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

blue for life said:
Employed on a freelance basis though.
Click to expand...
Still makes him an employee and he still agreed to the BBC's impartiality agreement in order to be a presenter on the show. If it comes out that Linekar actually has never agreed to any 'impartiality' then yes the BBC are wrong to have suspended him, but so far that doesn't appear to be the case.
 
Gabriel said:
As I said, no brouhaha.
Click to expand...
So no action was taken because nobody made a brouhaha. Nobody found the comments 'broke impartiality' so decided not to take action. If you want action taken, you have to raise the issue. These processes aren't automatic.
 
BerkshireBlue said:
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
Click to expand...

The BBC don't have the money to meet the PL demands for live coverage nor do they have the space in their schedules to accommodate end of - nobody is renegotiating anything
 
Del_Bosque said:
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.
Click to expand...
So the BBC charter prohibits social media posts "like this"?

You've read the charter, have you?
 
simon23 said:
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
Click to expand...
As has, I'm sure, already been pointed out, Sugar isn't contracted to the BBC, Lineker (note the spelling) is.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
The comparison was a poor one imo. Regardless of his or your or anyones dislike of this government, their language isn't the same as the hate and bile spewed by the nazi government. Comparing the too surely leads to belittling the evil that occurred in 1930s Germany. I do have an issue with that.

Its all too easy to throw insults and make comparisons like this these days and i think those that do don't fully understand what occurred back then. It trivialises an awful nadir in European history.
Click to expand...

I agree that throwing around Nazi insults and comparisons is often done too cheaply without understanding and runs the risk of trivialising the horrors of the Nazis. However as numerous people have pointed out that isn't what he did, he made a specific point about comparative language.

I don't think he was for a minute suggesting our government is as vile as the Nazis. I think he was making a point about propaganda and the power of the spoken and the written word and where it can ultimately lead to. When I think of pre WWII Germany the question from history is not why did a bunch of psychopathic fanatics concoct their evil plan but why did an entire nation of ordinary people just like you and I allow them to execute it? The salutory lesson is that the German people didn't get out of bed one morning and decide to support one of the most murderous regimes in human history. The events of Nov '38 and beyond followed well over a decade of an explicit process both pre and post coming to power an important part of which focused on language that normalised abnormal thoughts and behaviour with a view to creating a passivity and acceptance in the broader population that 'something had to be done'.

So I think it is healthy we are having this discussion. It's a shame much of our public discourse is now undertaken on technology platforms actively designed to distort that discourse. Nonetheless I think what he said is a legitimate topic for discussion. This governments penchant for a certain type of sloganeering doesn't make it nazi but it does raise questions about it's behaviour; it's fitness to govern and where it is trying to take us as a country.

There is a certain irony in how the BBC have subsequently behaved in this spat in that during the 20s both Himmler and then Goebbels coveted the ability to exert pressure on ithe mass media and entertainment spheres but they did not have the financial wherewithal. In '27 Goebbels exhorted the party faithful to focus on public speeches as the most cost effective way for the Nazis to operate within their current financial constraints, at the same time he provided guidance for a level of message discipline that showed how much he understood the power of slogans repeated ad nauseum as a conditioning tool on a broader population.

(As an aside as we're on the subject. For what it's worth my own view is that whilst we must be vigilant in this country, more obvious parallels can be drawn with the MAGA movement in the US. As a simple example, if you look at the 'drain the swap' term, its been used in US politics since the late 1800's but the way MAGA used it clearly echoed Goebbels positioning of the Nazis participation in the Reichstag to their base).
 
bluethrunthru said:
The BBC don't have the money to meet the PL demands for live coverage nor do they have the space in their schedules to accommodate end of - nobody is renegotiating anything
Click to expand...
Why are you banging on about live coverage for? It's the highlights package that the BBC won
 
Metal Biker said:
So no action was taken because nobody made a brouhaha. Nobody found the comments 'broke impartiality' so decided not to take action. If you want action taken, you have to raise the issue. These processes aren't automatic.
Click to expand...
So who raised the issue this time?

There was an interview with Lineker posted on here earlier in which he said that the impartiality clause applied to those working on news and current affairs, something which other BBC journalists have acknowledged, though there has always been a grey area about what ‘bringing the BBC into disrepute’ means.
 
pride in battle said:
He's freelance though ?
Click to expand...
And employed by the Beeb and agreed to the impartiality agreement (supposedly) which the BBC believes he has broken after receiving numerous complaints from the public and MP's.

The BBC has acted because people complained and it reached MP level of intervention. Had nobody complained, nothing would have happened.
 
blueinsa said:
I sleep every night to the sounds of thunderstorms from the Alexa, wonderful and it works.

Anyway, MotD? Fuck that, nothing will get me watching that shite.
Click to expand...
What a miserable life you must lead, seriously how can you get so wound up over a programme ? its laughable it really is...chill out...
 
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