THIS episode on Hue (about 40km from where I am now) is just superb TV. One of the greatest presenters ever. Able to tell entire histories through food. And he loved Indochina and he loved Vietnam as any wise traveler does, and likewise he loved Vietnamese noodle soups
Why the F did he top himself? All that wisdom. Sad
You're very like him, you think, isn't it?
He’s a trillion times more famous than me, but there are uncanny and undeniable echoes
"uncanny and undeniable echoes" ... yes I bet.
Rather like with me and Sean Bean.
You’re a retired accountant, Sean Bean is a famous actor
I’m a person paid to travel the world luxuriously and tell the world about it, aaaand… that’s what Bourdain did (more famously, coz he was on TV and I’m in print)
He was also an ex smack addict with a criminal record. Ditto ditto ditto
He wrote a bestselling book. Er, ditto
And so on. Like I say, he was and is billions of times more famous than me, but there ARE similarities. You and Sean Bean, not so much. To be fair
On the contrary, the similarities between me and Bean (Sean not Mr) are just as strong and probably stronger.
Same age, both from the coalfields of South Yorkshire, both now in the monied no-man's-land of North London, he via acting school, me via an unusual mastery of double entry bookkeeping.
It's the same journey and we've done it - in a sense - together.
Bet you've never played Mellors opposite Joely Richardson in Lady Chatterley's Lover, though.
This is true. And he's never drawn up a spotless extended trial balance. I only claim (to quote Leon) "uncanny and undeniable echoes".
It's a grim day for the BBC, and its independence, with both the Attenborough and Lineker stories, but it's been also a long time in coming, so people shouldn't be too surprised.
People who describe it as the BBC's "nervousness" misunderstand the overall situation. It's a very similar situation to the early 1990's, when there were so many Conservative placemen in senior positions in the BBC's administration that the corporation couldn't help but shift to the right. I'm hopeful that the changes, and the effects of the compromising of the BBC's journalistic room for manoeuvre will be less long-lasting than in the early 1990's, though ; then, and at that timeframe, Birt did permanent damage to the BBC's creative ethos, and intellectual ambitions with his McKinsey-led restructuring, whereas now I think we are looking at a short-term tantrum by a government and its appointees that are soon to be voted out, on more of a short-term and political, rather than long-term and so creative, or structural basis.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
Sugar is arguably more impressive than Lineker. The Amstrad was genuinely quite revolutionary
Lineker was a really good striker who… didn’t win anything for England. Ever
Either way we can probably find some agreement that: if the bulk of your income derives from the BBC then you shut the fuck up about politics on social media. Whether you are left or right, that must be the deal. The BBC cannot continue long, otherwise, as it won’t have national consent
Nor is this impossible. Jeremy Paxman had a massively long, successful bbc career. I still don’t know his politics
Rules that are equally enforced are not a problem. The problem arises when the BBC allows its presenters to express right wing opinions without consequence but fires them when they express non-right wing ones. I mean, it's not as if Lineker is even left-wing. He is, as you say, a bleeding heart liberal
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
THIS episode on Hue (about 40km from where I am now) is just superb TV. One of the greatest presenters ever. Able to tell entire histories through food. And he loved Indochina and he loved Vietnam as any wise traveler does, and likewise he loved Vietnamese noodle soups
Why the F did he top himself? All that wisdom. Sad
Loved Glasgow too, so top man obviously. In the sadly departed Rogano’s in which my newly married folks dined on their way to their honeymoon. The honeymoon was in Belfast, the marriage was doomed from the start.
I discovered something today re Glasgow and food that really got me hooping and hollering. The Doner Kebab Pie! Is that a product from the gods or what.
New one on me but I like the sound of it. If it'll go in a pie or between 2 halves of a roll, we'll do it. In fact..
Pie night down here. Out to 27 in Kingsbridge tonight. Soup, pie and a pud, £20 - for Jamie's soon-to-be-Michelin-starred quality food.
Hopefully better than his Glasgow restaurant food then.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Except that only seems to apply if you express opinions the government doesn't like. BBC presenter Alan Sugar is free to urge people to vote Tory, as he did in 2019, and to criticise Mick Lynch and the RMT, as he did earlier this year.
Gary's 'left liberal centrism' is also fine if aimed Left rather than Right. "Bin Corbyn" was one of his tweet themes. No probs.
Could the BBC and the Conservatives have played this any better for Gary's narrative? He is minted, he doesn't need the money, and now he's a martyr sacrificed by a partisan BBC on behalf of the much disliked "nasty" party.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Care to explain Andrew Neil's long and high profile BBC career then?
That is fairly simple - Andrew Neil is equally tough with his guests, whether they are Conservatives or Labour. He may have his own views but, in his role, he is neutral. If you didn't know his politics, you wouldn't be able to guess it from his interviews.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Emily Matilis who lets her contempt for anything that is not aligned with her views shine through. You can guess her politics a mile off.
Though that doesn't work in this case- I don't think that Lineker has been anything other than scrupulously neutral on MotD. Unless I have missed the bits about how Liverpool is still smarting from the effects of Thatcherism, whereas Sunderland is triving thanks to Brexit benefits.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Except that only seems to apply if you express opinions the government doesn't like. BBC presenter Alan Sugar is free to urge people to vote Tory, as he did in 2019, and to criticise Mick Lynch and the RMT, as he did earlier this year.
Gary's 'left liberal centrism' is also fine if aimed Left rather than Right. "Bin Corbyn" was one of his tweet themes. No probs.
