Gary Lineker Faces Backlash for Alleged Breach of BBC Election Guidelines with Anti-Israel

[transam]

1 minute ago, retarius said:

• Thank god for people like Lineker in our establishment. The rest look on genocide from Israel and shrug their shoulders afraid of being called anti-semitic. Gary is afraid. Keep up the good work Gary.

It seems you don't understand that his job is to stay out of controversial stuff. He gets paid a lot of money to stay on his paid topic.

Though it would seem you don't understand any of that, perhaps because of your time spent in football stands doing your thing..........

[brewsterbudgen]

1 hour ago, transam said:

It seems you don't understand that his job is to stay out of controversial stuff. He gets paid a lot of money to stay on his paid topic.

Though it would seem you don't understand any of that, perhaps because of your time spent in football stands doing your thing..........

His comments on current affairs and political views are separate from his job.  After the fuss about him comparing the language surrounding 'the boats' to pre-Nazi Germany, the BBC made it clear that he was free to continue to comment.  

[transam]

1 hour ago, brewsterbudgen said:

His comments on current affairs and political views are separate from his job.  After the fuss about him comparing the language surrounding 'the boats' to pre-Nazi Germany, the BBC made it clear that he was free to continue to comment.  

So why doesn't everyone who works or contracted to the BBC do it......?

Perhaps not that stupid to risk the sack.....🥴

[stevenl]

22 hours ago, Keeps said:

Lineker is a complete and utter prick who is also delusional in thinking anyone has the slightest interest in his views.

 

Great when he played for Tottenham though....555

So how many are following him? All because they're not interested in his views?

[brewsterbudgen]

4 hours ago, transam said:

So why doesn't everyone who works or contracted to the BBC do it......?

Perhaps not that stupid to risk the sack.....🥴

I guess they don't all have the same concerns about humanity as Gary?

 

BBC employees in the news and politics divisions have to be seen to be impartial.  But Gary is a sports presenter, so is free to express his opinions.

[Keeps]

7 hours ago, stevenl said:

So how many are following him? All because they're not interested in his views?

Ok, I should have caveated that with not interested in his political views. His followers want to know whether he thinks Crystal Palace are going to beat Wolves. He is not exactly a political powerhouse. He just likes the sound of his own voice as he has proved time and time again.

[transam]

11 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

I guess they don't all have the same concerns about humanity as Gary?

 

BBC employees in the news and politics divisions have to be seen to be impartial.  But Gary is a sports presenter, so is free to express his opinions.

Riiiiiiiiight........

[CG1 Blue]

On 6/12/2024 at 2:37 PM, Bangkok Barry said:

So state broadcasters can't have a voice in a democratic country? That's an interesting point of view.

You didn't read my post properly. 

 

The BBC's political pundits can talk about politics. Lineker could switch from being a (crap) sports presenter to being a political pundit. Then he could spout his champagne socialist views 24/7.

 

But while he's a sports presenter he can't be a leftie political influencer at the same time. 

[brewsterbudgen]

34 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

You didn't read my post properly. 

 

The BBC's political pundits can talk about politics. Lineker could switch from being a (crap) sports presenter to being a political pundit. Then he could spout his champagne socialist views 24/7.

 

But while he's a sports presenter he can't be a leftie political influencer at the same time. 

Actually it's the opposite.  BBC political pundits/reporters are supposed to be impartial.  BBC sports presenters can think and say what they like in their free time.

[Bangkok Barry]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

On 6/12/2024 at 8:37 PM, Bangkok Barry said:

So state broadcasters can't have a voice in a democratic country? That's an interesting point of view.

You didn't read my post properly. 

 

The BBC's political pundits can talk about politics. Lineker could switch from being a (crap) sports presenter to being a political pundit. Then he could spout his champagne socialist views 24/7.

 

But while he's a sports presenter he can't be a leftie political influencer at the same time. 

