Gary Lineker's tweet

Whilst I agree with Lineker that the policy is so very wrong on so many levels, I feel that his unfortunate reference to "1930's Germany", (and please don't point out that he didn't actually use the word 'Nazi', as the inference is clear), merely allows Braverman and Co. undeserved wriggle room, which of course they have used with simulated righteous indignation in an attempt to divert attention from the basic immorality of their disgusting plan. The vast majority of us remain unimpressed by such hypocritical posturing, but there are some who will show some sympathy. Perhaps a simile too far, Gary. Sticking to the rights and wrongs, with no controversial references to past atrocities may have better served the cause of the vulnerable.

Sorry, I don't understand. Why would it allow Braverman "wriggle room"? He was absolutely right. Why shouldn't he point out the similarities? Why is it hypocritical to point it out?

Do you honestly think we should forget past atrocities? Shouldn't we be learning from the past?

Quite honestly, Braverman and Co's "righteous indignation" hasn't done them any favours. It just shows them up for what they are.

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.

Groundhog Day!

Oh, I see that you added a sentence today micmc47

13:59Eloethan

Maudi You obviously think the best form of defence is attack. Casdon disproved your statement that you didn't watch GB News. It seems you think it is acceptable to label Casdon's actions as "sinister" and imply she is a troll in order to detract from your own lack of transparency. In fact, it doesn't require too much effort to look at a specific person's posts on Gransnet. I think, for the sake of clarity, it is important that this facility is available, as some people are either very forgetful as to what they have said or knowingly seek to disclaim it.

I think it is sinister actually googling other posters why would anyone bother doing that unless they are obsessed with said poster which Casdon seems to be always popping up and commenting on nearly all my posts even when my posts are directed at another poster and making childish comments. Whatever floats your boat. If you don't believe me try googling 😊

FannyCornforth

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.

Groundhog Day!

Fanny Cornforth. The only reason I posted was because I couldn't find the original, and thought that it might have been removed. I also tried to (unsuccessfully) make my position clearer, only to find that someone has somehow read that I am suggesting we should "forget past atrocities". Weird. Sorry that you feel the need to point out that I am merely repeating myself, "with just an added sentence". Wish I hadn't bothered ... Downer... which is not what I need right now.

In January, Joan Salter, an 83 year old Holocaust survivor, said Suella Braverman's language over migration was akin to what the Nazis used to justify murdering her family. The Home Secretary refused to apologise for her "invasion" rhetoric.

www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/14/suella-braverman-wont-apologise-to-holocaust-survivor-for-calling-migrants-invasion

It was Joan Salter, not Gary Linacre, who first challenged this use of intemperate language to stir up hatred. Gary Linacre did well to use his high profile to draw attention to it.

Last straw today, folks. Too much negativity and too many uninformed, judgemental postings on here, which is the last thing I need to be exposed to at my time of life and in my state of health. I'm therefore leaving Gransnet for good. It used to be such a supportive, friendly thread, but things have changed. I hope it can somehow recover, but I won't be here to see it. Signing off.

Maudi

Defund the BBC. Time for a subscription service all the people /posters who are happy to pay for it can. If you're happy to pay for Lineker's inflated salary £1.3 million for a few hours presenting the football you can and Zoe Ball's salary £1 million plus, the so called BBC talent you can. I think more people will be cancelling their TV License in protest.

Firstly, as has been pointed out on several occasions, it's not a salary, it's a fee. There's a big difference. Because GL is not an employee the BBC does not have to pay employers' NIC or holiday leave or sick pay. It's one reason why they like to have freelance contributors.

A TV licence costs £159 which is £3.05 per week
Sky/BT Sport package is £336 which is £6.40 per week

By my calculations that makes BBC less than half price.

You could say that football fans only watch football on BBC. The Premier League runs from August to May and I think that the season runs for 40 weeks. I'm sure that these fans watch other sports - American football, baseball, tennis, the Boat Race etc etc so to my mind, if they only watch sport they are getting a good deal.

And of course, there will almost certainly be other members of their household who watch programmes other than sport.

Lastly, for all those who complain about the repeats on the BBC - many of the programmes shown on Netflix are joint productions with the Beeb. As is Luther, streaming from last Friday, Very good too, if you enjoy policiers.

micmc47

Last straw today, folks. Too much negativity and too many uninformed, judgemental postings on here, which is the last thing I need to be exposed to at my time of life and in my state of health. I'm therefore leaving Gransnet for good. It used to be such a supportive, friendly thread, but things have changed. I hope it can somehow recover, but I won't be here to see it. Signing off.

