@SkyKaveh Gary Lineker suspended by the BBC for upsetting the Conservatives because he stood up for some of the most vulnerable people in the world. The same BBC whose chairman gave the Conservatives £400,000 before helping to arrange an £800,000 loan for Boris Johnson
Should have looked the other way. Having the government be mad at them for ignoring stars getting political is better than 'corrupt BBC Chair and other tories force popular presenter off air', as headlines go.
There's a Dan Hodges tweet claiming that Ministers are not happy bunnies with what's happened.
Replying to @RobDotHutton I actually wondered if that's the real story here - Beeb bosses managing up by saying "this is what happens when you get what you say you want."
I suspect some in Government may now realise their "friends" aren't as helpful as they would like. Had Lineker been ignored, news such as the GDP numbers would be dominating the media cycle but that's been lost in the faux outrage about a football pundit saying something silly.
OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
He's not being cancelled.
He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.
Which one is it?
Rather a side issue. Do you agree he should be losing his job for expressing political opinions on a site not linked to the BBC?
His form of contract is irrelevant. He is the highest paid BBC presenter and a major public face of the BBC. He's been able to tweet his views for years, unlikely many other BBC presenters I hasten to add, with impunity.
On this occasion he didn't just cross the line. He ran over 400 yards beyond it, dropped his trousers, took a massive dump on the pitch and then shouted/goaded the BBC and flung some of his shit at them at the same time.
It's a disciplinary matter, which he's too arrogant to recognise, and he absolutely deserves what's coming to him.
You want him to be cancelled.
Not really. But comparing the Government to Nazis and taking a seven-figure salary from licence-fee payers at the same time (which is compulsory, don't forget) and expecting no consequences for it, and goading those on top who disagree, isn't on.
It's a disciplinary matter. Free speech isn't utterly and completely absolute, and it's not zero consequence speech.
I'd have a problem with my employer if I tweeted in a personal capacity and dropped the n-bomb on my political opponents too.
This is my position. I don't care about him criticizing the government's policy, but the comparison to the Nazis really minimizes what was done to their victims.
No it doesnt it highlights the dangerous path we are currently treading.
You seriously think the country is on it's way to becoming Nazi Germany?
Nazi Germany was a place that most people tried to get out of, not into, IIRC.
OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
He's not being cancelled.
He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.
Which one is it?
Rather a side issue. Do you agree he should be losing his job for expressing political opinions on a site not linked to the BBC?
His form of contract is irrelevant. He is the highest paid BBC presenter and a major public face of the BBC. He's been able to tweet his views for years, unlikely many other BBC presenters I hasten to add, with impunity.
On this occasion he didn't just cross the line. He ran over 400 yards beyond it, dropped his trousers, took a massive dump on the pitch and then shouted/goaded the BBC and flung some of his shit at them at the same time.
It's a disciplinary matter, which he's too arrogant to recognise, and he absolutely deserves what's coming to him.
You want him to be cancelled.
Not really. But comparing the Government to Nazis and taking a seven-figure salary from licence-fee payers at the same time (which is compulsory, don't forget) and expecting no consequences for it, and goading those on top who disagree, isn't on.
It's a disciplinary matter. Free speech isn't utterly and completely absolute, and it's not zero consequence speech.
I'd have a problem with my employer if I tweeted in a personal capacity and dropped the n-bomb on my political opponents too.
This is my position. I don't care about him criticizing the government's policy, but the comparison to the Nazis really minimizes what was done to their victims.
No it doesnt it highlights the dangerous path we are currently treading.
You seriously think the country is on it's way to becoming Nazi Germany?
Nazi Germany was a place that most people tried to get out of, not into, IIRC.
If that was a quip it was very good. If it was a serious post, not so much.
OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
He's not being cancelled.
He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.
Which one is it?
Rather a side issue. Do you agree he should be losing his job for expressing political opinions on a site not linked to the BBC?
His form of contract is irrelevant. He is the highest paid BBC presenter and a major public face of the BBC. He's been able to tweet his views for years, unlikely many other BBC presenters I hasten to add, with impunity.