 

ANYONE is allowed to have a point of view, whoever they work for, in a democratic country. It is not for an employer to dictate what you are allowed to say and what you are not. His job has absolutely nothing to do with what he says or does off-air.

 

Clearly, you don't like him, calling what I believe is the BBC's highest paid presenter crap. If he is so bad at his job, why has the BBC employed him for so many years in the role, and responded to the outcry by backing down when they tried to say he should keep his mouth. He is so highly respected that the response was many of his colleagues going on strike and the BBC forced into drastic programme changes.

 

Just because he might have a different point of view to yours doesn't mean he has to be muzzled. That only happens in dictatorships like China and Russia and North Korea. Something you appear to support.

[Nick Carter icp]

19 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

ANYONE is allowed to have a point of view, whoever they work for, in a democratic country. It is not for an employer to dictate what you are allowed to say and what you are not. His job has absolutely nothing to do with what he says or does off-air.

 

Clearly, you don't like him, calling what I believe is the BBC's highest paid presenter crap. If he is so bad at his job, why has the BBC employed him for so many years in the role, and responded to the outcry by backing down when they tried to say he should keep his mouth. He is so highly respected that the response was many of his colleagues going on strike and the BBC forced into drastic programme changes.

 

Just because he might have a different point of view to yours doesn't mean he has to be muzzled. That only happens in dictatorships like China and Russia and North Korea. Something you appear to support.

 

   So if Joey Barton were to say that hes tired of all the Black players playing football and there should only be White players playing , you would be happy for him to commentate on games ?

[brewsterbudgen]

2 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   So if Joey Barton were to say that hes tired of all the Black players playing football and there should only be White players playing , you would be happy for him to commentate on games ?

Hasn't he already said much like that, and worse?  I don't think he works for the BBC, thankfully.

[CG1 Blue]

4 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Actually it's the opposite.  BBC political pundits/reporters are supposed to be impartial.  BBC sports presenters can think and say what they like in their free time.

You're wrong about sports presenters. Sports presenters representing the BBC cannot say whatever they like in their free time. There are rules, and new guidance was issued last year after the BBC caved in to Lineker.

 

In this particular case Lineker has broken these rules: 

"And this new approach says you can do that so long as you stay to the facts of the issue itself"

 

The guidance also says they shouldn't:

"comment on any issue of political debate during an election period"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66940530

 

[Keeps]

4 hours ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

ANYONE is allowed to have a point of view, whoever they work for, in a democratic country. It is not for an employer to dictate what you are allowed to say and what you are not. His job has absolutely nothing to do with what he says or does off-air.

 

Clearly, you don't like him, calling what I believe is the BBC's highest paid presenter crap. If he is so bad at his job, why has the BBC employed him for so many years in the role, and responded to the outcry by backing down when they tried to say he should keep his mouth. He is so highly respected that the response was many of his colleagues going on strike and the BBC forced into drastic programme changes.

 

Just because he might have a different point of view to yours doesn't mean he has to be muzzled. That only happens in dictatorships like China and Russia and North Korea. Something you appear to support.

There are in fact rules as to what presenters are allowed to comment on whether directly or indirectly employed by the BBC depending on what they are paid to comment upon. Just because he works with a load of sycophants who 'support' (and I use the term very loosely - more likely trying to feather their own nests) his views does not mean he is not breaching rules or guidelines.

 

If he perceives his views on political matters as more important than the views he is rewarded (very handsomely) to provide (eg, Burnely getting relegated or staying up), then perhaps he should forsake his exorbitant salary and become an ineffectual political pundit.

[Bangkok Barry]

So you believe in censorship in case it offends a section of society. Okay. And who elected those at the BBC who decide what people can or cannot say? Interesting concept from an organisation which has previously made its name by being fair and balanced. Now, as in so much of society, an alternative view isn't allowed. We now live in The Age Of Intolerance.

