[Stooky Bill]

It will be interesting to see what happens with local radio, where most of the commentators are staff so not able to take what amounts to strike action without going through due process. But I see an unusual lack of tweets from my local station's sports team on a match day.

Local Radio staff are striking on Wednesday for another reason

[Jeff]

Well, well, well - here's another twist to the BBC's dilemma as to what to do tonight:

twitter.com 

[lhx1985]

The BBC needs to rectify the situation with Gary asap and get him back on air - otherwise I fear it will have a major long term impact of talent not wanting to work for the BBC.

Agreed, but Davie has now left himself looking for an 'out' that gets Lineker back on air and doesn't make himself look utterly impotent in the process. 

I'm not sure that's possible anymore.

If you war game this out...
1) Backing down completely,
2) Firing him outright,
3) Urgently re-writing the social media code or at least who and how it's applied, 
4) Keeping head down and hoping things will be calmer when he's back in the UK...

.. I'm not sure any of those have a good outcome for Davie.

Back down and he's toast or at least a significantly weakened figure, fire him and he's toast after being hauled for a beating before a select committee. Re-write social media policy and he risks undermining his platform, and keeping his head down means this thimbles on for days with him as a passenger.

[Kojak]

They certainly didn't apply to Andrew Neil

The complaint was regarding his promotion of a controversial Spectator magazine report on twitter.

It was rejected. As its a commercial activity,  just as Gary Lineker wouldn't be found in breach for talking about Crisps,  despite childhood obesity

It's not the same thing. 

The BBC can't trust a live presenter who's openly choosing which rules to follow. No responsible broadcaster can.

With respect, it is the same thing. Crisps don't have a political bias. The Spectator magazine... does. Anyway, if the BBC are going to suspend Gary Lineker, who is not a news presenter, then they ought to also take a LONG look at Justin Webb, who is. He's always giving his opinions about this, that and the other - far more so than one would expect from a presenter of the Today programme. That's not to knock his journalistic credentials, which are impeccable. I just think that, again, there is a tremendous double standard at work.

[orange]

This issue has more holes than in Swiss Cheese.    Gary was allowed to voice his opinion about the Qatari government with no action from the BBC, yet a simple critique of government policy from a freelance contractor, which is the excuse the BBC have used for Andrew Neil and Chris Packham who are also freelance to express political opinion is perfectly fine.

The BBC (along with the Government) have dug themselves a massive hole when it could have easily gone away by allowing him to broadcast this weekend.

This is exactly right. Honestly it’s getting to the point where people are jumping through hoops to defend the BBC and we’re just going round and round in circles with the same counter points being discussed.

[UTVLifer]

twitter.com 

[Stockland Hillman]

This what I mean when I say there's a highly manipulated agenda here.

Labour commentator  Dan Hodges is bang on here

The abolition of the BBC Singers is the latest thing to be the equivalent of the Nazis. Come on. Everyone needs to get a serious grip. This is getting ridiculous now. <a href="https://t.co/b97016vJ3J">https://t.co/b97016vJ3J</a></p>&mdash; (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges)

[Division2023]

Well, well, well - here's another twist to the BBC's dilemma as to what to do tonight:

twitter.com 

They will just have to cancel MOTD then and face the wrath of the Premier League.

[Steve in Pudsey]

Wonder what 5 live will do at 3. My guess is joining BBC Radio Leeds for Leeds v Brighton commentary.

The Radio Leeds commentary would be too partisan for that?

[Kim Wexler’s Ponytail]

LOL so there’s a loophole. All Garry needs to do is edit a magazine. Then he can say whatever he wants because it’s a ‘’commercial venture’?’. How was Andrew Neil allowed to be editor of Spectator magazine at all, and regularly whip up controversy around it on twitter, while he was working as a journalist for the impartial BBC? As many others have said either the rule applies to everyone or it’s pointless.

He was publisher, not editor of Spectator, which itself is a magazine regulated by IPSO. Therefore nothing like the Lineker situation

It's widely accepted that Journalists write and work for other news organisations of similar standing - so and independently regulated news magazine wouldn't raise any issues, same working for another Ofcom regulated broadcaster

It seems like we're holding a BBC sports presenter to a higher standard than actual BBC journalists here. The political journalist could express his non impartial opinions on twitter because he also wrote for another news organisation but the Match of the Day presenter absolutely can't express a non-impartial opinion on twitter because.....????