No, I have a problem with that as well. If lineker said that, then fuck him, again
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Care to explain Andrew Neil's long and high profile BBC career then?
That is fairly simple - Andrew Neil is equally tough with his guests, whether they are Conservatives or Labour. He may have his own views but, in his role, he is neutral. If you didn't know his politics, you wouldn't be able to guess it from his interviews.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Emily Matilis who lets her contempt for anything that is not aligned with her views shine through. You can guess her politics a mile off.
Though that doesn't work in this case- I don't think that Lineker has been anything other than scrupulously neutral on MotD. Unless I have missed the bits about how Liverpool is still smarting from the effects of Thatcherism, whereas Sunderland is triving thanks to Brexit benefits.
You jest. But you raise an interesting point. Lineker ( and Shearer) act as valuable balance to an array of LFC and MUFC inclined pundits.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
What kind of place is Marin County, politically? Well-informed Americans will know the answer, but this might be news in the UK: It's full of wealthy leftists.
Which is why the couple accused here of "trying it on" where shocked at the low-ball appraisal, that discounted the actual value of the property by 1/3.
They could have simply got a second appraisal instead of setting up a pretext for a lawsuit.
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
You're reading the room wrong on this. Lots of retired Tories love Lineker on MoTD. He's particularly popular with women. They see him as a footballing icon, a charmer, and if they were pushed to ascribe political views to him, a centrist dad type, not a leftie firebrand. They neither know nor care what he says on Twitter, despite the right-wing press's best efforts to make them.
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
Or the left wing press fluffing Lineker but going after Clarkson. Neither side comes out of these spats well. But people see virtue in their own side and vice in the other side.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
FFS - that really is the dinner party guest list from hell. Bar a couple.
Alright then. Let’s just cancel the BBC entirely. Have a bunch of channels paid for by subscribers/viewers. That’s more honest and maybe healthier. Enough
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Care to explain Andrew Neil's long and high profile BBC career then?
That is fairly simple - Andrew Neil is equally tough with his guests, whether they are Conservatives or Labour. He may have his own views but, in his role, he is neutral. If you didn't know his politics, you wouldn't be able to guess it from his interviews.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Emily Matilis who lets her contempt for anything that is not aligned with her views shine through. You can guess her politics a mile off.
Though that doesn't work in this case- I don't think that Lineker has been anything other than scrupulously neutral on MotD. Unless I have missed the bits about how Liverpool is still smarting from the effects of Thatcherism, whereas Sunderland is triving thanks to Brexit benefits.
Neil's job was a political commentator. When he was hired, the BBC - and everyone - knew what they were getting. The key thing was whether he performed with impartiality when it came to his key role, which he did and about which there seems to be little dispute. There is also the possibility (probability) that his contract with the BBC may have specifically allowed him to express political views outside the BBC, as otherwise it would impact his other contractual obligations (eg The Spectator, writing columns).
Lineker is a different case altogether. He's a sports commentator. He has nothing to do with politics in terms of his job.
"... electric bikes are known as ‘electrically assisted pedal cycles’ (EAPCs). You do not need a licence to ride one and it does not need to be registered, taxed or insured."
According to James May the pedal is the important bit there.
If the electric motor only runs when you pedal, it's a bike.
If it runs without you pedaling, it's a motorbike, and not only needs tax and insurance, it needs a license plate as well
Most electric bicycles are power assisted; another word you have to pedal, but the electric motor makes it a lot easier
Yes, much easier for feckwads to mow down pedestrians, they are a menace in downtown Seattle these days.
Out of interest, how many pedestrians have been killed by e bikes in the last year in Seattle?
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
Max Hastings now backs Starmer, Hislop is a liberal, Greer anti Tory.
Of the above only Farage, Hartley Brewer and Liddle and Phillips could be called hard right.
Even Peter Hitchens was anti the Iraq War and wants to renationalise the trains
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
One criticises our democratically elected government. The other… doesn’t.
Good grief! Is criticising the democratically elected government verboten now?
What sort of a country have we become? What happened to free-speech?
Perhaps explain's Leon's fondness for Ron DeSantis? Libertarian turned Oligarch, modeling his politik on Viktor Orban.
The BBC is a state broadcaster. You don’t have that in America (perhaps wisely, who knows). I believe the BBC as we know it is doomed. Sadly. But if it is to survive it needs to be rigorously impartial in party politics. All employees (freelancers or otherwise) who provably gain the majority of their income from the BBC should be told, on pain of sacking, no political opinions on social media
And this should apply to left and right. To Sugar and Lineker. Just STFU as long as you work for the beeb
Seriously, have you listened to, watched or read anything from the BBC in decades?
Fifty years ago the BBC may have thought its duty was to be factual and objective. Nowadays, it clearly thinks its mission is to arrive at some kind of "consensus opinion" and propagate that. Lineker's crime isn't expressing an opinion - it's expressing an opinion that isn't the opinion the BBC has arrived at. And God knows the process by which the BBC arrives at that "received opinion", which is explained in condescending and partonising tones to the public on its website. Particularly when its chairman has been appointed following murky dealings with the prime minister as a result of which nearly £1 million changed hands.
The BBC needs either to go back to being strictly objective and factual, or else to express a diversity of opinion. But adopting a corporate opinion, and expressing only that - and sacking anyone who won't toe that line - is the worst of all worlds.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
One criticises our democratically elected government. The other… doesn’t.
Good grief! Is criticising the democratically elected government verboten now?