[Keeps]

5 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

So you believe in censorship in case it offends a section of society. Okay. And who elected those at the BBC who decide what people can or cannot say? Interesting concept from an organisation which has previously made its name by being fair and balanced. Now, as in so much of society, an alternative view isn't allowed. We now live in The Age Of Intolerance.

Those elected are the ones who pay the vast salaries for employees or freelancers to abide by the rules whether they like it or not. Plenty of other places to go and work and peddle their drivel for a fraction of the salary.

 

" Interesting concept from an organisation which has previously made its name by being fair and balanced."

 

Ha ha - I think you have had enough tonight - time to put that bottle of Turps back in the shed.

 

[Bangkok Barry]

14 minutes ago, Keeps said:

Ha ha - I think you have had enough tonight - time to put that bottle of Turps back in the shed.

 

Idiotic comment and so, so original. Did you make that up all by yourself? As I say, you don't believe in free speech. Happily. others do.

[NowNow]

On 6/11/2024 at 9:34 PM, Social Media said:

 

Gary Lineker, has found himself at the center of yet another controversy following a social media post that condemned Israel's actions in Gaza. This incident has sparked significant backlash, with critics accusing Lineker of violating the BBC’s stringent social media guidelines, particularly given the sensitive timing during the UK election period.

 

The controversy erupted when Lineker shared a post from author James Felton on the social media platform X. Felton's post, made in response to the rescue of four Israeli hostages in central Gaza, included a report accusing Israel of a "massacre" at the Nuseirat refugee camp. Felton wrote, "What kind of f***ed up species can’t look at endless scenes like this and collectively agree what Israel is doing is abhorrent." Lineker shared this post without adding any personal comment.

 

The move quickly provoked a strong reaction. Former Labour minister Lord Austin of Dudley expressed his dismay on the platform, stating, "Four hostages released and this is what Lineker posts. Unbelievable." Although Lineker subsequently deleted the repost, the original tweet remained visible in his Likes column, further fueling the controversy.

 

Lineker, it appears, interpreted the "f***ed up species" phrase as a reference to humanity in general rather than any specific national group. However, to avoid further misinterpretation, he chose to remove the repost while leaving the Like intact. This decision did little to quell the criticism, with a BBC staffer noting, "This repost looks like a clear breach but Gary knows the BBC won’t dare take him off air just before the Euros."

 

The BBC’s social media guidelines, which were revised after a previous incident involving Lineker, permit non-news figures like him more leeway to express political views. However, these guidelines impose stricter rules during election periods, particularly for flagship presenters. These rules stipulate that such presenters must avoid commenting on any issue that is a matter of political debate during the election period.

 

Danny Cohen, a former BBC director of television, was vocal in his criticism. "Gary Lineker has clearly broken the BBC’s strict election guidelines which prevent the corporation’s flagship presenters from expressing opinions on politically contentious subjects during the campaign," Cohen told the i newspaper. He also questioned why Lineker would support a message referring to people with differing views as a "f***ed up species," calling it "very disturbing." Cohen, who has previously accused the BBC of "anti-Israel bias," added, "The BBC’s senior leadership has proven itself unable to control Mr. Lineker. Few in the Jewish community will expect this to change anytime soon."

 

Leo Pearlman, a leading TV producer, echoed Cohen’s sentiments. "Mr. Lineker, in reference to the rescue of four of the Hamas hostages, retweeted the phrase ‘f***ed up species’ in relation to Israel," he said. "Lineker, the highest paid and highest profile BBC presenter, on the eve of the European Championships, continues to take advantage of his bosses’ cowardice."

 

The BBC, approached for comment, did not formally reprimand Lineker but indicated that they "do have conversations with individuals as required." This was not the first time Lineker faced calls for discipline over his social media activity. Previously, he had retweeted an article that called for Israel to be banned from international football tournaments, a post he later deleted.

 

This latest controversy adds to a series of incidents where Lineker's outspoken nature on social media has clashed with the BBC's guidelines. Earlier in the year, when asked if he would adhere to the stricter social media guidelines during election periods, Lineker confidently replied, "I know the guidelines really, really well. I was partly involved in drawing them up."

