Has the BBC become a Tory tool?

[MCFCTrick]

Not much difference for me. I always record it, fast forward to our game, switch off and delete straight after it. I never listen to their bolleux and sniping.

 

[west didsblue]

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.

Just fucking stop.

 

[mattcity5]

If Lineker has concerns about the future he should make his argument by setting those out.

He shouldn’t indulge in lazy tropes that minimise the evils of the Nazi regime. Presumably, Lineker’ concern isn’t that the UK government will shortly begin rounding up Jews and sending them to gas chambers (unless he is entirely unhinged). So it is not appropriate to invoke the Nazis and therefore ultimately the holocaust as a parallel, and doing so only serves to minimise those events.

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.

 

[threespires]

If Lineker had taken out the '1930's Germany' reference then I think there would have been little fuss. His use of over the top inflammatory language is just political mischief making which is fine when among friends but not so for the BBC where neutrality is it's whole DNA. If the multi millionaires Sugar and Lineker want to preach politics then fine, do it on commercial stations, not the politically neutral BBC.

So if we are in agreement that the BBC should be politically neutral do we agree that it starts with not having a major conservative party donor as it's chairman?

Btw - I think one of the main reasons people are unhappy is that of the two people you mention one is being treated very differently. Personally, I'm ok with both of them preaching politics in their own capacity, what I am not ok with is the application of different standards based on the shade of the politics people are preaching.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

How do you remain polite to massive morons like this?

I’m very well rewarded professionally for doing just that.

 

[paska]

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.

How could he have made it better?

In my view he said exactly the same thing, and what he said was what he intended to say. It was clear as day, not weasely or unclear, and people can interpret *anything* in a hundred different ways and don’t necessarily have to agree so he’s always going to get some backlash

But backlash gets treated as controversy, which it isn’t.

 

[bluethrunthru]

SKY News all over it again today - talk about handing your rival a big advantage

 

[Gordyola]

Just seen it. Very funny and feels like they threw their toys out the pram with the presentation of it.

What was the reason for:

- Not playing the theme song?
- Not showing team lineups and formations?
- Not having commentary in the games? (I'm sure they could've used some of the official Premier League commentary used on the international feed if they'd asked nicely)
- Not showing stats such as shots on target, possession, corners etc at the end?

The majority of the sports team backed Lineker and as such they had no option but to do the absolute minimum to satisfy the contact with the PL They now have a huge issue on their hands to sort this out utter ridiculous management

 

[Chris B]

Firstly, there isn't; that's inference on your part. If I tell you a young lad from the academy reminds me of Messi, and you then repeat to all and sundry that we have a player in the academy as good as prime Messi, then you've manipulated my words and blown a comparison out of all proportion.

Secondly, the language used by the Tories with this policy is repugnant. It's used to get the hard-right nationalists onside before the GE and simultaneously distract from the real issues plaguing the country; the objective of the bill (which is flagrantly illegal, btw), is to gets large swathes of knuckle draggers blaming all the ills of this country on "foreigners".

Mission accomplished for the party of compassion.

So you maintain that if someone talks about 1930s Nazi Germany that there isn’t always a subtext of what is to come? I’m sorry, you may be able to compartmentalise history in that way but to most people talk of the Nazis will automatically invoke WW2 and the holocaust, book burning and so on.

If the language is repugnant then Lineker should’ve spelt that out. As it is he has undermined his argument with an offensive and fatuous comparison.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

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.

This is you and your lunacy

"
Klopp, the Nazis and Pervitin.

Pervitin is a drug developed in Germany in the 1930s. It was originally intended as a recreational drug to help the famously dour Germans relax. It was soon repurposed for military use once its qualities were better understood.

As a German it is likely Jugen Klopp would be familiar with the history and properties of Pervitin. Indeed, it is believed several of his ancestral relatives were enthusiastic members of either the SS or Hitler youth..... " blah blah lfc cheat off the back of the nazis

I'm sick of crackpots getting a voice. But hey that's the world we live in, we all get free speech don't we.