What sort of a country have we become? What happened to free-speech?
Perhaps explain's Leon's fondness for Ron DeSantis? Libertarian turned Oligarch, modeling his politik on Viktor Orban.
The BBC is a state broadcaster. You don’t have that in America (perhaps wisely, who knows). I believe the BBC as we know it is doomed. Sadly. But if it is to survive it needs to be rigorously impartial in party politics. All employees (freelancers or otherwise) who provably gain the majority of their income from the BBC should be told, on pain of sacking, no political opinions on social media
And this should apply to left and right. To Sugar and Lineker. Just STFU as long as you work for the beeb
The license fee needs to go, and ASAP.
As for the BBC it’s survival should depend on its ability to raise revenue without a license fee.
THIS episode on Hue (about 40km from where I am now) is just superb TV. One of the greatest presenters ever. Able to tell entire histories through food. And he loved Indochina and he loved Vietnam as any wise traveler does, and likewise he loved Vietnamese noodle soups
Why the F did he top himself? All that wisdom. Sad
You're very like him, you think, isn't it?
He’s a trillion times more famous than me, but there are uncanny and undeniable echoes
"uncanny and undeniable echoes" ... yes I bet.
Rather like with me and Sean Bean.
You’re a retired accountant, Sean Bean is a famous actor
I’m a person paid to travel the world luxuriously and tell the world about it, aaaand… that’s what Bourdain did (more famously, coz he was on TV and I’m in print)
He was also an ex smack addict with a criminal record. Ditto ditto ditto
He wrote a bestselling book. Er, ditto
And so on. Like I say, he was and is billions of times more famous than me, but there ARE similarities. You and Sean Bean, not so much. To be fair
On the contrary, the similarities between me and Bean (Sean not Mr) are just as strong and probably stronger.
Same age, both from the coalfields of South Yorkshire, both now in the monied no-man's-land of North London, he via acting school, me via an unusual mastery of double entry bookkeeping.
It's the same journey and we've done it - in a sense - together.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Care to explain Andrew Neil's long and high profile BBC career then?
That is fairly simple - Andrew Neil is equally tough with his guests, whether they are Conservatives or Labour. He may have his own views but, in his role, he is neutral. If you didn't know his politics, you wouldn't be able to guess it from his interviews.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Emily Matilis who lets her contempt for anything that is not aligned with her views shine through. You can guess her politics a mile off.
Though that doesn't work in this case- I don't think that Lineker has been anything other than scrupulously neutral on MotD. Unless I have missed the bits about how Liverpool is still smarting from the effects of Thatcherism, whereas Sunderland is triving thanks to Brexit benefits.
Neil's job was a political commentator. When he was hired, the BBC - and everyone - knew what they were getting. The key thing was whether he performed with impartiality when it came to his key role, which he did and about which there seems to be little dispute. There is also the possibility (probability) that his contract with the BBC may have specifically allowed him to express political views outside the BBC, as otherwise it would impact his other contractual obligations (eg The Spectator, writing columns).
Lineker is a different case altogether. He's a sports commentator. He has nothing to do with politics in terms of his job.
Which is why he never mentions politics on MotD, which is his BBC job.
Alright then. Let’s just cancel the BBC entirely. Have a bunch of channels paid for by subscribers/viewers. That’s more honest and maybe healthier. Enough
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
Think Lineker out of line with comparisons between this government and Nazi Germany, when the measures are merely approved of by actual fascists like Salvini.
Alright then. Let’s just cancel the BBC entirely. Have a bunch of channels paid for by subscribers/viewers. That’s more honest and maybe healthier. Enough
We can have a UK Fox and a UK CNN. Sorted
Have you ever heard of ITV, Channel 4 and so on? But maybe you spend too little time in this country.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
One criticises our democratically elected government. The other… doesn’t.
Good grief! Is criticising the democratically elected government verboten now?
What sort of a country have we become? What happened to free-speech?
Perhaps explain's Leon's fondness for Ron DeSantis? Libertarian turned Oligarch, modeling his politik on Viktor Orban.
The BBC is a state broadcaster. You don’t have that in America (perhaps wisely, who knows). I believe the BBC as we know it is doomed. Sadly. But if it is to survive it needs to be rigorously impartial in party politics. All employees (freelancers or otherwise) who provably gain the majority of their income from the BBC should be told, on pain of sacking, no political opinions on social media
And this should apply to left and right. To Sugar and Lineker. Just STFU as long as you work for the beeb
The license fee needs to go, and ASAP.
As for the BBC it’s survival should depend on its ability to raise revenue without a license fee.
The beeb is fucked anyway. It cannot survive via a poll tax. These disputes merely hasten the inevitable
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
Max Hastings now backs Starmer, Hislop is a liberal, Greer anti Tory.
Of the above only Farage, Hartley Brewer and Liddle and Phillips could be called hard right.
Even Peter Hitchens was anti the Iraq War and wants to renationalise the trains
"now" backs Starmer? That's not over the whole of the period 1 January 2020 to date. So that's pathetic.
And remember your idea of what is left and what is right is drawn from your perspective. I mean. you keep calling me a hard leftie but I'm as centrist dad as one gets on PB!
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
FFS - that really is the dinner party guest list from hell. Bar a couple.
God, I know. I'd be absolutely sprinting (!) to get the seat next to Bonnie and if I failed I think I'd have to just get drunk.
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
This is going to run, and may not run to the BBC's or the government's advantage.
When he worked for the BBC Neil was largely neutral, certainly on British politics
You think the Spectator is neutral?
