Has the BBC become a Tory tool?

[Gone for a Burton]

Slight overreaction lol.

Eastenders is shite as well.

Hope that doesn’t send you into a spin?

A really great opportunity for a complete restyle and reset.

Get back to basics with some enlightened thinking......Birds in tight shorts and cropped tops ??

Bingo !!

 

[pride in battle]

Slight overreaction lol.

Eastenders is shite as well.

Hope that doesn’t send you into a spin?

Yours is the overreaction, why get so worked up ?

 

[simon23]

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

Regardless...he used his platform on the BBC to express political views, Lineker didnt.....What about the head of the bbc (or one of them cant remember which one) being a writer for a right wing magazine - think its called "the Competitor" or something like that.... is this ok? Howis that different from what Lineker has done? He is clearly contracted to the BBC

The difference is one is anti government, one is pro.....equal platform for all is how it should be...(note that Im not saying ban any side of the argument)

 

[cleavers]

Yes.

And Im saying it should never be ignored (what Linekar said) - football aint important by ANY standard when looking at something like what Linekar is talking about

Not sure you did, but you can take that to the one in the political forum, this is a thread in a football forum.

 

[blueinsa]

Yours is the overreaction, why get so worked up ?

The program is shite so I don’t watch it.

Hardly an overreaction is it?

Let me guess, me saying so on here has offended you?

Tough titties I’m afraid.

Enjoy your day.

 

[Coatigan]

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.

I think you could well be inadvertently belittling it yourslef, with that reach. And he compared it to 1930s not to 40s, so you (and others that have rushed to that) are the ones linking the two, not him.

It IS the same language, that's the point. And has been for a while. Pointing that out is not necessarily suggesting that what came to pass in Germany a decade after such language was used is in any way likely to happen here, nor is it trivialising what such language ultimately led to. I welcome anyone pointing that out, be it a guy at the pub, someone at the bbc, or footballing pundit i don't normally have time or love for.

Whatever the interpretation (semantic philosophical, political or whatever) of his comment though, the issue here isn't whether you or I agree or disagree with him. It is whether the BBC under pressure from the governemt have the right to stop him making it or not.

I dare guess btw that neither of us two would have even known he made it had it not been turned into fuss news by the bbc.

 

[Metal Biker]

But he didn’t make the comments on any BBC social media site or on the TV. How does that break the agreement? Is he not allowed to express a viewpoint on anything outside of his job?

According to the current BBC director general it supposedly does whilst he's earning a wage paid for by the taxpayer. Personally I feel it's a storm in a teacup; the BBC have, IMO, acted way too heavy-handed, could have simply reminded Gary that such comments bring the BBC up for criticism that they now have to bat away, not him himself, and they could do without the additional 'outrage' given there are many people with a certain opinion of the BBC calling for the licence fee to be scrapped.

I'm of the view that all opinions, whether welcomed or despised, should be heard and not faced with disciplinary action (threats of violence towards others etc being the exception). That doesn't mean I believe certain opinion shouldn't then be open to criticism from others, either. Gary hasn't said anything wrong, but i'm not a fan of the allegory he used to make it either.

 

[Sky Blue]

No Robyn Cowan commentating. All good.

 

[urban genie]

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."

yeah I know it is older and was still being pushed by some till the 50s-70s but in the context of that decade of topic it was very much still a popular policy and languague was being used similar to sunaks in oz

 

[BlueMoonday]

Just showing the highlights suits me.

Presenters on the BBC in general are over paid and it's daft that in 2023 we are forced to pay a fee for the pleasure. Have your opinion, fine. Just don't force us to contribute to your whopping pay packet.

Before you start your argument, read through the media thread and see the countless times BBC sport have been selective in their reporting on City on top of false reporting on our ownership.