Gary Lineker's tweet

This was covered earlier on in this thread, in detail

Good!
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks he’s a hypocrite.

Jaxjacky

Kandinsky

It’s a shame Gary Lineker & his mates didn’t make the same protest over human rights in Qutar.
They were happy to take the money from the BBC to sit & comment on the World Cup in a country that treats women, homosexuals, & workers appallingly.

Double standards indeed.

This was covered earlier on in this thread, in detail.

Yup. This is what I was getting at when I said that people often just pick up on points that feed their own world view.

My understanding is this has nothing to do with freedom of speech, it's about GL's contract and one of the clauses he's broken with this tweet.

I think that the only mistake Lineker made was to reference 1930's Germany. Whether or not he used the word "NAZI" is irrelevant, as the inference is clear. Unfortunately, this gives Braverman and Co. an opportunity to cry "foul," to simulate righteous indignation, and to divert attention from the basic immorality of their policy. Well-intentioned, Gary, but perhaps a simile too far.

Smileless2012

My understanding is this has nothing to do with freedom of speech, it's about GL's contract and one of the clauses he's broken with this tweet.

Which clause has he broken?

micmc47

I think that the only mistake Lineker made was to reference 1930's Germany. Whether or not he used the word "NAZI" is irrelevant, as the inference is clear. Unfortunately, this gives Braverman and Co. an opportunity to cry "foul," to simulate righteous indignation, and to divert attention from the basic immorality of their policy. Well-intentioned, Gary, but perhaps a simile too far.

If he'd referenced 1930s Spain or Italy no-one would have known what he was talking about. But it would certainly sidestepped the inevitable leap in people's minds.

OTOH, when a Holocaust survivor asks the Home Secretary to moderate her language as it was similar to that which enabled the Holocaust and the HS refuses to apologise, I suspect a precedent has been set.

micmc47

I think that the only mistake Lineker made was to reference 1930's Germany. Whether or not he used the word "NAZI" is irrelevant, as the inference is clear. Unfortunately, this gives Braverman and Co. an opportunity to cry "foul," to simulate righteous indignation, and to divert attention from the basic immorality of their policy. Well-intentioned, Gary, but perhaps a simile too far.

I do know what you mean, but I also think that what he said was true.

In many ways it doesn't matter whether I think it's true or not - I still think he has a right to tweet what he likes within the law. If he'd said 'the BBC is corrupt' I'd have been surprised if he hadn't been sacked, but his views on refugees are not relevant either to football or to the BBC.

Specifying what people can say and threatening their paid employment because of it is all to do with freedom of speech. Although as I have said you cant expect the BBC or Gransnet or any organisation to take a stand on this on their own.

Despite what Andrew Neil says this is not solely a matter of a negotiated agreement between the BBC and Lineker. The impartiality rules have to apply in general and it is difficult to see how the interpretation of such rules can be left to a Director General with a clear political party preference working under a Chairman with the same preference. That applies to Labour as well as Tory. We need a BBC above politics. Perhaps the King should be ex officio Chair and appoint the DG on advice.

I would be saying the same if he had been cheering on the policy with bunting and fireworks.

Doodledog

Smileless2012

My understanding is this has nothing to do with freedom of speech, it's about GL's contract and one of the clauses he's broken with this tweet.

Which clause has he broken?

How come everyone appears to be fully conversant with the details of Lineker's contract with the BBC. Has it been published on line?

The BBC guidelines, which I have posted twice on this thread, state that the risk of presenters', such as sports or science presenters, off air expression of political views impairing BBC. impartiality is 'low".

The BBC conract cannot 'own' Lineker- they can define what he does or doesn't say on air during the programme, but not in his private life. If they want to own him, lock, stock and barrel, then I am sure he will refuse to continue to work for them.

micmc47

I think that the only mistake Lineker made was to reference 1930's Germany. Whether or not he used the word "NAZI" is irrelevant, as the inference is clear. Unfortunately, this gives Braverman and Co. an opportunity to cry "foul," to simulate righteous indignation, and to divert attention from the basic immorality of their policy. Well-intentioned, Gary, but perhaps a simile too far.

Sorry (not sorry) to disappoint you micmc47

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/03/11/britons-say-bbc-was-wrong-suspend-gary-lineker

A Radio 4 presenter has just cut into his programme to announce the viewing figures for last nights football on the BBC. The figures were up 😂

Zoejory

I'm very confused. I thought that Gary had overstepped the mark when he mentioned similarities between the government and 1930s Germany but that doesn't seem to be the issue at all. It's because the government really are using the language of 1930s Germany. Which is actually total rubbish.

