The BBC | Tim Davie resigns as Director General over Trump documentary edit (p 187)

Gorton_Tubster said:
Why is this guy allowed to say this? They're are double standards here aren't there



And at what stage do the govn start policing our tweets? When do they start censoring ?
Click to expand...


Not really, he works for skysports they get their money through advertisements and subscriptions, anyone who likes it can tune in or pay, anyone who doesn’t can turn off or give them their money.

The issue with the BBC is they are funded by the license fee so everyone in the country who owns a TV has to pay up and if you don’t
you face criminal charges, then millions of pounds of that end up in Linekars pocket.

The deal with that is you abide by the BBC charter which prohibits social media posts like this (the Gov are proto Nazi’s ffs)

If he worked for BT, Sky, ITV etc there would be no issue and he knows it, but his posts in his high profile position (highest paid at the bbc?) put its very operating model at risk.

They generally get the most bland innoffensive people on their flagship shows for this very reason (Jenas, Shearer, Dan Walker etc) but Linekar has seemingly decided his social media posts are more important these days.
 
FantasyIreland said:
Everything in life has consequences,that needs to be accepted especially when you put yourself out there.......You are correct though,double standards and hypocrisy are rife,again in every walk of life,and especially where it suits.
Click to expand...
What about when Alan Sugar said stuff about Corbyn.....was he removed?

Sugar of course can say what he wants (as Linekar can) but one has been punished - one hasnt....the BBC should be impartial and everyone knows it isnt and this shows it again.....Tory donor in charge nd using that platform to suppor one side and vilify the other......

People sholdnt be talking about watching it more because certain presenters arent on etc etc (based on whether they like them or not - and that is probably based on whether they agree with the views on city or not)
People should be boycotting the programme altogether....plenty of highligths on line to watch if you want

Football loyalties are completely irrelevant here
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
Impartiality though surely doesn’t mean ‘cannot attack the government’?
Lord Sugar is paid by the BBC and is the face of The Apprentice and yet he said this, in an election year, as well….


View attachment 71686
Click to expand...
The BBC pays Lord Sugar and Fremantle for The Apprentice to be aired on their network. Sugar isn't a BBC employee in the same way that Lineker is, like whenever the Beeb purchases the rights to air certain films, the actors aren't suddenly BBC employees or paid directly by the taxpayer. Lineker is and he agreed to the impartiality agreement which the BBC believes he has broken.
 
Last edited:
Let’s be clear, his step down was Tory Government led so it was always going to be a shit show. EVERYTHING they do is a farce, controversial or a total fuck up. Tory voters must be so embarrassed of them. They’ve turned politics into a farce and are trying to run the country like China. Even if Labour run the country brilliantly when they get in, it’ll take a decade to sort this total clusterfuck of a mess out. Fair play to the MOTD team. Someone needed to take a stance like this
 
sir baconface said:
You think invoking 1930s Germany is balanced? Seriously?
Click to expand...
Actually early 1930s Germany is a worthwhile analogy. Not what it descended into when it grew in confidence and became increasingly malign as it was further consumed by evil; but what it started as. Reducing personal liberties, suppressing freedom of speech and blaming particular groups for societies ills.

Don’t be so complacent that the current direction of travel cannot continue along a similar path. I’m sure plenty of Jewish people dismissed the early days of Nazi government as just a phase. Don’t be overwhelmed with the benefit of hindsight and assume that what the Nazi party became was inevitable. Maybe it could have been stopped embarking on its genocidal course if enough decent people had spoken out when they could.

So yes, it’s absolutely balanced to caution against history repeating itself. Not because we are at the concentration camp stage, but to try and ensure that we don’t end up there.
 
Metal Biker said:
The BBC pays Lord Sugar and Fremantle for The Apprentice to be aired on their network. Sugar isn't a BBC employee in the same way that Linekar is, like whenever the Beeb purchases the rights to air certain films, the actors aren't suddenly BBC employees or paid directly by the taxpayer. Linekar is and he agreed to the impartiality agreement which the BBC believes he has broken.
Click to expand...
Is Lineker a BBC employee? Thought he was free lance who just had a contract with them?
 
blueinsa said:
Everything has to be so black and white these days.

I don’t 100% agree with what Lineker said but he has every right to say what he thinks and for the government and the BBC to then silence him over it is fucking ridiculous as it is when any group sets out to silence and cancel someone because they said something someone doesn’t like.

