Has the BBC become a Tory tool?

[blue for life]

No, he's an employee when appearing on MoTD and a freelancer when appearing on other media.

Employed on a freelance basis though.

 

[Metal Biker]

Employed on a freelance basis though.

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]

Did anyone complain? Did any MP's directly go to the BBC telling them to take action?

As I said, no brouhaha.

 

[Metal Biker]

As I said, no brouhaha.

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.

 

[bluethrunthru]

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

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

 

[Vic]

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.

So the BBC charter prohibits social media posts "like this"?

You've read the charter, have you?

 

[Vic]

Is Lineker a BBC employee? Thought he was free lance who just had a contract with them?

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good prejudice.

 

[Del_Bosque]

So the BBC charter prohibits social media posts "like this"?

You've read the charter, have you?

Yes

 

[jimharri]

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

As has, I'm sure, already been pointed out, Sugar isn't contracted to the BBC, Lineker (note the spelling) is.

 

[The perfect fumble]

When I look at England and see that David Attenborough and Gary Lineker can be portrayed as politically subversive, it is deeply concerning.

Don't forget J.K. Rowling