[DTV]

Clarkson was given multiple formal warnings though, and told he was on a “final warning” ahead of the incident that led to his firing.

Sure, but 'final warning' is always code for 'we don't really want to sack you'. Plus, many of his controversies involved discriminatory language and/or were during the production of a BBC programme. For instance, he once delivered an anti-Labour speech to the Top Gear audience before studio recording. If Lineker was giving slur-writhen speeches to the SPOTY audience pre-broadcast, it would be a different matter.

This is the behaviour of an activist, not a BBC presenter. It doesn’t matter if it is a good cause, that does not distract from the point of the issue. Please remember every time his actions are given approval, this sets a precedent. [...] Think carefully before you permit employees to run rampant the BBC should be thinking. Otherwise it will run out of control. It doesn’t matter which department or devision they work for, people only see one BBC.

Lineker no more sets a precedent than Neil did on social media usage or Attenborough does on activism (which has included criticism of govt policy and party political endorsements). Indeed, it's impossible to draft rules that restrict Lineker's activism that wouldn't also prevent Attenborough's climate advocacy or other sport presenters criticising lack of girl's football in schools. But, sure, what about some hypotheticals.

In terms of long-term damage to the BBC, I would say that anybody genuinely concerned about BBC impartiality would be more bothered by the fact the BBC's head of impartiality is a party political figure with a history of being accused of inserting his views into BBC output. But, of course, Lineker's critics are conspicuously silent about Robbie Gibb, because their concern about BBC impartiality isn't genuine, rather a party political game.

And as for 'people only see one BBC' and view Lineker as inseparable from it, do people assume Walkers are officially endorsed by the BBC? No, obviously.