You don't have to look at N & P. That's always a source for disagreement. There are plenty of non divisive topics many of which are very supportive. Witness the one about the lady with the cold fiancee. I don't think anyone was critical.

FannyCornforth

Doodledog

What is the T word?

Also, is GB News on Freeview Channel 7/8? On my online planner that shows as London News (I don't live in London) and on the TV it shows as 'Local News' (no region specified), but is full of right-wing commentators such as Jeremy Kyle and David Bull. I haven't found anything I want to watch on there, but it's just occurred to me that it is probably GB News.

You are thinking of Talk TV / Talk Radio
Kyle and Bull are on there, not GB News

Thanks. I doubt I'll be watching much of either .

varian

In January, Joan Salter, an 83 year old Holocaust survivor, said Suella Braverman's language over migration was akin to what the Nazis used to justify murdering her family. The Home Secretary refused to apologise for her "invasion" rhetoric.

www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/14/suella-braverman-wont-apologise-to-holocaust-survivor-for-calling-migrants-invasion

It was Joan Salter, not Gary Linacre, who first challenged this use of intemperate language to stir up hatred. Gary Linacre did well to use his high profile to draw attention to it.

I had Jewish friends staying over last week and they said just the same.

I think it should be funded more generously - maybe not from licences but from public money - and there should be a representative board of directors who are not, and never can be, influenced by the government (eg members should never be allowed to get a peerage or stand for parliament).

I agree doodle - bring back all our foreign correspondents too - don't just have a couple. And also properly fund our world service which has shrunk.

I think his name is Gary Lineker, not Linacre?

micmc47

Whilst I agree with Lineker that the policy is so very wrong on so many levels, I feel that his unfortunate reference to "1930's Germany", (and please don't point out that he didn't actually use the word 'Nazi', as the inference is clear), merely allows Braverman and Co. undeserved wriggle room, which of course they have used with simulated righteous indignation in an attempt to divert attention from the basic immorality of their disgusting plan. The vast majority of us remain unimpressed by such hypocritical posturing, but there are some who will show some sympathy. Perhaps a simile too far, Gary. Sticking to the rights and wrongs, with no controversial references to past atrocities may have better served the cause of the vulnerable.

It doesn't matter whether you think the inference is clear or not; he did not say that.

In the 1930s most countries decided, when the same language was being used in Germany, the UK, the USA, Canada and others, that we did not want to be led by a group that did not believe in liberal democracy or the parliamentary system, demonized select groups, believed in white supremacy and eugenics. They did not want to be led by a group that set out to create a dictatorship. Most countries, where they still could, opposed this.

The handbook of methods used to try and bring it about often reads like the methods used in countries where the hard right gets hold of or attempts to get hold of power in today's world.

You may not like this but many, probably most if they understand history, do not want what you appear to want. They didn't then and they don't now.

Jaberwok

I think his name is Gary Lineker, not Linacre?

Isn't it held to be rude to correct people's spelling on threads?

Do you have a contribution to make to the topic?

This thread is not about how the BBC is, or should be, funded.

Well he’s back, according to the Tekegraph, so that should help thus debate.

Mollygo

Well he’s back, according to the Tekegraph, so that should help thus debate.

Yes, that was reported this morning
The BBC have apologised

Fleurpepper

This thread is not about how the BBC is, or should be, funded.

Why can’t we talk about related stuff?
Why can’t we just chat about a topic?
Do we have to closely adhere to the title/ opening post?

No they haven’t apologised to Lineker if that’s what you infer from this debacle.They have apologised to viewers who may have missed all the punditry.
The BBC is going to have a review into who can say what on social media for the future to make thing absolutely crystal with no grey areas, which it obvs needs.Lineker is coming back to present MOTD next week as normal and agreed with the review.

Fleurpepper

This thread is not about how the BBC is, or should be, funded.

It can be, threads meander a bit and the topic is on the BBC.

We can talk about it Fanny, you just say no if someone says you cant .

Fleurpepper

This thread is not about how the BBC is, or should be, funded.

I don't see why BBC funding cannot be discussed. The Beeb has been attacked several times on this thread for the amount GL has been paid and the cost of the licence fee. it needs to be defended, even if it occasionally does stupid things.

More amazed about the amount of news coverage and fuss this has caused. He is a sports commentator not involved in news productions.
My husband actually preferred the MOTD without all the commentary