Steel Icarus
an attempt was made
I bet you work to rule eh.
How much do you reckon is getting paid to whoever gave the decision to mute the audience booing Israel at Eurovision? Does that contravene the impartiality aspect of their contract?
Will Gary Lineker be presenting Motd on Saturday?
- Thread starter Bingoman
- Start date
How much do you reckon is getting paid to whoever gave the decision to mute the audience booing Israel at Eurovision? Does that contravene the impartiality aspect of their contract?
kabbes
First intersubjective, then internalised
Here’s my spicy take that everybody’s been waiting for.
People have to own the messages that they are putting out there into the world. I know it feels like it’s “just” a retweet. But if it’s coming from your account then it’s coming from you, as if you wrote it. And that places a duty on you to make sure that you understand and agree with every part of it. Don’t understand one of the emojis? Then don’t just assume it isn’t important. You’re posting it, so you’re posting that emoji. It’s not good enough to plead ignorance after the event. Don’t be lazy. If that tweet it isn’t important enough for you to understand every element of it then it’s not important enough for you to retweet it.
The laziness of just retweeting things even though you haven’t understood them is just part of a wider malaise in the quality of public discourse. Of people shouting their reckons about issues that they have no real knowledge of. Of more attention being paid to celebrities with nothing more than a surface level understanding of a phenomenon than to people who’ve spent their lives reading and writing about it. Of reducing complexity down to 140 polarising characters. Of measurement by likes and engagement, rather than by quality of analysis.
Consequently, even though I have sympathy with Lineker’s politics, I don’t have any sympathy for his plight. If you want to play in the arena, arm and defend yourself against obvious attacks.
People have to own the messages that they are putting out there into the world. I know it feels like it’s “just” a retweet. But if it’s coming from your account then it’s coming from you, as if you wrote it. And that places a duty on you to make sure that you understand and agree with every part of it. Don’t understand one of the emojis? Then don’t just assume it isn’t important. You’re posting it, so you’re posting that emoji. It’s not good enough to plead ignorance after the event. Don’t be lazy. If that tweet it isn’t important enough for you to understand every element of it then it’s not important enough for you to retweet it.
The laziness of just retweeting things even though you haven’t understood them is just part of a wider malaise in the quality of public discourse. Of people shouting their reckons about issues that they have no real knowledge of. Of more attention being paid to celebrities with nothing more than a surface level understanding of a phenomenon than to people who’ve spent their lives reading and writing about it. Of reducing complexity down to 140 polarising characters. Of measurement by likes and engagement, rather than by quality of analysis.
Consequently, even though I have sympathy with Lineker’s politics, I don’t have any sympathy for his plight. If you want to play in the arena, arm and defend yourself against obvious attacks.
Elpenor
Datta. Dayadhvam. Damyata. Shantih Shantih Shantih
You seem to be arguing he gets an opt out of his employers policies cos he has nice fluffy politics.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I completely agree with the whole reposting thing - the whole POINT of reposting, surely, is to imply that you have some kind of buy-in on the thing you're reposting, which means you own the responsibility of having done so.
That said, it seems to me that Lineker played it by the book when it was called out (whether it was accidental or not). He pulled the post, and apologised. And then resigned before anyone made him (how many politicians in the last 20 years could have been said to have done similarly?).
That doesn't exonerate him from any pushback on the fact that he posted the tweet anyway.
HOWEVER, all of this fuss and frothing is exactly how Israel likes it. I can remember whiny Mark Regev, UK Israeli government spokesman. kvetching 30 years ago about antisemitism every time there was the slightest whiff of criticism of Israel's actions, and this looks like pretty much the same sort of thing - suggest that Israel is somehow not the victim of all this, and suddenly the finger points and someone's screaming that you're worse than Hitler.
I don't think there's any dispute that Lineker knows he screwed his career right there. But he's long become a folk devil of the right, and there have been, for a long time, concerted efforts to get him booted. He rather helped that process along with this one, but I think this was always going to be a case of "when", not "if".
And as someone who doesn't follow sport, far less football, the only reason I have any interest in what Lineker does is because I feel, in the generality of it, that it is refreshing to have a Personality who IS actually prepared to say what he thinks and nail his colours to the mast.
That said, it seems to me that Lineker played it by the book when it was called out (whether it was accidental or not). He pulled the post, and apologised. And then resigned before anyone made him (how many politicians in the last 20 years could have been said to have done similarly?).
That doesn't exonerate him from any pushback on the fact that he posted the tweet anyway.
HOWEVER, all of this fuss and frothing is exactly how Israel likes it. I can remember whiny Mark Regev, UK Israeli government spokesman. kvetching 30 years ago about antisemitism every time there was the slightest whiff of criticism of Israel's actions, and this looks like pretty much the same sort of thing - suggest that Israel is somehow not the victim of all this, and suddenly the finger points and someone's screaming that you're worse than Hitler.