On this occasion he didn't just cross the line. He ran over 400 yards beyond it, dropped his trousers, took a massive dump on the pitch and then shouted/goaded the BBC and flung some of his shit at them at the same time.
It's a disciplinary matter, which he's too arrogant to recognise, and he absolutely deserves what's coming to him.
You want him to be cancelled.
Not really. But comparing the Government to Nazis and taking a seven-figure salary from licence-fee payers at the same time (which is compulsory, don't forget) and expecting no consequences for it, and goading those on top who disagree, isn't on.
It's a disciplinary matter. Free speech isn't utterly and completely absolute, and it's not zero consequence speech.
I'd have a problem with my employer if I tweeted in a personal capacity and dropped the n-bomb on my political opponents too.
This is my position. I don't care about him criticizing the government's policy, but the comparison to the Nazis really minimizes what was done to their victims.
No it doesnt it highlights the dangerous path we are currently treading.
You seriously think the country is on it's way to becoming Nazi Germany?
Nazi Germany was a place that most people tried to get out of, not into, IIRC.
Well this one was overly keen to get out of the country:
This is the harrowing moment an Iraqi immigrant stabbed a university student because he wanted to be deported from Britain after arriving in the UK on a small boat.
OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
He's not being cancelled.
He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.
Which one is it?
Rather a side issue. Do you agree he should be losing his job for expressing political opinions on a site not linked to the BBC?
His form of contract is irrelevant. He is the highest paid BBC presenter and a major public face of the BBC. He's been able to tweet his views for years, unlikely many other BBC presenters I hasten to add, with impunity.
On this occasion he didn't just cross the line. He ran over 400 yards beyond it, dropped his trousers, took a massive dump on the pitch and then shouted/goaded the BBC and flung some of his shit at them at the same time.
It's a disciplinary matter, which he's too arrogant to recognise, and he absolutely deserves what's coming to him.
You want him to be cancelled.
Not really. But comparing the Government to Nazis and taking a seven-figure salary from licence-fee payers at the same time (which is compulsory, don't forget) and expecting no consequences for it, and goading those on top who disagree, isn't on.
It's a disciplinary matter. Free speech isn't utterly and completely absolute, and it's not zero consequence speech.
I'd have a problem with my employer if I tweeted in a personal capacity and dropped the n-bomb on my political opponents too.
This is my position. I don't care about him criticizing the government's policy, but the comparison to the Nazis really minimizes what was done to their victims.
A long article yet with no direct quotations from Bravermann. So which words are Lineker and the author talking about? Let us hear these words and judge for ourselves whether they are 1930s Germany-esque.
Match of the Day to be broadcast as highlights package with NO pundits
It'd be interesting to know if the BBC actually saves money from this. If they do, it might be a slight indicator as to whether the pundits are self-employed rather than employees.
Russian mercenary Wagner group’s chief Yevgeny Prigozhin has accused Vladimir Putin of cutting him off over his call for resupplying arms and ammunition in the grinding battle in eastern Ukraine.
“To get me to stop asking for ammunition, all the hotlines to offices, to departments etc have been cut off from me. But the real humdinger is that they’ve also blocked agencies from making decisions [related to Wagner],” the private Russian military’s leader said on Telegram.
Congratulations to the Tory lapdogs at the BBC ! You’ve turned this into an even bigger story which has politicized MOTD and clearly they couldn’t find anyone willing to be seen as a Judas !
Russian mercenary Wagner group’s chief Yevgeny Prigozhin has accused Vladimir Putin of cutting him off over his call for resupplying arms and ammunition in the grinding battle in eastern Ukraine.
“To get me to stop asking for ammunition, all the hotlines to offices, to departments etc have been cut off from me. But the real humdinger is that they’ve also blocked agencies from making decisions [related to Wagner],” the private Russian military’s leader said on Telegram.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
How about their news bulletins be about the news and not themselves?
The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.
He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.
He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.
No-one is.
I head Campbell on the radio this evening and what he said was far worse than Lineker's intemperate tweet, God knows why the BBC gave Campbell the airtime as they surely know his form.