I'm more than happy for him to tweet whatever he likes about this appalling government. I agree wholeheartedly. But for people to say he was telling the truth about 1930s Germany is pathetic.

This article is in the Mail, So this probably won't be read by many. It's written by Tom Bowyer. More bad news due to his reputation. However he's written, in simple terms, just what was going on in 1930s Germany. His family knew all about it. But what he says is the truth. There is no comparison whatsoever and it's hurtful to the Jewish population. But I know that some people here aren't overly keen. Jews have been persecuted for thousands of years. It's still not easy for us occasionally.

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11848987/TOM-BOWER-Nazi-thugs-beat-mother-know-real-language-used-1930s-Germany.html

Shalom shalom

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Fanny Cornforth.
micmc47

I think that the only mistake Lineker made was to reference 1930's Germany. Whether or not he used the word "NAZI" is irrelevant, as the inference is clear. Unfortunately, this gives Braverman and Co. an opportunity to cry "foul," to simulate righteous indignation, and to divert attention from the basic immorality of their policy. Well-intentioned, Gary, but perhaps a simile too far.

Sorry (not sorry) to disappoint you micmc47

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/03/11/britons-say-bbc-was-wrong-suspend-gary-lineker

Don't know what you're on about, Fanny. The article changes nothing I've said.. and as for "disappointing me", have you read and understood what I've written? Doesn't look like it..

It’s also worth pointing out that the government, who I disagree with on most subjects and policies, are trying to get to grips with an illegal immigrant problem that’s a major problem for all European countries. Not, like 1930’s Germany at all, where they cruelly went after German people because they hated them, also cynically because many Jews had successful businesses and they wanted to exploit that for themselves.
Also needs saying that many who dislike this government are using the Lineker tweet debacle as a stick to beat them with.
Lineker signed a contract in 2020 which covered the use of social media, which he knew when he tweeted he was breaking that clause.
Am guessing he and the BBC will come to an arrangement and he’ll be more careful with phrasing in future.

Micmc From your line ‘well intentioned Gary, but perhaps a simile to far’, I inferred that you thought that Lineker would lose the support of the public; and also that Braverman would derive political capital from his words.
I posted the link to the You Gov poll to show that he has the public’s support, also inferring that Braverman does not have the over whelming public support that she was anticipating.

I thought that I did in fact understand what you had written, apologies as it appears that I didn’t

Not to make political statements I think Doodledog.

Let me make it absolutely clear that I agree with Lineker's condemnation of the policy, and disagree with the decision to suspend him. The only issue I have is that his unfortunate comparison with 1930's Germany has given Braverman and Co. some undeserved wriggle room, which of course, they are shamelessly exploiting in order to divert attention from their immoral policy. It would have been better to simply stick to arguing the rights and wrongs of what has been proposed, rather than to make controversial historical comparisons.

Lineker signed a contract in 2020 which covered the use of social media, which he knew when he tweeted he was breaking that clause.
Do you have a link to that contract, please? Of just the clause?

Or just the clause

GrannyGravy13

Alastair Campbell has apparently come out in support of GL and raging against the Government.

He did omit that his podcast is produced by a company which GL is the major shareholder.

It was mentioned in the interview I saw with him. I would have thought it was the interviewers job to mention it,

Doodledog

*Lineker signed a contract in 2020 which covered the use of social media, which he knew when he tweeted he was breaking that clause.*
Do you have a link to that contract, please? Of just the clause?

The freelance IT expert Will Guyatt, who works with the BBC advising them on their social media policies, has said that it’s a case of ‘they make (them) up as the go along’.

Gary Lineker was a footballer turned TV pundit. There are many of those quietly getting on with their jobs that they are paid to do.

Gary has always been arrogant thinking he is better than the rest. This is what happens when they are given big contracts, huge money and allowed to believe they are indispensable. The way forward is a rolling one year contract. If it works, continue it for another year. If it doesn’t, there are many retired players and managers who would give their views on FOOTBALL on TV and be glad to do so without controversy.

Gary should disinherit his 4 sons and put his money where his big mouth is and house numerous refugee families, not one carefully handpicked person for a few weeks, and let’s see what happens.

Rod Stewart put his money where his mouth was. He paid for people’s scans on the NHS but did not bad mouth anybody while doing it. Saintly Gary could learn from him.

Let’s see big mouth Gary Neville turn his hotel over to refugees too.