[Football] Gary Lineker to step back from presenting MOTD

[Titanic]

Gary Lineker to step back from presenting MOTD

Gary Lineker to step back from presenting Match of the Day until agreement reached on social media use - BBC statement

www.bbc.co.uk

Gary Lineker is to step back from presenting Match of the Day until an agreement is reached on his social media use - BBC statement.
It follows an impartiality row over comments he made criticising the government's new asylum policy.
In a tweet, the presenter had compared the language used by the government to set out its plan to "that used by Germany in the 30s".

 

[Stato]

Okay, now that fuss is settled, can we concentrate on the actual policy? Is it:

a) A dangerously callous and overly simplistic approach to a very complex problem. Seems to be against international law, but even if not, diminishes our country's moral standing in the international community. - Presented after a persistent period of othering and dishonest language deliberately designed to use the desperation of one group of needy people to play upon the fears of another, offering an invented scapegoat to those not being helped, similar in rhetoric to that used by right wing politicans in Germany during the economic depression of 1930s Germany; or

b) A dangerously callous and overly simplistic approach to a very complex problem. Seems to be against international law, but even if not, diminishes our country's moral standing in the international community. - Presented after a persistent period of othering and dishonest language deliberately designed to use the desperation of one group of needy people to play upon the fears of another, offering an invented scapegoat to those not being helped, but a totally new way of distracting the disadvantaged from the real causes of economic depression, that has absolutely no parallels with anything that occurred before or during the darkest period in modern European history?

As I understand the media coverage, (a) would be completely unacceptable and causes great offence to the proposers of the policy, but (b) is not at all problematic?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Amusing amount of spin from the GL groupies on here. Lineker will return on the understanding he will abide by the BBC's interpretation of the rules and guidelines while a review of those guidelines takes place ... and no apology to GL.

A sensible outcome and all the wokies can carry on pretending they have helped avert the march of fascism in the UK and get back tp their yoghurt knitting.

Score draw at best.

Not sure how actual news stories and quotes from the BBC can be, er, spun, as 'spin'. Or how you know for sure that there was no apology to GL...

 

[Mellotron]

I think you will find it's apologies to the public for the disruption, not GL

Actually it's been confirmed it is both, which is the correct course of action.

Sky News understands Lineker has also received a direct apology.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Would you want to stand with Matt Le Tissier? If you do, make sure you leave before he gets onto discussing the earth.

In my view the fella is utterly nuts. But he has the same right express his views as Lineker etc etc

 

[drew]

Would you want to stand with Matt Le Tissier? If you do, make sure you leave before he gets onto discussing the earth.

I was about to post exactly the same!!! I'm surprised GB News haven't got Le Tissier together with David Icke to do a sort of Saint and Greavsie type show!!

 

[Jim in the West]

Amusing amount of spin from the GL groupies on here. Lineker will return on the understanding he will abide by the BBC's interpretation of the rules and guidelines while a review of those guidelines takes place ... and no apology to GL.

A sensible outcome and all the wokies can carry on pretending they have helped avert the march of fascism in the UK and get back tp their yoghurt knitting.

Score draw at best.

If GL had agreed to abide by the BBC's interpretation of the rules, then it didn't last very long! We're having to guess, but the BBC appears to have interpreted its rules as requiring GL to "avoid taking sides on party political issues or political controversies". But Gary's third tweet this morning refers very directly to the plight of asylum-seekers, and clearly draws a distinction between those who show empathy to such individuals, and those who don't (ie, the government). He's directly commenting on the biggest political controversy of the day! It couldn't be clearer really.

So, my bet is that GL's interpretation of the rules has won out here.

 

[Stato]

I was about to post exactly the same!!! I'm surprised GB News haven't got Le Tissier together with David Icke to do a sort of Saint and Greavsie type show!!

"Well Saint, Chelsea's problems under Potter are nothing new and all stretch back to having a forward line of lizardlike replicants from another dimension battling for a Satanic take over of the Isle of Wight."

"You kill me Greavsie - You forgot about the Channel Islands."

 

[beorhthelm]

Okay, now that fuss is settled, can we concentrate on the actual policy? Is it:

a) A dangerously callous and overly simplistic approach to a very complex problem. Seems to be against international law, but even if not, diminishes our country's moral standing in the international community. - Presented after a persistent period of othering and dishonest language deliberately designed to use the desperation of one group of needy people to play upon the fears of another, offering an invented scapegoat to those not being helped, similar in rhetoric used by right wing politicans in Germany during the economic depression of 1930s Germany; or

b) A dangerously callous and overly simplistic approach to a very complex problem. Seems to be against international law, but even if not, diminishes our country's moral standing in the international community. - Presented after a persistent period of othering and dishonest language deliberately designed to use the desperation of one group of needy people to play upon the fears of another, offering an invented scapegoat to those not being helped, but a totally new way of distracting the disadvantaged from the real causes of economic depression, that has absolutely no parallels with anything that occurred before or during the darkest period in modern European history?