 

Despite the controversy, Lineker is set to front the BBC’s coverage of Euro 2024, which begins shortly. Given his history of making politically charged comments, Tory sources have indicated that Lineker will be "watched like a hawk" during the tournament, particularly since it coincides with the final three weeks of the UK election campaign.

 

Home Secretary James Cleverly was also critical of Lineker, likening him to a "spoiled child" and a "showman" seeking attention. In an interview with LBC's Andrew Marr, Cleverly dismissed Lineker's comments regarding the D-Day commemorations as "nonsense," stating, "The Prime Minister was at D-Day celebrations over two days. A day in the UK and a day over in Normandy, he met British veterans, spent a huge amount of time with British veterans." He continued, "He said he was wrong to leave that final event, that world leaders’ event, and he has apologized."

 

Cleverly was firm in his stance against Lineker's inclusion in the Conservative Party, despite suggestions from some quarters. "Nigel's made it clear he wants to destroy the Conservative Party and I don’t embrace people that want to destroy my party and hurt the British people," he said, in response to Suella Braverman’s call for Nigel Farage to join the Tories.

 

Earlier in the week, Farage himself had commented on the matter, expressing admiration for Braverman but rejecting the notion of joining the Conservatives "at the moment." Speculation remains that if Farage, currently leading the Reform party, were elected to represent Clacton-on-Sea, he might eventually defect to the Tories depending on the party's future direction.

 

Credit: Inews 2024-06-12

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

Cohen, Pearlman... 

Looks like they really sought out impartial people for their comment.

Good on Gary.

[NowNow]

5 hours ago, Keeps said:

Yes, I didn't need any help with that one, you fool. Don't tell me what I believe in. I believe in free speech but people have to accept parameters when a pay master is involved. Lineker is free to give up the inflated salary and peddle his dribble elsewhere.

 

Plus, I am entitled to think who is a knob and who isn't and Lineker is up in the realms with your good self.

 

👎

Poor.

[NowNow]

5 hours ago, Keeps said:

Those elected are the ones who pay the vast salaries for employees or freelancers to abide by the rules whether they like it or not. Plenty of other places to go and work and peddle their drivel for a fraction of the salary.

 

" Interesting concept from an organisation which has previously made its name by being fair and balanced."

 

Ha ha - I think you have had enough tonight - time to put that bottle of Turps back in the shed.

 

 

👎

 

Seems you are on a roll...

Are you suggesting that Mr Lineker is paid to keep his mouth shut? I'm glad the man has some integrity. Certainly preferable to an anonymous someone who uses this forum to abuse people.

[NowNow]

6 hours ago, Keeps said:

There are in fact rules as to what presenters are allowed to comment on whether directly or indirectly employed by the BBC depending on what they are paid to comment upon. Just because he works with a load of sycophants who 'support' (and I use the term very loosely - more likely trying to feather their own nests) his views does not mean he is not breaching rules or guidelines.

 

If he perceives his views on political matters as more important than the views he is rewarded (very handsomely) to provide (eg, Burnely getting relegated or staying up), then perhaps he should forsake his exorbitant salary and become an ineffectual political pundit.

 

Why does he have to be one or the other? Because you say so? Get over yourself 😊 You seem to be somewhat envious of his salary. 

[NowNow]

8 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

You're wrong about sports presenters. Sports presenters representing the BBC cannot say whatever they like in their free time. There are rules, and new guidance was issued last year after the BBC caved in to Lineker.

 

In this particular case Lineker has broken these rules: 

"And this new approach says you can do that so long as you stay to the facts of the issue itself"

 

The guidance also says they shouldn't:

"comment on any issue of political debate during an election period"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66940530

 

 

He kept to the facts, so what's the problem? What does it have to do with the upcoming election? 

Is it right that people who had nothing to do with the HAMAS incursion are slaughtered? It's abhorent.