Of course it is - the Spectator’s recent most read article was by a lefty woke Travel writer called Sean something. He’s too far left for the guardian so I think it shows true balance at the Speccie perfectly.
Think Lineker out of line with comparisons between this government and Nazi Germany, when the measures are merely approved of by actual fascists like Salvini.
I was trying to work out why you had picked that particular PBer out.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
Max Hastings now backs Starmer, Hislop is a liberal, Greer anti Tory.
Of the above only Farage, Hartley Brewer and Liddle and Phillips could be called hard right.
Even Peter Hitchens was anti the Iraq War and wants to renationalise the trains
Most of them are professional arseholes who make money from voicing ignorant obnoxious opinions on national platforms, often while complaining that they are being cancelled or that nobody is allowed to say whatever moronic shit they have just said on national TV for money.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
Honestly, slagging off the national treasure Sir David Attenborough is going to be a huge vote loser for the Tories.
That was the BBC's decision not the Government's and the backlash more likely to be from RefUK, Farage, GB News and the populist right press than the Sunak and Hunt Government which is pro action to protect the environment and natural world like Attenborough
Come off it. When the RNLI was attacked, the most vicious attack was by the Tory Government putting laws in place in the relevant Parliamentary Bill to make its rescuing the Wrong People seriously illegal. Edit: wothdrawn, but not till after a very long time. The threat was very clear.
That was under the Johnson government, not the Sunak government
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
Vocal Thatcherite Jim Davidson presented Big Break on BBC One for a decade, with a side hustle in end of the pier racist standup.
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
Max Hastings now backs Starmer, Hislop is a liberal, Greer anti Tory.
Of the above only Farage, Hartley Brewer and Liddle and Phillips could be called hard right.
Even Peter Hitchens was anti the Iraq War and wants to renationalise the trains
Liddle hard right? He's classic liberal - libertarian. Very involved in the SDP.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Care to explain Andrew Neil's long and high profile BBC career then?
That is fairly simple - Andrew Neil is equally tough with his guests, whether they are Conservatives or Labour. He may have his own views but, in his role, he is neutral. If you didn't know his politics, you wouldn't be able to guess it from his interviews.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Emily Matilis who lets her contempt for anything that is not aligned with her views shine through. You can guess her politics a mile off.
Though that doesn't work in this case- I don't think that Lineker has been anything other than scrupulously neutral on MotD. Unless I have missed the bits about how Liverpool is still smarting from the effects of Thatcherism, whereas Sunderland is triving thanks to Brexit benefits.
He has clearly betrayed his country, in the wise judgment of our Home Secretary.
THIS episode on Hue (about 40km from where I am now) is just superb TV. One of the greatest presenters ever. Able to tell entire histories through food. And he loved Indochina and he loved Vietnam as any wise traveler does, and likewise he loved Vietnamese noodle soups
Why the F did he top himself? All that wisdom. Sad
You're very like him, you think, isn't it?
He’s a trillion times more famous than me, but there are uncanny and undeniable echoes
"uncanny and undeniable echoes" ... yes I bet.
Rather like with me and Sean Bean.
You’re a retired accountant, Sean Bean is a famous actor
I’m a person paid to travel the world luxuriously and tell the world about it, aaaand… that’s what Bourdain did (more famously, coz he was on TV and I’m in print)
He was also an ex smack addict with a criminal record. Ditto ditto ditto
He wrote a bestselling book. Er, ditto
And so on. Like I say, he was and is billions of times more famous than me, but there ARE similarities. You and Sean Bean, not so much. To be fair
On the contrary, the similarities between me and Bean (Sean not Mr) are just as strong and probably stronger.
Same age, both from the coalfields of South Yorkshire, both now in the monied no-man's-land of North London, he via acting school, me via an unusual mastery of double entry bookkeeping.
It's the same journey and we've done it - in a sense - together.
So much is the same as mid-1990's ; a BBC stuffed to the gills with Conservative placemen, a government soon to be voted out in a landslide.
All we might need is the second dawning of Britpop, to complete the holy visions.
Yes, that well known bastion of Tory politics the BBC
I pity the BBC.
It cannot win
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground and generally does on national issues. On local issues it’s news is little more than recycled press releases from charities and lobbyists.
High time the licence fee was abolished and it sought its own funding. Especially when viewing numbers are falling
I see Fiona Bruce was defending some Tory wifebeater on QT last night. Yet she won't be sacked.
QT is a right wing ghetto now. The bias is almost laughable.
Ludicrous, almost the entire audience last night was anti the Government's asylum boats policy despite every poll showing most voters support it. Even if it was from North London.
Ken Clarke, Richard Madeley, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on the panel, none of them hard right
Must admit I didn't see it. But you can't look at just one episode. The 16 non-MP panellists with the highest number of appearances on Question Time in the 21st century are:
Rod Liddle – 9 Max Hastings – 9 Camilla Tominey – 9 Kate Andrews – 11 Tim Stanley – 12 Isabel Oakeshott – 13 Fraser Nelson – 4 David Starkey – 12 Bonnie Greer – 13 Ian Hislop – 14 Julia Hartley Brewer – 17 Janet Street-Porter – 19 Peter Hitchens – 23 Piers Morgan – 24 Melanie Phillips – 28 Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
Max Hastings now backs Starmer, Hislop is a liberal, Greer anti Tory.
Of the above only Farage, Hartley Brewer and Liddle and Phillips could be called hard right.
