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 - lhx1985 - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 09:01 PM)AaronTV Wrote:  Out of interest, I’m assuming everyone would be equally supportive of Lineker if he had come out strongly in favour of the Government’s illegal immigration plan and had then been taken off air?

I can only speak for myself here, but, yes... absolutely. 

I don't see Andrew Castles pronouncements on LBC being particularly incompatible with him commenting on Tennis matches for the BBC.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - RhysJR - 11-03-2023

A BBC specific commentary by Sara Orchard appears on the iPlayer highlights of the Italy v. Wales rugby, so it looks that as things stand the chaos has not spread to the BBC's rugby coverage ahead of their live coverage tomorrow.

Looking at who appeared on 5 Live's reduced football coverage today, most if not all were probably staff (like Ian Dennis made clear in his intro). Ian was without a co-commentator for the 3pm kick-off. I'm not sure if Sara Orchard is staff or freelance (she has occasionaly appeared on BT Sport's European rugby coverage in the past but >95% of her work is on the BBC).

Worth noting that I believe the BBC are host broadcaster for tomorrow's match.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0f7qx8b/six-nations-rugby-2023-italy-v-wales-minihighlights 

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - interestednovice - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 08:35 PM)CF1 Wrote:  One positive from the interview - I did think Nomia Iqbal's questioning was good, even if Davie dodged much of it.

BBC News in general have covered this story very carefully, of course, to avoid being drawn in to the impartiality debate as a department themselves, but it’s a real credit to the BBC that their News output is still of a high journalistic standard despite cutbacks. Nomia Iqbal is a credit to them.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Jon - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 09:01 PM)AaronTV Wrote:  Out of interest, I’m assuming everyone would be equally supportive of Lineker if he had come out strongly in favour of the Government’s illegal immigration plan and had then been taken off air?

To be honest we wouldn’t be having the conversation if it was the other way around. But I don’t think I’d support anyone being taken off for expressing a pro-government view. I’m glad Lord Sugar wasn’t sacked for The Apprentice for being vocally anti-Jeremy Corbyn for example.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Spencer - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 09:01 PM)AaronTV Wrote:  Out of interest, I’m assuming everyone would be equally supportive of Lineker if he had come out strongly in favour of the Government’s illegal immigration plan and had then been taken off air?

That’s an interesting and important question to ask, and it did make me stop and think. But yes, I would be.

I think it would be equally absurd if Alan Sugar had been removed from The Apprentice for expressing his  opinions which I, personally, disagree with. The same with Andrew Neil. The reason being they’re both very good at doing their jobs, and have proven that they’re fully able to do so without their personal views affecting their work for the BBC.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - lhx1985 - 11-03-2023

I think Andrew Neil sailed close to the wind, on occasion. 

He got away with it, despite being in the news department, because he was quite clearly the best political interviewer at the corporation and clearly relished the opportunity to rip a politician of any affiliation to shreds - to the extent that Boris Johnson refused to do a one-on-one with him.

He was upfront about his bias - but he was still capable of holding power to account.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Rdd - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 07:44 PM)Jon Wrote:  I wonder if there has been refusal within Sport to negotiate something with IMG for its commentary to be on the programme. I’m sure they would have been able to reach a deal for a near nominal amount especially considering presumably they wouldn’t have to pay the pundits for tonight’s programme.

Presumably management of BBC Sport aren’t happy at decisions made higher up the chain.

Of course imagine most games are covered by radio commentary either local and National that could be used. But perhaps they’d have to get the commentators in question to agree. But it does seem a lack of trying to make it work from BBC Sport.

As a rights holder are they not entitled to use PLP coverage as of right? I know Premier Sports occasionally ditches it’s own presentation and takes the PLP coverage instead (they took it quite a bit over Christmas). BT shows the PLP Review and Preview programmes and I’m pretty sure Sky have done so in the past.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Adsales - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 09:01 PM)AaronTV Wrote:  Out of interest, I’m assuming everyone would be equally supportive of Lineker if he had come out strongly in favour of the Government’s illegal immigration plan and had then been taken off air?

That wouldn’t have happened as clearly proven by numerous BBC freelancers using their social media, newspapers and other broadcasters to support government policies or right leaning ideally. 

If he were supportive of the policy then exactly nothing would have happened. 

Personally I would disagree with him just as I disagree with many others but I would not have second thoughts about his freedom to state what he wishes. I would still watch MOTD just like Instill watch the Apprentice and many others things presented by people whom I don’t agree with.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Jon - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 09:30 PM)Rdd Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 07:44 PM)Jon Wrote:  I wonder if there has been refusal within Sport to negotiate something with IMG for its commentary to be on the programme. I’m sure they would have been able to reach a deal for a near nominal amount especially considering presumably they wouldn’t have to pay the pundits for tonight’s programme.

Presumably management of BBC Sport aren’t happy at decisions made higher up the chain.

Of course imagine most games are covered by radio commentary either local and National that could be used. But perhaps they’d have to get the commentators in question to agree. But it does seem a lack of trying to make it work from BBC Sport.

As a rights holder are they not entitled to use PLP coverage as of right?

I don’t know, that’s the suggestion earlier in the day. But you’d think that would be the case. I guess it’s an agreement Premier and Sky already have in place to give them that option.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - DavidWhitfield - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 09:01 PM)AaronTV Wrote:  Out of interest, I’m assuming everyone would be equally supportive of Lineker if he had come out strongly in favour of the Government’s illegal immigration plan and had then been taken off air?

Great question. It does seem like a lot of people are defending Lineker with comments like "he is right, though", "he's only saying what we're all thinking". You don't get to decide whether someone breaking impartiality rules is okay or not based on whether you personally agree with the 'rule-breaking' comments or not. If you'd be equally supportive of him had he made PRO-government comments and been taken off air, then fine. 

Ultimately, it looks to me like there are so many loopholes and fringe cases and previous examples of action not being taken that it's all very messy. Seems to me that the BBC need to come up with absolutely fool-proof rules on what people can and can't say which must be agreed to when signing contracts so that this sort of thing can't happen in future. You can't have people feeling as though it's one rule for one, one rule for another. They need to get a handle on it going forward.

---