What has that to do with the upcoming election? 

[NowNow]

On 6/13/2024 at 7:14 AM, transam said:

It seems you don't understand that his job is to stay out of controversial stuff. He gets paid a lot of money to stay on his paid topic.

Though it would seem you don't understand any of that, perhaps because of your time spent in football stands doing your thing..........

 

You just made that up all by yourself.

It's his job to comment on matters related to football. Apart from that, he a normal person with normal views. He expresses them at times. Good for him. Neither a paid shill or too afraid to stand up and be counted. Exemplary.

A refreshing contrast to the Trolls that inhabit this board.

[NowNow]

On 6/12/2024 at 2:42 PM, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Those were the mainly people guarding the hostages , Hamas members .

  The people guarding the hostages needed to be killed immediately 

 

Disgusting lies. Most of the people killed were killed by bombs from helicopers and fighter jets.

 

"

Samuel Johann, a coordinator with the international charity Doctors Without Borders, which operates in the hospital, said it was a “nightmare.”

“There have been back-to-back mass casualties as densely populated areas are bombed

"

"Israel called in heavy strikes from land and air to cover their evacuation to the coast."

 

''Khulood Shalaq, who was being treated at another hospital with her wounded 1-year-old nephew, said 14 members of her family were killed in the raid, with some still buried in the rubble. She said at one point she saw four helicopters launching missiles into the camp.''

 

"The Gaza Health Ministry said 274 Palestinians were killed and around 700 were wounded. The ministry does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its tallies, but said the dead included 64 children and 57 women.

“The streets are filled with dead bodies," she said."

 

"Hagari acknowledged that a cease-fire deal would bring home more hostages than military operations, but said Israeli forces need to “create conditions” to bring them home."

 

 

https://time.com/6987062/274-palestinians-killed-israel-hostage-rescue/

 

Barbarism.

[NowNow]

On 6/12/2024 at 3:19 PM, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   There were just four hostages , there was gun fire coming from all around , from the surrounding buildings , Israel bombed those buildings to stop the gun fire 

 

So kill and wound 1000 people(most of whom were not involved) in order to rescue four hostages. Does that sound right to you? 

What kind of person would seek to justify this?

No mention of the three other hostages killed in the bombing mayhem. 

 

You're a Jew, aren't you? 

 

 

[NowNow]

12 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   So if Joey Barton were to say that hes tired of all the Black players playing football and there should only be White players playing , you would be happy for him to commentate on games ?

 

Has Gary said anything like that? That's a pitiful strawman fallacy you have presented. Congratulations. You have outdone yourself on this occasion.

[NowNow]

On 6/12/2024 at 1:45 PM, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   That quite probably isn't true though , its very likely to be just another lie by Hamas that Israel killed three hostages 

 

But what if it's true?

 

Edited June 14 by NowNow

[NowNow]

On 6/12/2024 at 11:52 AM, transam said:

The bloke should be put out to graze on the same stuff he started out on.

He is also an embarrassing tool, taking the p_ss out of the BBC...........

 

If you replaced BBC with AseanNow, you could be that bloke..... 

[daveAustin]

On 6/12/2024 at 3:48 AM, brewsterbudgen said:

Good on Gary.  One positive result of a new Labour government will be less foaming-at-the-mouth outrage from the BBC haters.

He is right this time, and no reason why the BBC should not be hated... a joke of an organisation today when it gets involved in anything but period drama and the natural world. The news, esp' political, is pure pain. As for Labour, it would be more of the same bs (Starmer is a rubbishy, smug politician with no agenda beyond the obvious), pushing the same tired old *welfare* monies around. The UK is utterly lost amid wokeness, welfare and propping up very old people in buggies. Shove it!

[transam]

2 hours ago, NowNow said:

 

If you replaced BBC with AseanNow, you could be that bloke..... 

You haven't been here long enough, 9 days, to make that assumption, ol' chap.......