I can’t say I am hugely exercised either way by Lineker, but I am thoroughly enjoying reading posts from those who usually froth about cancel culture…celebrating someone being cancelled.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
I imagine the outcome of this is a swift agreement to change their policy so that so long as they don't bring the BBC into disrepute (a much higher bar), employees can say what they like unless they work in news, and therefore bringing Lineker back whilst maintaining it was all in line with policy, as it was at the time.
OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
He's not being cancelled.
He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.
Which one is it?
Rather a side issue. Do you agree he should be losing his job for expressing political opinions on a site not linked to the BBC?
His form of contract is irrelevant. He is the highest paid BBC presenter and a major public face of the BBC. He's been able to tweet his views for years, unlikely many other BBC presenters I hasten to add, with impunity.
On this occasion he didn't just cross the line. He ran over 400 yards beyond it, dropped his trousers, took a massive dump on the pitch and then shouted/goaded the BBC and flung some of his shit at them at the same time.
It's a disciplinary matter, which he's too arrogant to recognise, and he absolutely deserves what's coming to him.
You want him to be cancelled.
Not really. But comparing the Government to Nazis and taking a seven-figure salary from licence-fee payers at the same time (which is compulsory, don't forget) and expecting no consequences for it, and goading those on top who disagree, isn't on.
It's a disciplinary matter. Free speech isn't utterly and completely absolute, and it's not zero consequence speech.
I'd have a problem with my employer if I tweeted in a personal capacity and dropped the n-bomb on my political opponents too.
This is my position. I don't care about him criticizing the government's policy, but the comparison to the Nazis really minimizes what was done to their victims.
A long article yet with no direct quotations from Bravermann. So which words are Lineker and the author talking about? Let us hear these words and judge for ourselves whether they are 1930s Germany-esque.
This is the problem with everything being reduced to 140 characters. It would be nice to hear in more detail what exactly Lineker was referring to. I don't like Braverman but having watched her 10 minute statement to the House it was hardly reminiscent of the Nuremberg rallies. But perhaps Lineker was thing of something else.
I do apologise. I was moaning earlier about everyone talking about Lineker and now I'm doing just that.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
MotD will get crapola figures tomorrow. Because people like pundits (which are on pretty much every sport show worldwide). So the BBC say "we can scrap MotD as nobody watches it". And then lots of upset football fans "why do I pay my license fee?".
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
In the 80s and 90s we had news presenters like Michael Buerk, Moira Stuart, Sue Lawley, etc, and after watching them for about 20 years no-one had the slightest idea what their political opinions might be. Because no social media.
It does seem rather an own goal. Gary Lineker is an engaging everyman, rather than the "lefty liberal elite".
He is lefty liberal elite.
Very much so. All over.
Probably. But is he seen that way by the everymen and everywomen who only know him as that football chap, and now he said something about being nice to refugees or something?
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
How about their news bulletins be about the news and not themselves?
BBC: We have approached the BBC for comment, but received no response. We ask our BBC correspondant about this lack of response from the BBC.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
In the 80s and 90s we had news presenters like Michael Buerk, Moira Stuart, Sue Lawley, etc, and after watching them for about 20 years no-one had the slightest idea what their political opinions might be. Because no social media.
It does seem rather an own goal. Gary Lineker is an engaging everyman, rather than the "lefty liberal elite".
He is lefty liberal elite.
Very much so. All over.
Probably. But is he seen that way by the everymen and everywomen who only know him as that football chap, and now he said something about being nice to refugees or something?
Indeed he isn't. The lefty liberal elite don't have the purchase that he does.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
With a fair few saying "How much is he paid ???"
It would be ironic if the BBC change the format and make their pundits redundant
More seriously though the chair of the BBC should be non political but while they tax everyone for it then it will be a political football !!!!!!!!!!!!
This all feels *very* contrived now. Like a choreographed media event designed to turn the football watching masses against the Tory's supposed small boat crackdown.
