wonder what people would be saying if Corbyn or Farage or Griffin had made such a comparison.

As a Jew I have no issue with it as like any rational human you can take a step back and realise he is comparing the oppression of people and subsequently speech to that of a Nazi regime. He is not directly comparing it, its the lack of people to see the difference that causes the issues here, as soon as you utter the word Nazi people fail to read or realise the context of whats actually been said. I don't necessarily agree with his comments, but I equally not offended

Corbyn would have been supported and equally panned I imagine as Lineker but equally as a politician what he says would be held higher than Gary Lineker so its not really a like for like comparison and Farage and Griffin are right wing nazi types so would never say anything like it, they are more akin to say the dingys should be sent back whilst ironically making money on dingy manufacturing or whatever confused pr1cks like those two do

 

[Glenda's Legs]

The comparison of the proposed government policy with Nazi Germany is particularly crass and has been criticised by Jewish groups for trivialising the holocaust.

I wonder what people would be saying if Corbyn or Farage or Griffin had made such a comparison.

He compared the language used by Braverman to that used in Germany in the 1930s. We all know what that led to but he’s not comparing what was said to concentration camps but rather to what things can lead to if not challenged.
We need more people speaking out about what is happening here and it needs people of profile to do so.

 

[Baleforce]

The comparison of the proposed government policy with Nazi Germany is particularly crass and has been criticised by Jewish groups for trivialising the holocaust.

I wonder what people would be saying if Corbyn or Farage or Griffin had made such a comparison.

what he said was factually correct, that was the type of language used in 1930’s Germany about certain minority groups

Which should be getting 24 hour news coverage on the bbc, this government is despicable

it’s a common thought experiment, how did things in Germany escalate, what did people do to stop it, we are heading down that road (to authoritarian govt) again here if we don’t adjust rapidly

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

The wheels are falling off for BBC Sport, Football Focus pulled today and Final Score presenter pulls out.

 

[spurspinter1]

This is nothing to do with Lineker holding the political opinions of an idealistic, teenage halfwit.

He has a contract with the BBC that they believe requires political impartiality. He's been warned by them twice already for over stepping that mark. He's done it again and got suspended.

Whether you agree with his opinions or not, surely you can see the peril in employees of what is essentially a state broadcaster being unable to avoid political entanglements.

Almost everything is politics though. You're really suggesting a sports commentator should be muzzled on having any public opinion? North Korea's calling, they want their policies back!

Don't bother replying until you've explained how the youth team had a better chance of beating Leicester than our first team (it's cute how my response played on your mind) , so essentially, don't bother replying, you're probably way to busy not acknowledging how little you understand stuff

"Do the BBC's impartiality guidelines apply to Lineker?

Lineker is a freelance broadcaster for the BBC, not a permanent member of staff, and is not responsible for news or political content, so does not need to adhere to the same rules on impartiality.

His twitter remarks were made on his personal account, which does not include an official link to the BBC or MOTD in his bio.

However, BBC guidelines also note that figures that are “clearly identified with the BBC” are expected to behave appropriately and “in ways that are consistent with the BBC’s editorial values and policies.”

Mr Sambrook told PA: “For a sports presenter in their personal life to express views that aren’t impartial, is not as serious as if it was a news journalist.”"

 

[mephitis]

He compared the language used by Braverman to that used in Germany in the 1930s. We all know what that led to but he’s not comparing what was said to concentration camps but rather to what things can lead to if not challenged.
We need more people speaking out about what is happening here and it needs people of profile to do so.

To quote Martin Niemöller: "First they came for....."

It's the very thin end of a very long wedge but the thin end of a wedge nonetheless.

 

[Baleforce]

The wheels are falling off for BBC Sport, Football Focus pulled today and Final Score presenter pulls out.

what an amazing show of solidarity by all involved

 

[Glenda's Legs]

To quote Martin Niemöller: "First the came for....."

It's the very thin end of a very long wedge but the thin end of a wedge nonetheless.

And that is so relevant now. We are seeing rights to protest removed/diminished, rights to withhold labour removed/diminished, now rights to claim asylum removed (not even diminished) simply due to method of travel. Even the right to claim refuge because you have been trafficked is being removed. Of course it won’t happen because it is illegal but to even think it is acceptable as a political strategy is both awful and extremely worrying.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

what an amazing show of solidarity by all involved

No PL players will be interviewed after matches today on MotD, PFA said players would have been supported in refusing to take part.