Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Although GL is looney left, i believe he only commented on the govt "rhetoric".

Beradogs wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 8:57 am No. Observing that it’s like 1930’s Germany is clearly ridiculous while dragging economic migrants back from whence they came is a policy that has already been enacted in Australia.

Where did he say that it was like 1930s Germany?

spen666 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 1:51 am

ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:23 pm I would think Gary Lineker would consider sueing the BBC . If this thing isn't solved quickly.
...

Sue them for what?

Enforcing the terms of his engagement with the BBC?

Ahh - so what, exactly does it say in his contract? Please publish as you clearly have access to it.

Type high wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 3:13 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:28 pm

OyinbO wrote: ↑Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:18 pm Shearer out aswell now. I wonder who'll scab?

They'll get some eejit .

You putting yourself up for it then

They Want YOU.

DuvB wrote: ↑Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:00 pm Lineker needs to read up on 1930s and 1940s German history before he invokes any Nazi comparisons.

And you need to read up on EXACTLY what Lineker said.

The BBC have seriously made this into something it needn't have. And it's those who have agitated for its demise who will be rubbing their hands with glee.

On Thursday they were issuing statements they all was okay. And then yesterday they changed their tune. What happened to cause that pivot?

And if Lineker is in breach of his contract, then fine, deal with that. But apply that approach consistently with all other presenters (I.e. Alan Sugar).

I cant see GL working for the BBC again. He will not apologise....why should he, he's done nothing wrong, and the BBC will look weak if they just let him go back to MOTD, and the government wont let the BBC do that.
IMO, BBC is a government propaganda arm, and the government has full control of it, and its decisions.

As I said in an earlier post, others have posted highly political stuff, whilst working for the BBC, and they havent been sanctioned so why Lineker.
We have a government that just wont allow criticism of its policies, especially by a powerful leftie, and that is very reminiscent of 1930's Germany

Many on here and elsewhere saying they are looking forward to MOTD just showing the football. You can have that experience anyway by just fast forwarding the analysis now. Football has never been about just the game, that is why scores of screen time is devoted to talking and analysing about it. If the BBC, ITV, Sky, BT etc just showed the games or highlights it would mean the vast percentage of their output about football would be lost. There are radio stations that devote all of most of their coverage to it. There are countless online platforms, YouTube etc that add to the coverage. Online Facebook groups, Twitter and forums like this one are also adding to the football debate.

There is a hungry market for it and those on here who just want to watch the football and ditch the analysis are also adding to it by commenting.

I expect the viewing figures for tonight's MOTD will be fairly good, as people will be interested to see what it looks like. Showing just the highlights won't be sustainable as they are widely available elsewhere without any analysis

Football Focus off the schedule now as nobody wants to do it.
Interesting to to see what 5live Sport & Chappers do at 12.00. He is widely expected to get the Soccer Saturday gig anyway

It’s an interesting one.

I am always in favour of free speech under the law, so Gary Lineker has a right to his opinions, albeit the Nazi comparison was foolhardy at best in my view. It made me recall MP Andrew Bridgen’s likening of Covid vaccinations to the Holocaust, which caused an outrage and he subsequently apologised for.

The BBC should be impartial and needs to be seen as that. Lineker is one of its faces and with that comes responsibilities to uphold the impartiality line. If he isn’t happy with that restriction, despite his high pay, then don’t work for the BBC. Same for Shearer, Wright et al, MOTD is bigger than all of them.

I think at some point the BBC was going to have to take a stand, probably should have done so before so it wouldn’t have got to this point. From what I read it’s a grey area for non-news presenters, which is a poor state of affairs if so.

As to Chair Richard Sharp donating to the Tory party and helping with the Boris loan, same category for me, but multiple wrongs don’t make a right. Feel a little for Tim Davie here, for he has no power to remove Sharp, it’s a government appointment.

Just to confirm, I won't be on Match of the Day tonight.

EastDerehamO wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 10:11 am It’s an interesting one.

I am always in favour of free speech under the law, so Gary Lineker has a right to his opinions, albeit the Nazi comparison was foolhardy at best in my view. It made me recall MP Andrew Bridgen’s likening of Covid vaccinations to the Holocaust, which caused an outrage and he subsequently apologised for.

The BBC should be impartial and needs to be seen as that. Lineker is one of its faces and with that comes responsibilities to uphold the impartiality line. If he isn’t happy with that restriction, despite his high pay, then don’t work for the BBC. Same for Shearer, Wright et al, MOTD is bigger than all of them.

I think at some point the BBC was going to have to take a stand, probably should have done so before so it wouldn’t have got to this point. From what I read it’s a grey area for non-news presenters, which is a poor state of affairs if so.

As to Chair Richard Sharp donating to the Tory party and helping with the Boris loan, same category for me, but multiple wrongs don’t make a right. Feel a little for Tim Davie here, for he has no power to remove Sharp, it’s a government appointment.

Bridgen and Lineker weren't remotely similar, straw man to say otherwise. Saying the government's language around immigration is similar to that seen during the 30s shouldn't even be controversial, it's there in black and white. If people want to extrapolate that to the later years of Nazism, they can if they wish but people seem keen to gloss over the fact that Hitler didn't start up by saying "hey everyone, gonna kill all the Jews" but the rhetoric grew as he went.

Whereas comparing lockdown rules to the eventual event which accounted for millions and millions of Jews, Roma, LGBT, left wingers etc is clearly abhorrent.

That Phoenix FM, is how you do it .

Some people need to remember that the BBC can’t sack GL, as he’s freelance.