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Russian mercenary Wagner group’s chief Yevgeny Prigozhin has accused Vladimir Putin of cutting him off over his call for resupplying arms and ammunition in the grinding battle in eastern Ukraine.
“To get me to stop asking for ammunition, all the hotlines to offices, to departments etc have been cut off from me. But the real humdinger is that they’ve also blocked agencies from making decisions [related to Wagner],” the private Russian military’s leader said on Telegram.
If Russia aren't supplying munitions and are so terrible, perhaps he and his private army can back their bags and go home?
I believe there's a vacancy in the UK where giving an overview of various fields of play would be sought after. And he's on the correct side of the political spectrum not to get into hot water.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
In the 80s and 90s we had news presenters like Michael Buerk, Moira Stuart, Sue Lawley, etc, and after watching them for about 20 years no-one had the slightest idea what their political opinions might be. Because no social media.
I once saw MIchael Buerk turn a corner on Pall Mall, wearing a pink Garrick Club tie - true story. Moira Stewart I suspect further towards the centre.
This all feels *very* contrived now. Like a choreographed media event designed to turn the football watching masses against the Tory's supposed small boat crackdown.
In which case it would likely be even more of a Sunak lead given his bromance with Macron today.
Quite astonishing that less than a year after Boris resigned a plurality of voters see the Tory PM as more pro EU than the Leader of the Labour Party.
Shows the extent of Starmer's attempts to reassure the redwall he will respect the Brexit vote and the success of Sunak’s Deal with the EU
So slightly more than a fifth of voters see Sunak as more pro EU compared to exactly a fifth of voters saying Starmer. I wouldn’t get TOO excited by that finding…
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Twitter wasn't around then and I don’t think Jim Davidson ever said much about politics on Big Break
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics who voted for Boris are back voting Labour now Starmer has replaced Corbyn and Brexit is done or have gone to RefUK
It does seem rather an own goal. Gary Lineker is an engaging everyman, rather than the "lefty liberal elite".
He is lefty liberal elite.
Very much so. All over.
Probably. But is he seen that way by the everymen and everywomen who only know him as that football chap, and now he said something about being nice to refugees or something?
Your reminder that he is in a minority
Britain Elects
On banning migrants who come to the UK in small boats from ever re-entering the UK
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Twitter wasn't around then and I don’t think Jim Davidson ever said much about politics on Big Break
Snooker is well known to be racist, all about a single white ball dominating hordes of balls of colour as though superior to them, so that is pretty inherently political.
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Twitter wasn't around then and I don’t think Jim Davidson ever said much about politics on Big Break
Yes he did. He kept showing the white potting the black.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
In the 80s and 90s we had news presenters like Michael Buerk, Moira Stuart, Sue Lawley, etc, and after watching them for about 20 years no-one had the slightest idea what their political opinions might be. Because no social media.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
Simply getting rid of all the presenters was the natural end point of this argument. It is the same line of thinking whereby why don't we just employ ex-cons on four week work trials to perform heart surgery? It's the "unproductive" public sector after all. Why shouldn't it be as shambolically cheap as possible? It's what it deserves.
In which case it would likely be even more of a Sunak lead given his bromance with Macron today.
Quite astonishing that less than a year after Boris resigned a plurality of voters see the Tory PM as more pro EU than the Leader of the Labour Party.
Shows the extent of Starmer's attempts to reassure the redwall he will respect the Brexit vote and the success of Sunak’s Deal with the EU
Sunak's deal with the EU hasn't been a success. It hasn't even been confirmed.
Not this again
It was referred to by Macron today in glowing terms as part of the new entente cordial and Sunaks very obvious move to closer relationship with France and the EU
Indeed the Lineker story is a nonsense compared to this summit which is a welcome change from Johnson and Truss antagonistic attitude to the EU
WF will happen even without the DUP returning to Stormont
This all feels *very* contrived now. Like a choreographed media event designed to turn the football watching masses against the Tory's supposed small boat crackdown.
It’s not contrived but the whole thing has escalated because no 10s media arm the Daily Mail decided it wanted Lineker gone .