Even Peter Hitchens was anti the Iraq War and wants to renationalise the trains
Liddle hard right? He's classic liberal - libertarian. Very involved in the SDP.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
One criticises our democratically elected government. The other… doesn’t.
Good grief! Is criticising the democratically elected government verboten now?
What sort of a country have we become? What happened to free-speech?
Perhaps explain's Leon's fondness for Ron DeSantis? Libertarian turned Oligarch, modeling his politik on Viktor Orban.
The BBC is a state broadcaster. You don’t have that in America (perhaps wisely, who knows). I believe the BBC as we know it is doomed. Sadly. But if it is to survive it needs to be rigorously impartial in party politics. All employees (freelancers or otherwise) who provably gain the majority of their income from the BBC should be told, on pain of sacking, no political opinions on social media
And this should apply to left and right. To Sugar and Lineker. Just STFU as long as you work for the beeb
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
One criticises our democratically elected government. The other… doesn’t.
Good grief! Is criticising the democratically elected government verboten now?
What sort of a country have we become? What happened to free-speech?
Perhaps explain's Leon's fondness for Ron DeSantis? Libertarian turned Oligarch, modeling his politik on Viktor Orban.
The BBC is a state broadcaster. You don’t have that in America (perhaps wisely, who knows). I believe the BBC as we know it is doomed. Sadly. But if it is to survive it needs to be rigorously impartial in party politics. All employees (freelancers or otherwise) who provably gain the majority of their income from the BBC should be told, on pain of sacking, no political opinions on social media
And this should apply to left and right. To Sugar and Lineker. Just STFU as long as you work for the beeb
The license fee needs to go, and ASAP.
As for the BBC it’s survival should depend on its ability to raise revenue without a license fee.
The BBC's brand name would give it huge power to go to markets to raise cash. I think a subscription based model and member ownership, along the lines of the National Trust, is the way forward if it is to have a long-term future.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
This is going to run, and may not run to the BBC's or the government's advantage.
Well, as reported by the BBC the decision that he was going to "step back" came from them, not him, and they didn't claim he had agreed to it. Not so much incorrect, as wrapped up in so much nonsensical jargon as to try to disguise the fact that they'd sacked him.
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
Sugar is arguably more impressive than Lineker. The Amstrad was genuinely quite revolutionary
OK so Sugar made a decent guitar that was quite popular at the time. Does that enable him to pretend to be some kind of business guru for the rest of his life?
Guitar? You may wish to recalculate using your Amstrad calculator!
His violins are legendary, though.
Sugar's greatest innovation was a cheap word processor incompatible with anything else. Back in the day I used to scratch a few bob here and there translating Amstrad WP files to PC or Mac for onward editing. In retrospect I might have realised it would be short-lived.
So much is the same as mid-1990's ; a BBC stuffed to the gills with Conservative placemen, a government soon to be voted out in a landslide.
All we might need is the second dawning of Britpop, to complete the holy visions.
Yes, that well known bastion of Tory politics the BBC
I pity the BBC.
It cannot win
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground and generally does on national issues. On local issues it’s news is little more than recycled press releases from charities and lobbyists.
High time the licence fee was abolished and it sought its own funding. Especially when viewing numbers are falling
No, it shifts from right to left and back ; I would say that's more of an empirical fact. You now have a much larger number of right-of-centre ( on economic matters at least ) staff in in its journalistic staffing positions, and a large number of directly handpicked Tory placemen on the administrative front, just as when Birt changed its creative direction in the mid-1990's.
New Labour did a certain amount of nobbling too , but generally much less concertedly so, as it saw the BBC as less of an "issue" for its supporters' and their base. I think in the long-term the answer is that all these appointments have to be taken out of the hands of central government.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Except that only seems to apply if you express opinions the government doesn't like. BBC presenter Alan Sugar is free to urge people to vote Tory, as he did in 2019, and to criticise Mick Lynch and the RMT, as he did earlier this year.
Gary's 'left liberal centrism' is also fine if aimed Left rather than Right. "Bin Corbyn" was one of his tweet themes. No probs.
Could the BBC and the Conservatives have played this any better for Gary's narrative? He is minted, he doesn't need the money, and now he's a martyr sacrificed by a partisan BBC on behalf of the much disliked "nasty" party.
Yep he'll be luving it, I'd have thought. He was much nearer the end than the beginning of his MOTD time in any case.
So much is the same as mid-1990's ; a BBC stuffed to the gills with Conservative placemen, a government soon to be voted out in a landslide.
All we might need is the second dawning of Britpop, to complete the holy visions.
Yes, that well known bastion of Tory politics the BBC
I pity the BBC.
It cannot win
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground and generally does on national issues. On local issues it’s news is little more than recycled press releases from charities and lobbyists.
High time the licence fee was abolished and it sought its own funding. Especially when viewing numbers are falling
Without licence fee funding the BBC would collapse. It might get some subscribing to pay for Dancing on Ice or Attenborough (while he remains alive) and the odd drama like Gold and The Bodyguard but that is about it.
Not having adverts is one of the few advantages the BBC now still has over rivals with viewers
Alright then. Let’s just cancel the BBC entirely. Have a bunch of channels paid for by subscribers/viewers. That’s more honest and maybe healthier. Enough
Andrew Neil is a more interesting case. Damn good interviewer, willing to ask difficult questions of his own side. But nobody could pretend he was a neutral.
He was at the core of the Beeb's poltical coverage for a couple of decades, and that was considered OK.
