Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Printable Version

+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy (/showthread.php?tid=381)

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Alf Stewart - 10-03-2023

(10-03-2023, 09:47 PM)Steve in Pudsey Wrote:  Irony detector activated

https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/1634261387386953730?t=a1hsJB-9OS-eLD46ZaD2Ew&s=19 

It's OK Nads. Only 2 people will be watching. One of whom is blind drunk, the other will nod off after 5 minutes.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - UTVLifer - 10-03-2023

Brief words from Tim Davie

https://twitter.com/marcsettle/status/1634288726200274945?s=61&t=9PSUu8dUPDOGotmQBtN_ig 

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Steve in Pudsey - 10-03-2023

It was more the irony of a sitting MP who has a TV show asking Lineker to decide whether he wants to be a TV presenter or politician that I was suggesting was somewhat ironic

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Dadeki - 10-03-2023

(10-03-2023, 09:51 PM)UTVLifer Wrote:  Brief words from Tim Davie

https://twitter.com/marcsettle/status/1634288726200274945?s=61&t=9PSUu8dUPDOGotmQBtN_ig 

Tweet has been deleted.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - lhx1985 - 10-03-2023

(10-03-2023, 09:51 PM)UTVLifer Wrote:  Brief words from Tim Davie

https://twitter.com/marcsettle/status/1634288726200274945?s=61&t=9PSUu8dUPDOGotmQBtN_ig 

"Sorry that tweet has been deleted"

Was he in breach of his own social media policy, or something?

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - LDN - 10-03-2023

(10-03-2023, 09:05 PM)qwerty123 Wrote:  

(10-03-2023, 09:01 PM)Adsales Wrote:  It inevitably cannot be the correct decision if the standards are not applied across the board which they haven’t in recent years.

The issue isn’t that Gary has tweeted criticism of a government policy, which he and others have done in the past without repercussion. The issue is that he thought it acceptable to compare the policy of a mainstream political party (a policy which a not unsubstantial proportion of the country support) to the behaviour of the nazis.
Unless you can give examples of others who have compared the behaviour of a mainstream political party to the Nazis or other similar groups (Isis, North Korea) and not been reprimanded it is not factual to say the standards are not being applied equally.
It really isn’t unreasonable to have standards that allow people to disagree with things politely but don’t allow such criticism to turn into insults or hyperbole.

Uh. What? You're saying that the issue is that Lineker compared the behaviour of the Conservatives to that of the Nazis. That isn't the issue at all. 

The BBC explicitly stated this evening what its issue was with Lineker's actions: "We have said that he should keep well away from taking sides on party political issues or political controversies." This situation, in the BBC's own words, has nothing whatsoever to do with the specifics of his comments - the BBC has made it plain that it's simply not happy with Lineker expressing opinions with political implications. That is the issue here, and the BBC couldn't have been clearer in explaining that. 

So your insistence that the only equivalence that might count here would be if another BBC personality expressed similar comparisons between how our government is framing its efforts to tackle illegal immigration, and the activities of Nazis in 1930s Germany, is frankly bizarre. 

The BBC has clearly stated that they don't want this particular presenter wading into "party political issues or political controversies". Shouldn't that standard apply equally to other BBC personalities? And if not, why not? Why are some personalities allowed to express overtly political opinions, repeatedly and without consequence, while another is being held to account over his politically-sensitive comments?

That's the issue here. 

And beyond that, of course, there remains the question of why any such policies exist in the first place. Why should a sports personality, or a presenter on The One Show, or a talk show host, who works at the BBC not be allowed to speak up on issues that they feel deserve attention, in a factually correct manner? Presumably, such policies - however slapdash their implementation, in practice - were intended to avoid any unvetted opinions from loose-lipped celebs bringing the BBC into disrepute. 

That's going well.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Omnipresent - 10-03-2023

This needs to be sorted in 24 hours, not a week.

I really had hoped that the days of self inflicted internal BBC crises like this were over. History will not be kind to Tim Davie if he caves in to political pressure.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - UTVLifer - 10-03-2023

What Davie said was

https://twitter.com/bbcnews/status/1634292300087013377?s=61&t=9PSUu8dUPDOGotmQBtN_ig 

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Ash101 - 10-03-2023

(10-03-2023, 09:55 PM)lhx1985 Wrote:  

(10-03-2023, 09:51 PM)UTVLifer Wrote:  Brief words from Tim Davie

https://twitter.com/marcsettle/status/1634288726200274945?s=61&t=9PSUu8dUPDOGotmQBtN_ig 

"Sorry that tweet has been deleted"

Was he in breach of his own social media policy, or something?

Clip reposted here if you’re interested 

https://twitter.com/jake_kanter/status/1634298424416694273 

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Kojak - 10-03-2023

Fear not, people! I have it on very good authority that a replacement host for tomorrow night's MOTD has been found:

---