Many will take the view that the Tories want to shut down any criticism of their policies and will use their media mates to do so . Rather troubling !
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Twitter wasn't around then and I don’t think Jim Davidson ever said much about politics on Big Break
Lineker never says anything about politics on MOTD you twat. Davidson did appear at Tory conferences however.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals and Independents. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
I'm not sure the BBC should exist. But he's not a news presenter, he's a sports presenter. And he's allowed to have his own views (however foolish) and to disseminate them on Twitter.
He is, but right now with the BBC he's trying to have his cake and eat it.
But you wouldn't support kicking Clarkson off the BBC for expressing political views on Twitter or in his Sunday Times column, right?
Clarkson isn't on the BBC.
On the one occasion he did firmly cross the line he was kicked off it.
The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.
He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.
He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.
No-one is.
I head Campbell on the radio this evening and what he said was far worse than Lineker's intemperate tweet, God knows why the BBC gave Campbell the airtime as they surely know his form.
It does seem rather an own goal. Gary Lineker is an engaging everyman, rather than the "lefty liberal elite".
He is lefty liberal elite.
Very much so. All over.
Probably. But is he seen that way by the everymen and everywomen who only know him as that football chap, and now he said something about being nice to refugees or something?
Your reminder that he is in a minority
Britain Elects
On banning migrants who come to the UK in small boats from ever re-entering the UK
It’s not about the opinion itself it’s about his right to express it. Unless you’re saying that majority opinions supportive of the governing party should be more tolerated than minority ones. Doubtless you’d be up in arms if he’d have tweeted a post in support of the new legislation and been banned by the BBC as a result?
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Twitter wasn't around then and I don’t think Jim Davidson ever said much about politics on Big Break
Lineker never says anything about politics on MOTD you twat. Davidson did appear at Tory conferences however.
He never called Blair's policies Nazi however, the most he did was mock his sweaty shirt post speech
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
Few young voters vote in local elections
Hmm.
You're always a very loyal servant to the Tory cause, HYUFD, sometimes admirably so when so many others have deserted them, but with the Tories often at around 25-28% at the moment, I personally doubt this.
This all feels *very* contrived now. Like a choreographed media event designed to turn the football watching masses against the Tory's supposed small boat crackdown.
It’s not contrived but the whole thing has escalated because no 10s media arm the Daily Mail decided it wanted Lineker gone .
Many will take the view that the Tories want to shut down any criticism of their policies and will use their media mates to do so . Rather troubling !
Is the Mail No 10's media arm, or is No 10 the Mail's political arm?
Dear BBC, a gentle reminder that this is written on the side of your fucking headquarters. If I were you, I’d be sacking the chairman who withheld the truth, NOT the presenter who told it.
The people who wail about cancel culture have got Lineker cancelled. I’m shocked SHOCKED that they are more worried about speech critical of the Tory Party than supportive. I mean, who could possibly forget their brave picketing of BBC TV Centre throughout the Nineties to protest the appearance of Thatcherite and Tory donor Jim Davidson on Big Break every Saturday night.
Twitter wasn't around then and I don’t think Jim Davidson ever said much about politics on Big Break
Lineker never says anything about politics on MOTD you twat. Davidson did appear at Tory conferences however.
He never called Blair's policies Nazi however, the most he did was mock his sweaty shirt post speech
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
Few young voters vote in local elections
Hmm.
You're always a very loyal servant to the Tory cause, HYUFD, sometimes admirably so when so many others have deserted them, but with the Tories often at around 25-28% at the moment, I personally doubt this.
I have been canvassing over the last few weeks and found we have actually won back some upper middle class voters with Rishi who went LD last year when Boris was still PM.
However we are losing working class and lower middle class voters to Labour and occasionally RefUK
This all feels *very* contrived now. Like a choreographed media event designed to turn the football watching masses against the Tory's supposed small boat crackdown.
This madness is not a distraction from Tories using language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s. It is a consequence of them doing so.
The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.
He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.
He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.
No-one is.
I head Campbell on the radio this evening and what he said was far worse than Lineker's intemperate tweet, God knows why the BBC gave Campbell the airtime as they surely know his form.
