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 - Technologist - 29-09-2023

The old and new "rules" cover all who have a face on Tv (or voice on radio)
or are employed by the BBC.

As a result of the Lineker incident and the Hardie report the Guidance has changed to clarify for everyone
and it brings in a new category of Flagship Programme or Presenter who are more restricted than the average BBC employee.
but less so than "Individuals working in news and current affairs (across all divisions) and factual journalism production"
(but note what factual Journalism is - this may also be seen as a change)

The guidance for personal social media has not changed.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - RhysJR - 13-12-2023

Well, we are here once again with Gary.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67701186 

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Keith - 13-12-2023

(13-12-2023, 05:19 PM)RhysJR Wrote:  Well, we are here once again with Gary.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67701186 

I can't help thinking that the BBC would benefit from simply not renewing Gary's contract when it expires. Firstly, it would allow them to employ someone at a similar or cheaper salary for MOTD and other sporting events. Secondly, it would avoid the BBC getting dragged into the mire every time he expresses an opinion.

They're unlikely to suspend him, given what happened the last time they did.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - JMT1985 - 13-12-2023

It is starting to become a regular thing with Gary, and the problem is that Gary doesn't seem to care - there seems to be no repercussions when he speaks out.

For me, I think the rule should be, if you work for BBC News or BBC Current Affairs, you are restricted to what you can say, and everyone else can say what they want to a certain degree.

He works for BBC Sport, he is not a newsreader, or a host of a BBC political show, so why should be be quiet?

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - interestednovice - 13-12-2023

They are bit stuck now, I agree.

If they suspend him, it creates a crisis as happened before. Equally, he can’t be seen as untouchable so if he does go over the line something needs to be done - either a suspension, or “the line” moved to allow more commentary from big-name presenters. Meanwhile, Gary keeps tweeting in a way which probably does contravene the guidance but there is no will to do anything about it.

It’s basically a mess.

And, if there is still genuine confusion over what is and is not allowed, then the existing guidance is clearly inadequate.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Former Member 237 - 13-12-2023

Don’t renew the contract, that’s the best way, when it ends. I’m sure another broadcaster will snap him up but the BBC can’t have him going off every five minutes.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Brekkie - 13-12-2023

It's not Gary who is the problem- it's those who attack him who often wish to destroy the BBC. John Nicholson has quite rightly, perhaps in jest, called out the BBC Board for their own political affiliations today.

https://twitter.com/MrJohnNicolson/status/1734963203820437567 

I'm sure it's already been announced Gary has renewed his contract. It wouldn't save a huge amount axing him as it's likely his replacement, especially if female, would put the BBC underconsiderable pressure to come close to his salary. Both Mark Chapman and especially Gabby Logan have a similar level of experience.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Former Member 237 - 13-12-2023

This is where we need to separate conspiracy and fact. Anyone who works for the BBC really cannot do what Garry is doing. Do you really think someone working for any company who is so public, constantly getting involved in matters of public interest is good for said company? No it isn’t and it has to stop.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - interestednovice - 13-12-2023

I tend to agree that senior figures in an organisation shouldn’t be engaging in such debates, as it creates an organisational reputation issue. That is the case if it’s the BBC or not.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Stockland Hillman - 13-12-2023

(13-12-2023, 07:27 PM)interestednovice Wrote:  They are bit stuck now, I agree.

If they suspend him, it creates a crisis as happened before. Equally, he can’t be seen as untouchable so if he does go over the line something needs to be done - either a suspension, or “the line” moved to allow more commentary from big-name presenters. Meanwhile, Gary keeps tweeting in a way which probably does contravene the guidance but there is no will to do anything about it.

It’s basically a mess.

And, if there is still genuine confusion over what is and is not allowed, then the existing guidance is clearly inadequate.

Read the guidelines here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidance/individual-use-of-social-media#:~:text=Everyone%20who%20works%20for%20the,undermine%20trust%20in%20the%20BBC .

For those in a professional organisation, the guidelines are clear and use simple English , with a logical construct that is well within a GCSE level students grasp. Definitely within the grasp of a multi million pound senior worker, and if it's not perhaps someone could Read it to him.

There's no getting around the respect section and the requirements not to bring the BBC into disrepute.

---