It's true that he's not there now, he left in Autumn 2020. But that's not that long ago... what's changed since then?
Meanwhile, NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.
That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.
This is going to run, and may not run to the BBC's or the government's advantage.
Well, as reported by the BBC the decision that he was going to "step back" came from them, not him, and they didn't claim he had agreed to it. Not so much incorrect, as wrapped up in so much nonsensical jargon as to try to disguise the fact that they'd sacked him.
The BBC are going to have to pay Gary a few million to not front a few TV shows.
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
Sugar is arguably more impressive than Lineker. The Amstrad was genuinely quite revolutionary
OK so Sugar made a decent guitar that was quite popular at the time. Does that enable him to pretend to be some kind of business guru for the rest of his life?
Guitar? You may wish to recalculate using your Amstrad calculator!
His violins are legendary, though.
Sugar's greatest innovation was a cheap word processor incompatible with anything else. Back in the day I used to scratch a few bob here and there translating Amstrad WP files to PC or Mac for onward editing. In retrospect I might have realised it would be short-lived.
I adapted mine with a PC drive to do that myself! - posting the 5.25 inch discs to editors in many a magazine or newspaper or academic journal. Saved a lot of money on having to buy a pukka PC till prices came down.
So much is the same as mid-1990's ; a BBC stuffed to the gills with Conservative placemen, a government soon to be voted out in a landslide.
All we might need is the second dawning of Britpop, to complete the holy visions.
Yes, that well known bastion of Tory politics the BBC
I pity the BBC.
It cannot win
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground and generally does on national issues. On local issues it’s news is little more than recycled press releases from charities and lobbyists.
High time the licence fee was abolished and it sought its own funding. Especially when viewing numbers are falling
Without licence fee funding the BBC would collapse. It might get some subscribing to pay for Dancing on Ice or Attenborough (while he remains alive) and the odd drama like Gold and The Bodyguard but that is about it.
Not having adverts is one of the few advantages the BBC now still has over rivals with viewers
Of course it will collapse. That’s what the BBCphobes desire.
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Except that only seems to apply if you express opinions the government doesn't like. BBC presenter Alan Sugar is free to urge people to vote Tory, as he did in 2019, and to criticise Mick Lynch and the RMT, as he did earlier this year.
Gary's 'left liberal centrism' is also fine if aimed Left rather than Right. "Bin Corbyn" was one of his tweet themes. No probs.
Could the BBC and the Conservatives have played this any better for Gary's narrative? He is minted, he doesn't need the money, and now he's a martyr sacrificed by a partisan BBC on behalf of the much disliked "nasty" party.
Yep he'll be luving it, I'd have thought. He was much nearer the end than the beginning of his MOTD time in any case.
Paging Mr Lineker and Mr Wright, I have Sky on the line for you.
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground ...
That's the point. It tries to propagate a certain "centrist" opinion, and to enforce uniformity in that. That's not in the least the same thing as being factual and objective.
Linekar steps down from motd. Where's my tiny violin when I need it?
Tories descend to Nazi-style censorship.
Yes, it sort of proves his point.
I don't care one way or another but the double standards of the right wing press defending the right of free speech for Farage and Yaxley-Lennon, and cheering the fall of Lineker is a joyous irony.
When Alan Sugar takes to Twitter to slag off Mick Lynch, that’s fine.
But when Gary Lineker tweets critically of government policy, that’s a breach of impartiality.
So by Saturday the only football pundit willing to present will be David Mellor or David Icke.
Wait, didn't Mellor used to present 606?
The original presenter of "red hot soccer chat", if my memory is accurate...
Didn't Danny Baker present it first, before one of his many sackings?
That;'s true, but the first Baker season wasn't really the same show, I believe - more a Banny Baker show with some phone-in content; Mellor redefined it as a football phone-in focused entirely on the day's games, AIUI.
BBC Licence fee frozen in April 22 and April 23 but rises in line with CPI again from April 24.
But nobody is on the ball to realise it's historically always been done on the average of CPI from 18 months to 6 months before the increase date.
So for the April 24 increase they take CPI for Oct 22, Nov 22, Dec 22 ........... Sept 23 and average the 12 figures.
So the current very high CPI will be in the figures - so far we have 11.1, 10.7, 10.5, 10.1 with eight figures to come. Even if CPI now falls rapidly the average is surely going to be around 8% to 9%.
So the question is - will the Govt give the BBC 8% or 9% in April 24 or not? No surprise the BBC is going to be very, very complicit in the months ahead!
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
Sugar is arguably more impressive than Lineker. The Amstrad was genuinely quite revolutionary
OK so Sugar made a decent guitar that was quite popular at the time. Does that enable him to pretend to be some kind of business guru for the rest of his life?
Guitar? You may wish to recalculate using your Amstrad calculator!
His violins are legendary, though.
Sugar's greatest innovation was a cheap word processor incompatible with anything else. Back in the day I used to scratch a few bob here and there translating Amstrad WP files to PC or Mac for onward editing. In retrospect I might have realised it would be short-lived.
Yes undoubtedly the WP systems were the real cash cow. His PC range was pretty successful too (I bought one). The violins has issues - a bit Amstradivarious!
The problem isn’t Linekers tweet. It’s that he threatens to be a significant player in the new media business, with interests such as the “rest is politics” podcast.
There’s one helluva media battle being fought. Entrenched interests want to kill the upstarts.