Lineker is getting all this support (almost entirely from people who want to attack and damage the Government) precisely because of his politics, and the free speech stuff is entirely by the by.
If he was saying outlandishly right-wing things on Twitter we'd hear far less of this argument from most posters on here.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
In the 80s and 90s we had news presenters like Michael Buerk, Moira Stuart, Sue Lawley, etc, and after watching them for about 20 years no-one had the slightest idea what their political opinions might be. Because no social media.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals and Independents. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
Few young voters vote in local elections
Recent council by-elections are consistently showing the Lib Dems outperforming polls (and Labour underperforming), as well as the Greens taking huge shares from Con across the whole SE.
One increasingly important factor is the environment, by which I mean raw sewage being pumped into watercourses. The government ignores this at its peril.
The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.
He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.
He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.
No-one is.
I head Campbell on the radio this evening and what he said was far worse than Lineker's intemperate tweet, God knows why the BBC gave Campbell the airtime as they surely know his form.
I heard him on Radio 5, he was throwing mud at everyone, and going far further than Lineker did. I'm honestly surprised that an editor thought it was a good idea to have him on.
Match of the Day to be broadcast as highlights package with NO pundits
Viewing figures will go up. Noone wants to listen to the bullshit that passes for comment
I think you're wrong.
Not really being a football fan I watch MOTD on Saturday (I think I started the end of lockdown). Its now a comfy routine and a capstone to the week. The presenters are harmless and the football secondary to the conversation.
I couldn't think of a better way of biasing 8 million people against the government then by telling them that that the nice Mr Lineker and friends have disappeared because he typed something he believes in on the internet.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals and Independents. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
Few young voters vote in local elections
No wonder about the young, your party is trying to suppress voting.
This all feels *very* contrived now. Like a choreographed media event designed to turn the football watching masses against the Tory's supposed small boat crackdown.
Oh FFS…someone gets cancelled because they criticised the Government and that’s supposed to SUPPORT his position? Victim blaming is not quite the right phrase because Lineker is not exactly going to be thrown into a gutter in penury because of this but…come on…take a look at yourself.
The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.
He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.
He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.
No-one is.
I head Campbell on the radio this evening and what he said was far worse than Lineker's intemperate tweet, God knows why the BBC gave Campbell the airtime as they surely know his form.
I heard him on Radio 5, he was throwing mud at everyone, and going far further than Lineker did. I'm honestly surprised that an editor thought it was a good idea to have him on.
But Mr Campbell is not employed by the BBC to comment on football.
Why is it so surprising that Piers Morgan would be backing him? He's hardly one to be concerned with impartiality.
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
In the 80s and 90s we had news presenters like Michael Buerk, Moira Stuart, Sue Lawley, etc, and after watching them for about 20 years no-one had the slightest idea what their political opinions might be. Because no social media.
No-one ever had a problem with Des Lynham.
TBF, social media wasn't a thing when Lynham was in his prime.
It does seem rather an own goal. Gary Lineker is an engaging everyman, rather than the "lefty liberal elite".
He is lefty liberal elite.
Very much so. All over.
Probably. But is he seen that way by the everymen and everywomen who only know him as that football chap, and now he said something about being nice to refugees or something?
Your reminder that he is in a minority
Britain Elects
On banning migrants who come to the UK in small boats from ever re-entering the UK
It’s not about the opinion itself it’s about his right to express it. Unless you’re saying that majority opinions supportive of the governing party should be more tolerated than minority ones. Doubtless you’d be up in arms if he’d have tweeted a post in support of the new legislation and been banned by the BBC as a result?
It’ll be interesting to retake that poll in a week’s time. It would give us a real world answer on whether the Lineker controversy has helped, harmed or made zero difference to the popularity of the policy (my money is on zero difference).
Anyway, all this culture war smokescreen is simply because Rishi can't possibly allow Conservative MPs to find out that he is trying to run a competent government.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals and Independents. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
Few young voters vote in local elections
Recent council by-elections are consistently showing the Lib Dems outperforming polls (and Labour underperforming), as well as the Greens taking huge shares from Con across the whole SE.
