Has the BBC become a Tory tool?

[Gorton_Tubster]

If you talk about Nazis in the 1930s there’s a clear implication of where it leads. Don’t be so disingenuous.

Why don't you shhhh? Iv just read your stuff in the conspiracies thread, you're a fkin loon.

 

[cheekybids]

It started in Germany with dehumanising language, which was Lineker’s actual point, but even if you don’t agree with Lineker’s point surely he had a right to make it and doesn’t deserve suspending for it?

I have no problem with him making it & I agree with the premise of his argument but he needs to make it better when using a platform that encourages outrage.
The bbc has dehumanised people for ever, it’s a national broadcaster used for propaganda otherwise they’d have sold it off with the gas & water.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

No, I don’t think so. Minimisation of the evils of the holocaust is a standard antisemitic trope. As with Andrew Bridgen this kind of false equivalence is often widely condemned.

Where has he minimalised the evils of the holocaust?

Surely by highlighting what he has, he’s trying (in a small way) to warn against it happening again. And how could that possibly be described as an antisemitic trope?

Maybe it’s those who are complacent and lazy about history repeating itself who display more obvious signs of subconscious antisemitism. Casually dismissing the parallels with the erosion of liberties and where it could end up.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Exactly. But last nights (shit)show didn’t prove they’re not particularly needed. Or at least didn’t prove a revamp is needed.

What they showed last night you can get on Sky’s YouTube channel. That last night wasn’t worth paying a TV licence for.

I'd would think that 95% of televised broadcasts aren't worth paying for. The TV licence is like one of those hotel bills which include spa treatments and the like, all of which might be included in the price, but none of which you are inclined to use.

Much of the so-called BBC flag ship (I prefer the term 'flag-shit) programmes I find unwatchable - Eastenders, Strictly, MotD, and more and more BBC programmes are being filled with faux emotion rather than education, entertainment and information! If the BBC were a subscription channel I'd keep the subs for servicing my bikes, paying for my coffee, the pies 'n Bovril at The Etihad.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of boats, the conservatives, or the BBC because I skew to the left of most people here and I'm not sure there's much to discuss really.

But I will say that Match of the Day isn't really for hardcore football fans who go to the games and post on football forums. It's for a much, much more casual viewer. It's a magazine format, punditry is required to talk people through basic interpretations of the law rather than intensive tactical analysis. I tend not to watch because by the time the evening comes around I've watched half of the games, usually attended one of them, and have already read and watched highlights on others. Most people aren't like me or us.

 

[city saint]

i might be on my own here but i like motd yes they talk shite at times but so does the bloke down the pub.that last night was pathetic and the big cheese who caused it should be sacked.typical out of touch manager

 

[argyle]

Google is your friend.

You're confusing cancelled with criticised.

 

[Chris B]

It’s not an unremarkable immigration policy in 2023 that is being compared. It’s a disgraceful policy that criminalises asylum seekers for being asylum seekers. You’re the one trying to minimise the contemptibility of this government proposal.

It’s not so different from the policy Australia had in recent years. Hardly the precursor the next holocaust. Anyway, I’m not particularly interested in the policy which will probably end up getting thrown out by legal challenges anyway.

My point is simply that it is antisemitic to minimise the holocaust. Lineker has done that here, in a minor way, but he has done it none the less. This isn’t a unique standard I’ve invented for Lineker. I’ve highlighted the recent example of Andrew Bridgen. Look back to past years and you’ll find plenty of other times minimising the holocaust is considered antisemitic.

At the end of the day, Lineker has done that here in a crass unthinking way. It more ignorance than malice and I don’t think he needs to be sacked over it, but a word and perhaps some education would be helpful.

 

[west didsblue]

I disagree. I think it is an appropriate comparison, at the right point in time. It isn't the first either, and shouldn't be the last. And he should have every right to make it.

By the same logic, you are now 'minimising holocoust' by exaggerating his comment to that extent.

I was thinking the same.

I’m finding his invoking of the holocaust as a means of criticising Lineker quite contemptible and I can’t be arsed discussing it with him any more as he seems to be a bit of an idiot.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Where has he minimalised the evils of the holocaust?

Surely by highlighting what he has, he’s trying (in a small way) to warn against in happening again. And how could that possibly be described as an antisemitic trope?

Maybe it’s those who are complacent and lazy about history repeating itself who display more obvious signs of subconscious antisemitism. Casually dismissing the parallels with the erosion of liberties and where it could end up.

How do you remain polite to massive morons like this?