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
Sugar is arguably more impressive than Lineker. The Amstrad was genuinely quite revolutionary
OK so Sugar made a decent guitar that was quite popular at the time. Does that enable him to pretend to be some kind of business guru for the rest of his life?
Guitar? You may wish to recalculate using your Amstrad calculator!
His violins are legendary, though.
Sugar's greatest innovation was a cheap word processor incompatible with anything else. Back in the day I used to scratch a few bob here and there translating Amstrad WP files to PC or Mac for onward editing. In retrospect I might have realised it would be short-lived.
I adapted mine with a PC drive to do that myself! - posting the 5.25 inch discs to editors in many a magazine or newspaper or academic journal. Saved a lot of money on having to buy a pukka PC till prices came down.
Alan Sugar epitomised why the UK gets nowhere in many fields in tech.
Cheapest possible product, barely developed, chuck it over the wall.
No actual knowledge of what he was trying to sell.
So much is the same as mid-1990's ; a BBC stuffed to the gills with Conservative placemen, a government soon to be voted out in a landslide.
All we might need is the second dawning of Britpop, to complete the holy visions.
Yes, that well known bastion of Tory politics the BBC
I pity the BBC.
It cannot win
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground and generally does on national issues. On local issues it’s news is little more than recycled press releases from charities and lobbyists.
High time the licence fee was abolished and it sought its own funding. Especially when viewing numbers are falling
Without licence fee funding the BBC would collapse. It might get some subscribing to pay for Dancing on Ice or Attenborough (while he remains alive) and the odd drama like Gold and The Bodyguard but that is about it.
Not having adverts is one of the few advantages the BBC now still has over rivals with viewers
Without Lineker we can all pay a reduced license fee...
I don't understand what all the fuss is about with Lineker, the BBC and free speech. Seems fairly simple to me.
If you work for the public funded BBC then you have to be politically impartial and can't say whatever you like on Twitter.
If you don't work for the BBC then you can say what you like.
So, if you want to say what you want on Twitter don't work for the BBC.
Care to explain Andrew Neil's long and high profile BBC career then?
That is fairly simple - Andrew Neil is equally tough with his guests, whether they are Conservatives or Labour. He may have his own views but, in his role, he is neutral. If you didn't know his politics, you wouldn't be able to guess it from his interviews.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Emily Matilis who lets her contempt for anything that is not aligned with her views shine through. You can guess her politics a mile off.
Though that doesn't work in this case- I don't think that Lineker has been anything other than scrupulously neutral on MotD. Unless I have missed the bits about how Liverpool is still smarting from the effects of Thatcherism, whereas Sunderland is triving thanks to Brexit benefits.
Exactly. I happen to agree with KitchCab that Neil did a good job of keeping his very strong right wing partiality out of his tv performances for the Beeb but this is not really the point here.
Maybe he's realised that although he has the right to do so, alienating half his audience isn't a sensible idea.
It’s not so much the alienation, it’s that the BBC relies on a licence fee, which is particularly paid by older Tory voters
If 10,000 of them think Fuck it, why should I help to pay Gary Lineker £1.5m a year to spout Woke gibberish (which he does) AND avoid tax on it, that’s 10,000 x £180 a year = £1.8m lost, every year from now on. Lineker is not worth that. And if 50,000 older people think fuck the Licence Fee then the BBC is in real trouble
Market forces. The beeb relies on older Tories coughing up. What a shame for Gary
Gary will be fine. I wouldn't worry about him.
He’ll be fine, just like Jeremy Clarkson is fine. But if the BBC wants to survive (I doubt it can, but it should try) it has to do this. The spectacle of this mega-millionaire tax avoider exulting in his ludicrous lefty views on social media is nauseating - he only has that influence because of the BBC
See, also, BBC presenter Alan Sugar. Though, to be fair, Gary Lineker was a world class footballer who was internationally famous because he scored countless goals for Leicester, Barcelona, Everton, Spurs and England. Sugar not so much.
Sugar is arguably more impressive than Lineker. The Amstrad was genuinely quite revolutionary
OK so Sugar made a decent guitar that was quite popular at the time. Does that enable him to pretend to be some kind of business guru for the rest of his life?
Guitar? You may wish to recalculate using your Amstrad calculator!
His violins are legendary, though.
Sugar's greatest innovation was a cheap word processor incompatible with anything else. Back in the day I used to scratch a few bob here and there translating Amstrad WP files to PC or Mac for onward editing. In retrospect I might have realised it would be short-lived.
I adapted mine with a PC drive to do that myself! - posting the 5.25 inch discs to editors in many a magazine or newspaper or academic journal. Saved a lot of money on having to buy a pukka PC till prices came down.
Alan Sugar epitomised why the UK gets nowhere in many fields in tech.
Cheapest possible product, barely developed, chuck it over the wall.
No actual knowledge of what he was trying to sell.
Quite. The PCW was basically a heap of the equivalents of Betamax VCRs all put into a box and sold as one unit. Notably the - three inch, was it? - disc drive. Only it was so successful that the manufacturers of the different bits had to put them back into production!
Comments
People who describe it as the BBC's "nervousness" misunderstand the overall situation. It's a very similar situation to the early 1990's, when there were so many Conservative placemen in senior positions in the BBC's administration that the corporation couldn't help but shift to the right. I'm hopeful that the changes, and the effects of the compromising of the BBC's journalistic room for manoeuvre will be less long-lasting than in the early 1990's, though ; then, and at that timeframe, Birt did permanent damage to the BBC's creative ethos, and intellectual ambitions with his McKinsey-led restructuring, whereas now I think we are looking at a short-term tantrum by a government and its appointees that are soon to be voted out, on more of a short-term and political, rather than long-term and so creative, or structural basis.