One increasingly important factor is the environment, by which I mean raw sewage being pumped into watercourses. The government ignores this at its peril.
LDs always do better in by elections as they throw every activist and their wife within a hundred miles at it. When national elections are held however they can't do that.
Dear BBC, a gentle reminder that this is written on the side of your fucking headquarters. If I were you, I’d be sacking the chairman who withheld the truth, NOT the presenter who told it.
A gentle reminder to the Count that it being the truth or not is not the point either in this case, not really. It's about saying it at all. And the inconsistent application of restrictions on people saying thing.
Anyway, all this culture war smokescreen is simply because Rishi can't possibly allow Conservative MPs to find out that he is trying to run a competent government.
I'd like to believe that, as it'd suggest this refugee issue aside things are on the up. I think that unlikely though.
The 60% who aren't interested in football are going "What's all the fuss about?" at the moment.
The problem for the Tories is, a lot of the people who are interested in football, are ( some of ) their new core vote. The days of green wellies in the Tory shires being their only, or even fully functioning, redoubts are not ours.
They are again actually, Rishi's core vote is West London and Home counties. Most of the redwall football fanatics are back voting Labour now or have gone to RefUK
Indeed, which means very bad news at the elections for the Tories. A number of shire former strongholds will go Lib Dem, I think, thanks to tactical voting among younger voters.
The opposite. Rishi will hold Tory Shire seats from the LDs and may even gain a few seats from the Liberals. However he will lose seats to Labour in Essex, Kent, the North and Midlands.
Few young voters vote in local elections
Hmm.
You're always a very loyal servant to the Tory cause, HYUFD, sometimes admirably so when so many others have deserted them, but with the Tories often at around 25-28% at the moment, I personally doubt this.
I have been canvassing over the last few weeks and found we have actually won back some upper middle class voters with Rishi who went LD last year when Boris was still PM.
However we are losing working class and lower middle class voters to Labour and occasionally RefUK
LibDems pushed the Tory into 3rd place in the Hounslow byelection yesterday from a zero start. Good reception on the doorstep.
It does seem rather an own goal. Gary Lineker is an engaging everyman, rather than the "lefty liberal elite".
He is lefty liberal elite.
Very much so. All over.
Probably. But is he seen that way by the everymen and everywomen who only know him as that football chap, and now he said something about being nice to refugees or something?
Your reminder that he is in a minority
Britain Elects
On banning migrants who come to the UK in small boats from ever re-entering the UK
Does being on the minority or majority side of an issue have any effect on the validity or justifiability of expressing your views? Slippery slope if so I'm sure you'll agree.
Comments
Grant Shapps to open car showroom in Hanwell.
"Have we finally got a plan that will stop the boats?"
"Well, our first step is get MOTD cancelled..."
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1634212564807581698?s=20
An independent BBC could and should have given the Government the same response previously made by the media in Arkell v Pressdram.
Match of the Day to be broadcast as highlights package with NO pundits
The government's repeated failure to deal with the issue, despite promising that its legislation last year would do so.
The government's repeated failure to deal with the issue, despite being in office for thirteen years.
The government's repeated failure to deal with the issue, despite the public voting to take back control of the borders nearly seven years ago.
On the face of it, the government have played an absolute blinder. And, of course, the BBC is rarely happier than when talking about itself.
Alan Shearer: "I have informed the BBC that I won’t be appearing on MOTD tomorrow night."
Wow. Forget Rosa Parks! Suffragettes, nuffragettes! Shearer is surely a man who stood up for humanity against all repression!
MOD will feature match action with no studio presentation or punditry
Was this what the government intended ?
“I watched it and it was much better without the overpaid lefty pundits!”
This is the harrowing moment an Iraqi immigrant stabbed a university student because he wanted to be deported from Britain after arriving in the UK on a small boat.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/iraqi-man-stabs-student-jailed-six-years-kitchen-knife/
https://twitter.com/EdwardPentin/status/1634253808678100992?t=dqt3Zkgio2qcgtlpLmrwBA&s=19
Russian mercenary Wagner group’s chief Yevgeny Prigozhin has accused Vladimir Putin of cutting him off over his call for resupplying arms and ammunition in the grinding battle in eastern Ukraine.
