Without wanting to derail the thread, that's not true, most conditions of employment, particular for people in senior positions include dismissible offences around bringing the company into disrepute for posts on social media.What’s your job? Unless it’s posting on bluemoon you’re not following your own advice.
People are not just their day jobs. He *can* say whatever he likes on social media, that’s exactly what social media is for!
The only things barred from social media are attacks on protected characteristics. As of yet, being a govt minister hasn’t been declared one.
This is what many don't realise, the Nazis came to power precisely because of inaction. The German people, at the time, were fatigued and apathetic after WW1 and the Versailles treaty, and Hindenburg was in the throes of senility. From the regimes inception to the unspeakable atrocity that culminated a decade later, their hate was met with no resistance.This. The language they used early on enabled what they did later on.
It says in the bbc guidelines that sports and entertainment staff have a wider scope to talk on these things in publicI agree that freedom of speech should be available to everyone but unfortunately it’s not these days. The problem for Gary is that he has a contract that SHOULD (plenty of examples of the BBC turning a blind eye) exclude him for making comments like that as he works for our state broadcaster and therefore be sensitive to all the political spectrum. In theory if he wants to pass comment he should jump ship and go to Sky or BT where you pays your money and takes your choice.
Unfortunately the whole thing isn’t straightforward and is riddled with hypocrisy both by the BBC and Gary Lineker. Gary didn’t mind crossing the picket line in Qatar did he?
Crowd noise with no commentary every time, but if they could amplify the voice of the bloke behind in East Stand shouting "Oh, stop passing backwards" it would be better, though of course that wouldn't be during our highlights.On that basis I'm guessing there were incidents missing from every game.
Just because there's no commentary is no reason to crop out genuine highlights.
Even things like a clock coming up to show the time of the highlight was missing. No excuse for things like this.
I quite enjoyed last night's show in concept. The BBC need to think hard about what actually adds value.
Put it this way, 3 years ago we had commentary with no crowd. Last night we had crowd with no commentary. I know which one I prefer.
JK Rowlings work hasnt dried up. Her books are wideley still sold, her films still available with their own channel on sky, her works now being made into a series, a game, a mini theme park in London. She has her podcast too.
But sure she's cancelled. We're not going to agree.
Which is fine, but that’s not what happened is it? Voicing an opinion isn’t bringing your employer into disrepute.Without wanting to derail the thread, that's not true, most conditions of employment, particular for people in senior positions include dismissible offences around bringing the company into disrepute for posts on social media.
It was Lineker that brought up the Nazis, and by clear implication the crime they are most associated with, first - blame him. I agree it was a quite contemptible thing for him to do.
By implication though, she’s suggesting we pull out of the ECHR, which will certainly affect you. The retained EU bill, quietly passing through the HOC, will move a massive amount of power away from the legislature in Parliament and directly to the executive arm of Government. So much for, taking back control!Civil liberties as in those freedoms that apply to citizens? Covis romanas sum as Kennedy invoked in his famous Berlin speech? I’m very keen on those and don’t consider them a trivial issue. However, I can’t detect any erosion of those in the actions of the Home Secretary. Care to enlighten me?
If you don’t want pundits and commentators, seriously, why on earth would you bother watching MOTD at all?
Remember this https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/holocaust-survivors-pen-open-letter-28404047Is she right to call it an 'invasion' and a 'swarm' when we take in way less than other major European countries? Does the exaggeration help anyone?
And is it a crime to arrive and seek refuge? It didn't used to be.
As for 'Albanians' - many could recognise them visibly, and would certainly recognise a foreign accent if close by enough to hear one. The hatred being drummed up by poorly worded statements from our government puts many legitimate refugees who have moved here to escape persecution back into danger.
If you don’t want pundits and commentators, seriously, why on earth would you bother watching MOTD at all?
The biggest group of illegal immigrants arriving by boats are Albanians. I doubt you or I could tell them apart from British people by looking at them. A Home Secretary setting out actions to be taken against criminals (illegal migration is a crime after all) does not constitute demonisation of an ethnic group.
Hitler as leader of the national socialist party claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.There’s obviously a value judgement to make for each case. To me, in this instance, the comparison Lineker is making is very strained and not appropriate. Were the Nazis trying to stop people from outside illegally entering their country? Did they voice concerns for the dangers people were in and by a desire to uphold the law? I don’t think so and Lineker’s comparison is wrong and counterproductive. That won’t be the case in every instance but I believe it is in this one.
Remember this https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/holocaust-survivors-pen-open-letter-28404047
What some survivors thought of CB last year
In fairness, there's lots of people who don't really know what YouTube actually is never mind trying to access it.
They wouldn’t be my choice of words but she needs to be able to speak freely. We talk about home invasions when those an undertaken by two or three people so that doesn’t imply a great number of people. Influx would be an equivalent word. I don’t see it as dehumanising.Is she right to call it an 'invasion' and a 'swarm' when we take in way less than other major European countries? Does the exaggeration help anyone?
And is it a crime to arrive and seek refuge? It didn't used to be.
As for 'Albanians' - many could recognise them visibly, and would certainly recognise a foreign accent if close by enough to hear one. The hatred being drummed up by poorly worded statements from our government puts many legitimate refugees who have moved here to escape persecution back into danger.
I think you’re confusing your own ignorance with others.Nice googleing there
So the best way to make sure it never happens again is to never talk about it, never highlight the past and stick our heads in the sand. Excellent.