I don't think there's any dispute that Lineker knows he screwed his career right there. But he's long become a folk devil of the right, and there have been, for a long time, concerted efforts to get him booted. He rather helped that process along with this one, but I think this was always going to be a case of "when", not "if".
And as someone who doesn't follow sport, far less football, the only reason I have any interest in what Lineker does is because I feel, in the generality of it, that it is refreshing to have a Personality who IS actually prepared to say what he thinks and nail his colours to the mast.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Do please show me where I'm arguing that he should have been treated any differently than he was. I can wait.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Middle England Male is always good value.
teqniq
DisMembered
The BBC not covering itself in glory here:
www.bbc.co.uk
Gary Lineker: A sorry end to a BBC career
His years as a BBC host end in circumstances nobody would have wanted, but some might have predicted.
www.bbc.co.uk
hitmouse
God laid a big egg in my heart to tell you this
A very obvious point but not seen anyone else make it: I think people should breach their employer's policies and get away with it. Like fuck, how many people here have, at some point, used their employer's internet connection to visit urban and how many of you are confident that's 100% within your employer's acceptable IT use policies?
It's bad enough when we have liberals wanking on about the rule of law, please let's not get into preaching the sanctity of the HR department as well.
Where I work someone recently got told off for using our intranet to make an uncomplimentary comment about an outsourcing scheme that led to several directly-employed members of staff being made redundant, I can't say for sure whether or not her comment actually breached any official policies but I do know that that question is completely irrelevant as to whether or not I support her. Same principle here imo - argue that Lineker's post was wrong if you think it was wrong but please let's not get all pious about employment contracts.
It's bad enough when we have liberals wanking on about the rule of law, please let's not get into preaching the sanctity of the HR department as well.
Where I work someone recently got told off for using our intranet to make an uncomplimentary comment about an outsourcing scheme that led to several directly-employed members of staff being made redundant, I can't say for sure whether or not her comment actually breached any official policies but I do know that that question is completely irrelevant as to whether or not I support her. Same principle here imo - argue that Lineker's post was wrong if you think it was wrong but please let's not get all pious about employment contracts.
hitmouse
God laid a big egg in my heart to tell you this
It's an instagram post not a tweet (relevant imo in that he wasn't posting it on a nazi-owned site), is a video so a screenshot doesn't capture the full thing but was posted over on t'other thread: Gary Lineker's in trouble again
magneze
🎧
Thanks.
krtek a houby
Saoirse don Phalaistín!
Something about not keeping an eye on details.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
You have no choice on whether to have a TV license if you watch live TV, even if you don't watch the BBC you have to pay for it.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
Nah.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
Sorry to state the obvious, but thought it might be necessary here: if something's antisemitic, it's not just about "Israel and its supporters got offended."
dessiato
4 years and I still cry sometimes
I've been reading thread, although not the last page yet.
All I gather from this is that Linneker dropped a bollocking, apologised for it and resigned. I don't see a problem with that especially.
Where I do have a problem is that so very few people/celebrities are standing openly, and loudly, against the Israeli genocide. I can't see how being anti-genocide can be so automatically considered antisemitic.
I think that there are times when it is important for people and organisations to stand up and be counted. This is one of those times.
Am I missing something?
All I gather from this is that Linneker dropped a bollocking, apologised for it and resigned. I don't see a problem with that especially.
Where I do have a problem is that so very few people/celebrities are standing openly, and loudly, against the Israeli genocide. I can't see how being anti-genocide can be so automatically considered antisemitic.
I think that there are times when it is important for people and organisations to stand up and be counted. This is one of those times.
Am I missing something?
Yeh thats a good summary.
His career at the beeb was coming to an end but a bit of a boondoggle at the WC would have been nice im sure. And yeh - he has used his platform to voice political views which goes against their FAQ so had to go.
He seems like a good un and I wish him the best. I can totally see him with his trotters up in LA doing the premier league coverage over there, probably not for Fox though. Not sure who carries the rights there, ESPN?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
A few random points, splurged out because I can't be bothered putting it into any logical order:
I'm not overly fussed, but I think it's a bit much for non-news/current affairs BBC staff to have limits on their social media/political commentary. More to the point, I'd have more sympathy with the BBC if they'd actually clamped down on Jeremy Clarkson's explicit racism. Racism and more performed within the actual fucking programmes, along with the wider tidal wave of filth churned out in his newspaper columns.
I'm not that interested in defending Lineker's own position at the BBC. He's paid an obscene amount of money and there's little to be gained trying to make progressive points out of the lives and sayings of celebrities and the rich. Same time, I'm prepared to accept he didn't notice the rat thing or know it's significance. For no other reason than he'd have been deeply stupid and self destructive if he had known.