As I understand the media coverage, (a) would be completely unacceptable and causes great offence to the proposers of the policy, but (b) is not at all problematic?

if we were taking the view b) then there would have been more talk about the policy and less about a football pundit this past week.

"totally new" and "absolutly no parallels" are too much, just that making reference to Nazi Germany is clearly caused a distraction. some wont even like the word Nazi included there, and that for me highlights the problem, it all becomes very loaded and detracts from the core issue. except thats the point of the original message, its not like it was an accidental reference, albeit softened to avoid being accused of making that reference.

 

[KZNSeagull]

I'm curious who scored for the Beeb?

Certainly not the management, but the news teams and others have not avoided reporting it or discussing it. As Nicky Campbell said this morning, the BBC is very good at criticising itself and does not shy away from critical discussions about itself, which says a lot imo.

 

[Stato]

I wonder if the the Tories now throw Sharp and Davie under the bus? This is not the solution most of the 25% of potential Tory voters wanted? (https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/uk-opinion-polls)

Sharp's an interesting one. He's doing the bidding of the government in his role at the BBC, but he's also closely linked to Johnson. Presumably Sunak wouldn't be opposed to replacing Johnson's man with his own, but has to balance this with potentially upsetting someone who has given the party such a large amount of money. Keep your friends close, your enemies closer and your donors closest.

 

[Jim in the West]

Sharp's an interesting one. He's doing the bidding of the government in his role at the BBC, but he's also closely linked to Johnson. Presumably Sunak wouldn't be opposed to replacing Johnson's man with his own, but has to balance this with potentially upsetting someone who has given the party such a large amount of money. Keep your friends close, your enemies closer and your donors closest.

One problem that Sharp now has to face is this Independent Review of social media guidelines. Because the recommendations will go to the Board. Given the furore over the past few days it seems inconceivable that we end up with Richard Sharp effectively deciding what the new rules are. Hopefully he will resign very soon and at least avoid that nightmare.

 

[Blue3]

Very pleased to hear it, the Tories are frothing at the mouth over it bunch of snow flakes

 

[sparkie]

The BBC has finally stopped bungling the issue and got it's act together, I see.

Better late than never.

Let's now see some resignations at the top.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

One problem that Sharp now has to face is this Independent Review of social media guidelines. Because the recommendations will go to the Board. Given the furore over the past few days it seems inconceivable that we end up with Richard Sharp effectively deciding what the new rules are. Hopefully he will resign very soon and at least avoid that nightmare.

Many are suspicious that Sharp is there to bring the organisation down. I think we'll find out the truth of this if he does try to hang on.

 

[Hove Lagoonery]

Maybe the BBC will do a MOTD on Wednesday night to try and make up a bit for the shambles at the weekend. GL said he's raring to get back and presumably so are the rest of the staff.
I'm just relieved this didn't happen on Sixth Round weekend.

 

[Eric the meek]

Inside the BBC staff email from the director general​

All BBC staff have received an email from the director general Tim Davie in the last hour about the resolution that's just been announced.
"I want to acknowledge how challenging the last few days have been and to say how grateful I am for all your work during this weekend’s disruption."
He tells staff that it was a "difficult balancing act to get right where people are subject to different contracts and on-air positions, and with different audience and social media profiles."
But, he says he recognises that "there are grey areas which has caused potential confusion," so a review on the BBC's social media guidance will go ahead with a focus on how it applies to freelancers outside news and current affairs.
"Gary is in favour of such a review and I’m pleased that he will be back on air this coming weekend."
"We’ve had a difficult weekend. But it’s right that we listen and that we ask ourselves questions to ensure that we continue to fight for a BBC that delivers world-class, impartial output for all audiences."

I think Tim Davie has done rather well here. With a light touch, he has taken ownership of mistakes, told staff he is going to put things right, and persuaded Gary to get back to doing what he does best, while reducing the temperature.

His language is the very antithesis of that of Suella Braverman.

When you hold a position of great responsibility, the greatest challenge is to tread the path on which you don't need to exercise it.

 

[Lever]

BBC apology to Gary Lineker? Apparently so... and quite right too.

 

[Lever]

and.....

Mark Dollman​

54 minutes ago
The Tories made the most out of being offended, and the BBC had to be seen to be doing something about it, but probably didn't expect the backlash. One postive is that it's highlighted the Richard Sharp situation again.

 

[Wozza]

Fiona Bruce stepping down from Refuge charity work too.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

In my view the fella is utterly nuts. But he has the same right express his views as Lineker etc etc

I’m not denying his right to state the earth is flat.