Chairman of BBCs position is completely untenable
NO PARTY POLITICS IF YOU WORK MAINLY FOR THE BBC
A simple rule, simply applied
https://twitter.com/AppleHelix/status/1634237793659437086
Good luck to FDIC trying to figure out what to do with its biotech venture debt portfolio.
These typically have 2 year duration which means 50% of loan portfolio matures each year…
But you raise an interesting point.
Lineker ( and Shearer) act as valuable balance to an array of LFC and MUFC inclined pundits.
Rod Liddle – 9
Max Hastings – 9
Camilla Tominey – 9
Kate Andrews – 11
Tim Stanley – 12
Isabel Oakeshott – 13
Fraser Nelson – 4
David Starkey – 12
Bonnie Greer – 13
Ian Hislop – 14
Julia Hartley Brewer – 17
Janet Street-Porter – 19
Peter Hitchens – 23
Piers Morgan – 24
Melanie Phillips – 28
Nigel Farage – 35
I mean, c'mon.
He left the BBC years ago too
Bar a couple.
We can have a UK Fox and a UK CNN. Sorted
Lineker is a different case altogether. He's a sports commentator. He has nothing to do with politics in terms of his job.
Michael Portillo used to spar with the Postman on Andrew Neil's show and present his railway programme to no ill effect.
Of the above only Farage, Hartley Brewer and Liddle and Phillips could be called hard right.
Even Peter Hitchens was anti the Iraq
War and wants to renationalise the trains
Fifty years ago the BBC may have thought its duty was to be factual and objective. Nowadays, it clearly thinks its mission is to arrive at some kind of "consensus opinion" and propagate that. Lineker's crime isn't expressing an opinion - it's expressing an opinion that isn't the opinion the BBC has arrived at. And God knows the process by which the BBC arrives at that "received opinion", which is explained in condescending and partonising tones to the public on its website. Particularly when its chairman has been appointed following murky dealings with the prime minister as a result of which nearly £1 million changed hands.
The BBC needs either to go back to being strictly objective and factual, or else to express a diversity of opinion. But adopting a corporate opinion, and expressing only that - and sacking anyone who won't toe that line - is the worst of all worlds.
As for the BBC it’s survival should depend on its ability to raise revenue without a license fee.
Is conservatives at 32% (+3) their highest for a long time
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1634237953139458059?t=HReSLMRYBylR1p5_BSl-Fw&s=19
All we might need is the second dawning of Britpop, to complete the holy visions.
https://twitter.com/IanWright0/status/1634243318723821576?s=20
Kudos Wrighty
And remember your idea of what is left and what is right is drawn from your perspective. I mean. you keep calling me a hard leftie but I'm as centrist dad as one gets on PB!
Everybody knows what Match of the Day means to me, but I’ve told the BBC I won’t be doing it tomorrow. Solidarity.
https://twitter.com/IanWright0/status/1634243318723821576
Wait, didn't Mellor used to present 606?
I pity the BBC.
It cannot win
The barking left think it’s full of Tories, the barking right think it’s full of commies. It tries to tread the middle ground and generally does on national issues. On local issues it’s news is little more than recycled press releases from charities and lobbyists.
High time the licence fee was abolished and it sought its own funding. Especially when viewing numbers are falling
https://centralbylines.co.uk/bbc-question-time-perspectives-on-panel-audience-and-question-selection-bias/
No, you don’t. Ah well
Sugar's greatest innovation was a cheap word processor incompatible with anything else. Back in the day I used to scratch a few bob here and there translating Amstrad WP files to PC or Mac for onward editing. In retrospect I might have realised it would be short-lived.
New Labour did a certain amount of nobbling too , but generally much less concertedly so, as it saw the BBC as less of an "issue" for its supporters' and their base. I think in the long-term the answer is that all these appointments have to be taken out of the hands of central government.
I am not saying they aren't right and the rest wrong, but...
Not having adverts is one of the few advantages the BBC now still has over rivals with viewers
The dog can’t take much more of this suspense….
That’s what the BBCphobes desire.
@Kevin_Maguire
·
53m
Regrettably a weakling BBC is the UK Conservative Government’s broadcasting arm
With a Tory donor chair who helped organise Johnson’s £800,000 deal and a D-G who stood as a Con council cand
BBC hacks were chief spin doctors for PMs Cameron, May & Johnson
But nobody is on the ball to realise it's historically always been done on the average of CPI from 18 months to 6 months before the increase date.
So for the April 24 increase they take CPI for Oct 22, Nov 22, Dec 22 ........... Sept 23 and average the 12 figures.
So the current very high CPI will be in the figures - so far we have 11.1, 10.7, 10.5, 10.1 with eight figures to come. Even if CPI now falls rapidly the average is surely going to be around 8% to 9%.
So the question is - will the Govt give the BBC 8% or 9% in April 24 or not? No surprise the BBC is going to be very, very complicit in the months ahead!
There’s one helluva media battle being fought. Entrenched interests want to kill the upstarts.
Business is business.
(a) Lineker is a contractor, not a BBC employee. And he was not - and has never - been involved in the production of TV news
(b) There weren't howls of protest about Clarkson saying inflammatory things on Twitter or in his Sunday Times column when he was a BBC presenter
Cheapest possible product, barely developed, chuck it over the wall.
No actual knowledge of what he was trying to sell.