Humanity is busy eating itself over social media. You could say something a 100 times more offensive to someone’s face and garner little reaction yet even the most innocent of statement on social media has people’s brains melting.
Click to expand...
Same here. I agree with the sentiment Linekar made, not so much the allegory he used to make it, and agree he should be allowed to say it. But apparently pointing out the reasons why the Beeb has taken action (That Linekar agreed to the impartiality agreement and the BBC is of the opinion his tweets broke said agreement) means you support the action taken and that is because you disagree with Linekars comments.

Every debate has become so toxic, everyone wants to paint everybody else as some sort of heinous individual and it is becoming so tiresome.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Actually early 1930s Germany is a worthwhile analogy. Not what it descended into when it grew in confidence and became increasingly malign as it was further consumed by evil; but what it started as. Reducing personal liberties, suppressing freedom of speech and blaming particular groups for societies ills.

Don’t be so complacent that the current direction of travel cannot continue along a similar path. I’m sure plenty of Jewish people dismissed the early days of Nazi government as just a phase. Don’t be overwhelmed with the benefit of hindsight and assume that what the Nazi party became was inevitable. Maybe it could have been stopped embarking on its genocidal course if enough decent people had spoken out when they could.

So yes, it’s absolutely balanced to caution against history repeating itself. Not because we are at the concentration camp stage, but to try and ensure that we don’t end up there.
Click to expand...
Brilliant post
 
You only have to look at the make up of last Thursday’s Question Time panel and Bruce’s ridiculous intervention about Stanley Johnson’s wife beating and that tells you all you need to know about BBC impartiality
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Certainly plenty countries did likewise.

America, in particular, had a press saying they were full and turning away boats of Jews fleeing, government policy unless you had a family member and bribed someone for a visa?

I would never liken America and FDR to the Nazis, regardless.

Wrong, yes. Fascists, no.
Click to expand...

Trump is undeniably a fascist.
 
urban genie said:
True I mean the US of the 1920s especially Albert Johnson or the Australian labour party and other advocates of the White Only Act in the 20s/30s could equally have been used as an example

but then all 3 used language similar to sunak and braveman so all 3 are valid examples.

I haven't actually seen any quote from lineker calling them mass murders or claiming they are outright nazis who want to murder people in their million, only that the language is dangerously similar, whch in truth it is.
Click to expand...

The White Australia Policy goes back to 1901. It was Australia who quashed the following proposal that the Japanese wanted inserted in the Treaty of Versailles in 1919....

"The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord as soon as possible to all alien nationals of states, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect making no distinction, either in law or in fact, on account of their race or nationality."
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
Why is this guy allowed to say this? They're are double standards here aren't there



And at what stage do the govn start policing our tweets? When do they start censoring ?
Click to expand...

Sky don't have an impartiality agreement policy for their employees.
 
bluethrunthru said:
what I am saying is the BBC lacks the financial clout to secure live broadcasts. The two that do have the cash for live UK broadcast lock the BBC out - thats how contracts work - the BBC "saving" from presenter contracts is a drop in the ocean compared to the cost and the prize - the idea that somehow an agreed contract between parties is open to renegotiation mid season is - and I am sorry to say this - fucking stupid. The two big payers lock the small player out and in effect dictate terms. Were the PL to to say hey you know what we will take a quid more for longer highlights then the biggest paymasters can say enjoy your quid we are paying a fiver less.

The BBC have royally fucked this up and whatever your prejudices may be enjoy a silent MoyD - if it even fucking airs coz at this moment its looking like you may well get Where Eagles Dare instead
Click to expand...

The PL puts packages together and sells them. 3 live game packages and one highlights package gets sold to the highest bidder in this country. Sky, BT and Amazon won the bids for the live packages the BBC won the bid for the highlights package each package has its own contract. What each of the bidders pay for has nothing to do with what the other bidder has paid for. The BBC doesn't need SKY or BTs consent for this it's their contract with the PL and can be renegotiated at any time. It's not hard to understand mate
 
Gabriel said:
In 2017, Lineker tweeted ‘Bin Corbyn’, an explicitly political opinion, yet there was no such brouhaha and the same BBC guidelines were not deemed to have been breached. These same guidelines have now been stretched to cover an implicit tweet that some have inferred as politically explicit. Irrespective of one’s opinions of the individual, the inconsistent application here should make any fair-minded person shift in their seat.
Click to expand...
Did anyone complain? Did any MP's directly go to the BBC telling them to take action?
 
The pundits just state the obvious, I mentally switch off when they start chirping. Maybe we'll get more football shown because some of the games barely get a minute. Each game is 50% highlights, 50% chat shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top