Will Gary Lineker be presenting Motd on Saturday?
- Thread starter Bingoman
- Start date
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Not as nice as lice.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
The best of their best villains
Are lower than pestilence.
This organisation harboured paedophiles, I'd say that's worse than Lineker having a tweeting oopsie.The BBC not covering itself in glory here:
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
8ball
World is a fuck
I thought it was down to him punching one of the production staff…
Or do you think they were just waiting for an opening?
trashpony
Hag
Im not very good t following rules which is why I’ve been self employed for years. And I don’t know about Eurovision. I didn’t watch it and I don’t have a TV licence any more. I cancelled it when they covered up and carried on paying Huw Edwards.
The urban take seems to be that if you agree with Lineker’s position, it’s okay for him to not be impartial. His political views are irrelevant. If he didn’t want to sign up to impartiality, I’m sure there were other broadcasters who would have been happy to pay him £1.4m a year for talking about football.
No idea who that guy is, but he needs to learn where and when to use an apostrophe.
Linkeker's influence has clearly transcended sports broadcasting anyway. Yep hes broken the BBC rules so clearly had to be sacked but he doesn't give a fuck and I live my life by a similar ethos so fair play to him. Fuck Israel. That's what he wants to say but has pulled his punches slightly.
Idris2002
Stay Alive in '25
Is Clarkson impartial?
As for Lineker, the BBC must be over the moon that they have a new HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER to replace J. Savile.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
BTW, Henderson apologised for that tweet, and it wasn't over the abominable superfluous apostrophe:
https://www.thenational.scot/news/2...son-apologises-gary-lineker-impartiality-row/
WouldBe
Dislicksick
His private life and posts should be separate from his work life unless he's slagging off the BBC in his private posts.
VivaE
Well-Known Member
Quite. And as for this hand-wringer -
"...the BBC's need for impartiality..."
Who are they trying to kid here? The BBC cherry picks to a hollow laughable degree what it imposes its 'impartiality' on. Impartial my arse.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
BIB: A BBC journalist of course. They all get their jobs on merit, always.
Eh, I wouldn't take the piss out of a regular person doing it, but yeah.
trashpony
Hag
It’s irrelevant. If he didn’t want to abide by the BBC’s social media policy he shouldn’t work there.
kabbes
First intersubjective, then internalised
There is no such thing as impartial. Everybody always occupies a position and that position always comes with assumptions about how the world works. If you think you’re being impartial then that just means the assumptions embedded in your position have become naturalised for you, such that you don’t even notice them.
Anyway. I would think that the BBC contract would certainly come with rules against publicly slagging off a fellow employee. It looks to me as if that Henderson chap is the one who should be sacked for breach of contract.
Anyway. I would think that the BBC contract would certainly come with rules against publicly slagging off a fellow employee. It looks to me as if that Henderson chap is the one who should be sacked for breach of contract.
Last edited:
trashpony
Hag
No. And he doesn’t work for the BBC any more.
Anyway, as I no longer pay the BBC for any output or watch it, I’ve got zero skin in the game. I’ll leave you to it.
PTK
We Are All "PALATINE ACTON". End Trade with Israel
It was not very "impartial" for Jeremy Bowen to post instructions on how to disable a Russian tank shortly after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 2022. If he had published similar advice for Palestinians, I imagine that he would have been sacked.
WouldBe
Dislicksick
Of course it's relevant the BBC shouldn't be allowed to impose such regulations. Everyone's private life should be separate from their work life as long as it's not illegal.
trashpony
Hag
Of course the BBC can impose those kind of regulations! Every place I’ve ever worked has an SM policy which stipulates that if you’re identifiable as an employee then there are rules.
If you’re posting on the same account both as a BBC pundit and in your private capacity you’re blurring the lines. Lineker chooses to only have one account and it’s explicitly against the BBC rules.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Absolutely laughable anyone on this website can put BBC and impartial together with a straight face. There's examples of the opposite every day. Throughout it's history.
But for those of a certain age, who remember the BBC deliberately swapping footage around at Orgreave to make it look like the miners attacked the police...
Orgreave. Never forget.
But for those of a certain age, who remember the BBC deliberately swapping footage around at Orgreave to make it look like the miners attacked the police...
Orgreave. Never forget.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
That might be "the urban take", but it's not mine.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
So it's all worked out nicely, then. Because he doesn't work there now.
kabbes
First intersubjective, then internalised
How many identifiable BBC employees post regularly in favour of the royal family every time there is any kind of monarchist celebration?
How many identifiable BBC employees post nationalist symbols such as flags or poppies during state-sanctioned festivals?
How many identifiable BBC employees post their antagonism with regimes, entities and individuals that the state have deemed to be acceptable enemies?
All these things are partial statements made on social media and all are routine.
So the policy is not what it appears. It’s not actually that you can’t say anything that is impartial. It’s that you aren’t allowed to say anything in disagreement with the way in which the power relations of the nation-state are reproduced.
And that’s understandable, because the BBC is a tool of the state. But let’s not pretend that it’s anything other than what it is.
Dystopiary
The system isn't broken; it's rigged.
All reasons to stop paying for a TV licence, or not get one in the first place, going back decades.
tommers
Currently in investor / advisor mode.
I got a threatening letter from the licence people the other day. It said I needed to pay for a licence if I watched anything - BBC, ITV, Sky or YouTube. It was for the shop, and I don't watch anything there, and I have a licence at home so luckily I wasn't breaking any BBC rules.
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
As it goes, you see "it's ok when someone I like/agree with does it" all the time, across every subject going, and tbh it is something that genuinely irritates me most of the time.
That said... we still all do it, me included.
But, seeing as the bigger can of bigger worms has been opened...
Alla this. Just aaaaaaalla this.
As soon as you say "this is ok to say, this isn't", you've taken a stance, picked a side, and how could anyone say that's impartial?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Impartiality is a bit of a weaselly term. When it comes to a national broadcaster you don't want it to be 'partial', for a particular party, but impartiality covers a variety of sins and has no agreed core or range to it. Impartiality is itself a form of partiality, pretty much as we see in the case of the BBC. I'd rather see it being genuinely independent.
krtek a houby
Saoirse don Phalaistín!
What organisation hasn't "harboured" paedophiles?
Similar threads