Also, no-one is impartial. No-one. We all have political views, but not everyone has the clout to air them to an audience. Lineker can claim that his fame is far more down to him being a world-famous footballer rather than being the host of a BBC programme, and he’d be right.

As has been pointed out by others, Suralun has been been tweeting pretty vile tweets for years now and still holds down a job at the BBC. Paxman, Robinson, Kuenssberg and others all have right-wing connections and have all held down full-time posts at the BBC, let alone being freelancers.

Personally I think that invoking “1930’s Germany” is always risky, however accurate it is (and I think Lineker was absolutely right) because the Tories and their media pals are always going to jump on it, but Lineker has been absolutely correct in standing his ground and facing them head-on. I doubt he’d be too upset if he didn’t present MOTD again if it meant that he could still speak his mind unhindered.

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 9:33 am

Type high wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 3:13 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:28 pm

They'll get some eejit .

You putting yourself up for it then

They Want YOU.

The BBC is too leftwing for me

Be great tonight to watch the games tonight without the opinionated crap they spout, a real bonus.

It’s genuinely impressive to see the level of solidarity on this amongst the BBC’s freelancers. They’ve rightly picked up on the hypocrisy underpinning this. It’s hilarious seeing the BBC having to report how they’re being told from all sides that they’ve made a major error.

I can actually see the BBC backing down over this. They left themselves wriggle room by saying he won’t return until there’s agreement about his social media use. I wouldn’t bet against that agreement actually being nothing more than a statement that Lineker’s views don’t necessarily reflect those of the BBC.

PJ is correct, too; noting the direct equivalents in language use isn’t expression of an opinion - I mean, there’s even an argument that racists would observe the similarities with great enthusiasm.

It’s a clever political tactic; be extreme, then call out anyone calling you extreme as unreasonable.

B.whitehouse+10more wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 10:51 am Be great tonight to watch the games tonight without the opinionated crap they spout, a real bonus.

Yeah, opinionated crap like “here is where the positioning of the defenders caused a problem for their team”. Eurgh football analysis. So woke!

Jeremy Clarkson in 2011 called for striking workers to be shot in front of their families. He said it “as a joke”, but it was a joke based on exaggerating his actual political opinion.

He wasnt suspended from Top Gear.

(Nor should he have been, IMO - it was Clarkson doing his schtick)

Yep, there were left wing voices calling for his head, attempting to “cancel” or whatever, but crucially, they were disregarded.

The problem with anyone being gleeful about a “cancellation” or a suspension or whatever you want to call it is that the precedent doesn’t necessarily only apply to your team

What next? Will the Beeb tell their employees they are not allowed to vote? This is the biggest loada of nonsense that has ever been stirred up. That old BBC employee George Orwell will be stirring in his grave. No doubt the BBC is Spring cleaning Room 101 in Bush House, right now. Just be careful what you say on here as, Big Brother might be watching you. Don't have any thoughts, we all know how dangerous they are. Remember that the Sun knows best.

Anyone got some examples of the sort of rhetoric 1930s Germany used? I have seen before propaganda books they published and the trashing of shop fronts

EastDerehamO wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 10:11 am It’s an interesting one.

I am always in favour of free speech under the law, so Gary Lineker has a right to his opinions, albeit the Nazi comparison was foolhardy at best in my view. It made me recall MP Andrew Bridgen’s likening of Covid vaccinations to the Holocaust, which caused an outrage and he subsequently apologised for.

The BBC should be impartial and needs to be seen as that. Lineker is one of its faces and with that comes responsibilities to uphold the impartiality line. If he isn’t happy with that restriction, despite his high pay, then don’t work for the BBC. Same for Shearer, Wright et al, MOTD is bigger than all of them.

I think at some point the BBC was going to have to take a stand, probably should have done so before so it wouldn’t have got to this point. From what I read it’s a grey area for non-news presenters, which is a poor state of affairs if so.

As to Chair Richard Sharp donating to the Tory party and helping with the Boris loan, same category for me, but multiple wrongs don’t make a right. Feel a little for Tim Davie here, for he has no power to remove Sharp, it’s a government appointment.

I think it would quite informative to actually explore whether Lineker has "broken the BBC's guidelines" etc etc, and whether football pundits should keep out of politics - since those seem to be the main attack lines here. Perhaps it would be useful to look at the BBC's Editorial Guidelines - since some on here and elsewhere seem to be interpreting them somewhat loosely (see my emphasis above as an example)

BBC's Editorial Guidelines - the relevant guideline here is this:

"15.3.13 Where individuals identify themselves as being linked with the BBC, or are programme makers, editorial staff, reporters or presenters primarily associated with the BBC, their public expressions of opinion have the potential to compromise the BBC’s impartiality and to damage its reputation. This includes the use of social media and writing letters to the press. Opinions expressed on social media are put into the public domain, can be shared and are searchable...

The risk is greater where the public expressions of opinion overlap with the area of the individual’s work. The risk is lower where an individual is expressing views publicly on an unrelated area, for example, a sports or science presenter expressing views on politics or the arts."

So the guidelines actually indicate that it's worse for someone like Kuenssberg, Neil, Bruce and (arguably) Sugar to spout personal opinions on politics - given that politics is their sphere and so their opinions are more likely to compromise the BBC's impartiality. The guidelines specifically indicate that Impartiality is less at risk where it is "for example, a sports or science presenter expressing views on politics or the arts"

Just turned on 5live to listen to.....but no Fighting Talk now!!!

Lineker must have his feet up with the biggest smile on his face

Jason Mohammad will not present Final Score................If BBC employees are told they are not allowed to express a Political opinion. There will be a long list of people thinking about their future with the Beeb.

Whoops .