|
|
BBC
Mar 11, 2023 8:09:02 GMT
Post by Lobster on Mar 11, 2023 8:09:02 GMT
The BBC insist on being "impartial", but surely they only need to do this with what they actually broadcast? If Gary Lineker was ranting about politics on Match of the Day, I would understand it, but what difference does what he says on Twitter make to him being a presenter?
They don't seem to connect with anyone, left or right. I'm hoping the days of the TV Licence are numbered. This is nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian H Block on Mar 11, 2023 10:24:49 GMT
The BBC insist on being "impartial", but surely they only need to do this with what they actually broadcast? If Gary Lineker was ranting about politics on Match of the Day, I would understand it, but what difference does what he says on Twitter make to him being a presenter? They don't seem to connect with anyone, left or right. I'm hoping the days of the TV Licence are numbered. This is nonsense. The BBC is doomed. The Tories are now in charge and given their dismal track record for running everything else the corporation has no chance. On the Lineker issue, the hypocrisy from the bed wetting hard right is nauseating; they have no issue with Alan Sugar or Andrew Neil tweeting right wing nonsense or Jeremy Clarkson calling for striking workers to be shot in front of their families. |
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 11, 2023 10:38:25 GMT
Post by Curva Nord on Mar 11, 2023 10:38:25 GMT
The BBC insist on being "impartial", but surely they only need to do this with what they actually broadcast? If Gary Lineker was ranting about politics on Match of the Day, I would understand it, but what difference does what he says on Twitter make to him being a presenter? They don't seem to connect with anyone, left or right. I'm hoping the days of the TV Licence are numbered. This is nonsense. The BBC is doomed. The Tories are now in charge and given their dismal track record for running everything else the corporation has no chance. On the Lineker issue, the hypocrisy from the bed wetting hard right is nauseating; they have no issue with Alan Sugar or Andrew Neil tweeting right wing nonsense or Jeremy Clarkson calling for striking workers to be shot in front of their families. Doesn't that make them impartial? |
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 11, 2023 10:40:06 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Mar 11, 2023 10:40:06 GMT
It isn’t an impartiality issue at all, the fascist government run the BBC and he criticised them on his own personal social media - his treatment proves that he was completely correct in what he said.
|
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 11, 2023 11:31:25 GMT
via mobile
Post by Lobster on Mar 11, 2023 11:31:25 GMT
The BBC is doomed. The Tories are now in charge and given their dismal track record for running everything else the corporation has no chance. On the Lineker issue, the hypocrisy from the bed wetting hard right is nauseating; they have no issue with Alan Sugar or Andrew Neil tweeting right wing nonsense or Jeremy Clarkson calling for striking workers to be shot in front of their families. Doesn't that make them impartial? Fair point, I could add "neutral" though as everyone seems to moan about them. |
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 11, 2023 11:37:45 GMT
via mobile
Post by Lobster on Mar 11, 2023 11:37:45 GMT
The BBC insist on being "impartial", but surely they only need to do this with what they actually broadcast? If Gary Lineker was ranting about politics on Match of the Day, I would understand it, but what difference does what he says on Twitter make to him being a presenter? They don't seem to connect with anyone, left or right. I'm hoping the days of the TV Licence are numbered. This is nonsense. The BBC is doomed. The Tories are now in charge and given their dismal track record for running everything else the corporation has no chance. On the Lineker issue, the hypocrisy from the bed wetting hard right is nauseating; they have no issue with Alan Sugar or Andrew Neil tweeting right wing nonsense or Jeremy Clarkson calling for striking workers to be shot in front of their families. In the case of Neil, its actually pertinent to his role as a political presenter as well, so he shouldn't be tweeting political views. Lineker is a football presenter so his views on the goverment are irrelevant. If anything you should get more annoyed about him being biased towards Leicester City FC. Also, with Clarkson, I think I'm right in saying Top Gear was never cancelled because of any of his views, but because of the way he behaved towards other staff. I don't know what part of racially abusing and physically assaulting a chef his fans think is acceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Mar 12, 2023 10:57:32 GMT
The Director General of the BBC was asked if any action would've been taken against Gary Lineker if he had tweeted in support of the UK migrant policy, and he said he wouldn't discuss hypothetical situations. Why not? If the BBC is serious about impartiality, surely the best way to illustrate guidelines is to discuss examples of what does and doesn't infringe upon them?
It leads me to infer that the answer is 'no', in which case it's not about impartiality, it's about not criticising the government.
|
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 12, 2023 14:11:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Mar 12, 2023 14:11:52 GMT
Obvious isn’t it. Was never about impartiality when the same Lineker tweeted “bin Corbyn”, Alan Sugar told everyone to vote for Boris Johnson, Alan Sugar again posted racist tweets about African football teams selling sunglasses on beaches, Andrew Neill editing a far right-wing magazine whilst being the main political anchor for the channel…
Before we even get into the various dalliances between BBC top brass and the Tories - loaning Johnson cash etc.
Was never ever about “impartiality” at all.
|
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 12, 2023 16:07:12 GMT
Post by Curva Nord on Mar 12, 2023 16:07:12 GMT
Are you two going to do anything about it bleat about it on the internet? I am guessing neither of you pay your license fee so you're not actually entitled to have a say where the money is spent or what opinions they put out
|
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 12, 2023 16:10:20 GMT
Post by avfo on Mar 12, 2023 16:10:20 GMT
The Director General of the BBC was asked if any action would've been taken against Gary Lineker if he had tweeted in support of the UK migrant policy, and he said he wouldn't discuss hypothetical situations. Why not? If the BBC is serious about impartiality, surely the best way to illustrate guidelines is to discuss examples of what does and doesn't infringe upon them? It leads me to infer that the answer is 'no', in which case it's not about impartiality, it's about not criticising the government. On the subject of impartiality, the official twitter account of BBC Sport NI 'liked' these tweets (Poots is the leader of the DUP and Kate Hoey is, well, Kate Hoey) -  |
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 12, 2023 16:23:36 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Mar 12, 2023 16:23:36 GMT
Kate Hoey literally proving his point - shutting down dissenting voices is a bit FASH isn’t it?.
She’s basically said: “He freelances for the BBC (amongst other broadcasters) so cannot post his personal opinion on his own personal social media.”
Nonsensical point.
And even if she meant it like Lineker is representing the BBC so should be careful what he says on social media… it’s a bit weird to lambast him for that particular tweet and yet ignore the racist shite spouted by the likes of Sugar.
|
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 12, 2023 18:38:48 GMT
Post by avfo on Mar 12, 2023 18:38:48 GMT
It was oh so different back in 2018, wonder what's changed - BBC spokesperson - " Gary is not involved in any news or political output for the BBC and as such any expression of his personal political views does not affect the BBC's impartiality." (Video includes some of his tweets back then including one on the treatment by some of young refugees) www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44957901 |
|
|
|
BBC
Mar 16, 2023 13:02:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Mar 16, 2023 13:02:39 GMT
Half a million public sector workers marching through London on strike yesterday - not a single second of footage on the BBC.
|
|