Any use of vermin-esque language to describe a people is problematic going on deeply disturbing. I put it like that because, like Nye Bevan, we call the Tories vermin and I'm good with that. But yes, certainly, it is demeaning, racist and abhorrent when applied to 'peoples'. Same time the use of the rat isn't exclusively used about Jewish people, a point (kind of) made in this article:
theweek.com
So, yeah, he retwiddled something that was deeply problematic, though I'm happy to accept that it was a genuine mistake and/or carelessness and that he has gone through the proper apologies and retractions. I think the more important part of this story is when you step back a bit. To look at the hair trigger offence that is martialled against critics of Israel and the (successful) attempts to claim that critics of Israel's actions are also antisemites. It's the story of what happened to Jeremy Corbyn's leadership amongst other things. And when you look at the power of Israeli interests in the politics of this country and the United States, the ability to get a particular story told about the state of Israel and the Palestinian people, you see a picture of power and influence. 77 years on from The Nakba and here we are, tens of thousands of deaths which are intensifying right now. Lineker isn't the story here.
I'm not overly fussed, but I think it's a bit much for non-news/current affairs BBC staff to have limits on their social media/political commentary. More to the point, I'd have more sympathy with the BBC if they'd actually clamped down on Jeremy Clarkson's explicit racism. Racism and more performed within the actual fucking programmes, along with the wider tidal wave of filth churned out in his newspaper columns.
I'm not that interested in defending Lineker's own position at the BBC. He's paid an obscene amount of money and there's little to be gained trying to make progressive points out of the lives and sayings of celebrities and the rich. Same time, I'm prepared to accept he didn't notice the rat thing or know it's significance. For no other reason than he'd have been deeply stupid and self destructive if he had known.
Any use of vermin-esque language to describe a people is problematic going on deeply disturbing. I put it like that because, like Nye Bevan, we call the Tories vermin and I'm good with that. But yes, certainly, it is demeaning, racist and abhorrent when applied to 'peoples'. Same time the use of the rat isn't exclusively used about Jewish people, a point (kind of) made in this article:
The history of animal metaphors in propaganda
Images of rats, snakes and cockroaches have been used to dehumanise political enemies and minority groups
theweek.com
So, yeah, he retwiddled something that was deeply problematic, though I'm happy to accept that it was a genuine mistake and/or carelessness and that he has gone through the proper apologies and retractions. I think the more important part of this story is when you step back a bit. To look at the hair trigger offence that is martialled against critics of Israel and the (successful) attempts to claim that critics of Israel's actions are also antisemites. It's the story of what happened to Jeremy Corbyn's leadership amongst other things. And when you look at the power of Israeli interests in the politics of this country and the United States, the ability to get a particular story told about the state of Israel and the Palestinian people, you see a picture of power and influence. 77 years on from The Nakba and here we are, tens of thousands of deaths which are intensifying right now. Lineker isn't the story here.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
TBF I don't think he's worked for the BBC for about a decade or so has he?
You're 'good with that'? While Labour has been spent the last year becoming more Tory than the Tories?
I've met many decent enough Tories, equally many thick as pigshit ones. Same goes for Labour/TUC people. It's so simplistic and binary to have these divisions, it's stupid beyond belief (see the Kneecap thread)
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
No, indeed, but it took several deeply offensive and racist episodes for the BBC to deal with him. If you want to put it like this, he got away with' masses more than Lineker, though I wouldn't actually put it that way. Lineker expressed personal opinions in his social media, Clarkson came out with vile racist stuff on TV.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
You can see why people are reluctant to speak out. And that, I strongly suspect, is not by accident.
The only thing that is "special" about the Lineker case is that he's someone with the integrity, regardless of how hamstrung he is by his contract, who is still willing to speak out against vested interests - and Israel has devoted considerable effort to maintaining itself as a "vested interest".
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Any reference to the Tories as 'vermin' isn't actually a defence of Labour you know. There's nothing binary about it, I hate the Tories and I hate Labour. To be honest, I don't tend refer to the Tories as vermin - well, maybe I do, I'd have to check back - but I think using it in the same way that Bevan did is fine.
Hold the front page: search function says I do call Tories vermin!
Last edited:
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
Labour are red vermin. Again, it's about punching up, not down.
ETA: Again, they're decent to you; they've still helped to make life very difficult for many, many other people.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Vermi
dessiato
4 years and I still cry sometimes
Yes, I can see why people say nothing sometimes. There are even parts of U75 where disagreeing with views, or posters, will cause problems. But on something as big as Israeli genocide silence should not be an option.
Yes, i know, including myself.
My point was that it's a bit silly to describe all Tories as 'vermin'. Not helpful.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
It's a choice to be a Tory, not a protected characteristic.
And some of us find it very helpful, when feeling utterly powerless, to shit-talk people who try to destroy our lives and communities.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
As mentioned, I don't think it's helpful - quite the opposite - to describe nations/people as vermin. Even when one of those nations, Israel, is slaughtering Palestinians in Palestine. But really, why is it not helpful to describe the Tories as vermin? The link to Bevan is obvious and they are utterly hostile to much of the population of this country, causing numerous deaths with both their policies and inactions. Fuck 'em. Vermin.
Similar threads