“To get me to stop asking for ammunition, all the hotlines to offices, to departments etc have been cut off from me. But the real humdinger is that they’ve also blocked agencies from making decisions [related to Wagner],” the private Russian military’s leader said on Telegram.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ukraine-russia-news-latest-wagner-chief-says-putin-has-cut-him-off/ar-AA18rDX2?rc=1&ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=00e6895c66844de2c4764fbf655e42ca&ei=6
https://news.sky.com/story/match-of-the-day-to-go-ahead-without-studio-presentation-or-punditry-12830720
If Russia aren't supplying munitions and are so terrible, perhaps he and his private army can back their bags and go home?
The problem appears to be that the BBC is trying to enforce something on all its staff that seems increasingly unworkable in the social media age. Who is going to want to work there if you are unable to say anything that might be seen as politically partial even when you aren't at work? Or is it just for newspeople/high profile figures only? The BBC could do with explaining exactly what the policy is. It may be available in a long-winded document somewhere but they should be defending it on their own news bulletins.
They usually start broadcasting one hour before kick off and they bore me silly
I haven't watched MOD in years
Quite astonishing that less than a year after Boris resigned a plurality of voters see the Tory PM as more pro EU than the Leader of the Labour Party.
Shows the extent of Starmer's attempts to reassure the redwall he will respect the Brexit vote and the success of Sunak’s Deal with the EU
Very much so. All over.
I do apologise. I was moaning earlier about everyone talking about Lineker and now I'm doing just that.
Cut to Nadine Dorries cackling. Fade to black.
More seriously though the chair of the BBC should be non political but while they tax everyone for it then it will be a political football !!!!!!!!!!!!
Britain Elects
On banning migrants who come to the UK in small boats from ever re-entering the UK
Support: 50%
Oppose: 36%
via
@YouGov
RACISM
It is the same line of thinking whereby why don't we just employ ex-cons on four week work trials to perform heart surgery?
It's the "unproductive" public sector after all.
Why shouldn't it be as shambolically cheap as possible?
It's what it deserves.
It was referred to by Macron today in glowing terms as part of the new entente cordial and Sunaks very obvious move to closer relationship with France and the EU
Indeed the Lineker story is a nonsense compared to this summit which is a welcome change from Johnson and Truss antagonistic attitude to the EU
WF will happen even without the DUP returning to Stormont
Many will take the view that the Tories want to shut down any criticism of their policies and will use their media mates to do so . Rather troubling !
Few young voters vote in local elections
Great riposte from Campbell!
You're always a very loyal servant to the Tory cause, HYUFD, sometimes admirably so when so many others have deserted them, but with the Tories often at around 25-28% at the moment, I personally doubt this.
Dear BBC, a gentle reminder that this is written on the side of your fucking headquarters. If I were you, I’d be sacking the chairman who withheld the truth, NOT the presenter who told it.
However we are losing working class and lower middle class voters to Labour and occasionally RefUK
This madness is not a distraction from Tories using language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s.
It is a consequence of them doing so.
Lineker is getting all this support (almost entirely from people who want to attack and damage the Government) precisely because of his politics, and the free speech stuff is entirely by the by.
If he was saying outlandishly right-wing things on Twitter we'd hear far less of this argument from most posters on here.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-22483478
One increasingly important factor is the environment, by which I mean raw sewage being pumped into watercourses. The government ignores this at its peril.
Not really being a football fan I watch MOTD on Saturday (I think I started the end of lockdown). Its now a comfy routine and a capstone to the week. The presenters are harmless and the football secondary to the conversation.
I couldn't think of a better way of biasing 8 million people against the government then by telling them that that the nice Mr Lineker and friends have disappeared because he typed something he believes in on the internet.
The Greens are currently polling worse than RefUK
Slippery slope if so I'm sure you'll agree.