BoroMart
Well-known member
He did but this is actually just a guideline for non-politics staff and contractorsThat piece of crap Hancock argued that he didn't break covid rules, only guidleines. Even though that was a lie.
He did but this is actually just a guideline for non-politics staff and contractorsThat piece of crap Hancock argued that he didn't break covid rules, only guidleines. Even though that was a lie.
Sharp won’t even be involved. Contrary to the way it’s been portrayed recently he is not responsible for the day to day running of the BBC.
Has it occurred to you that maybe the Sun weren’t completely bang on the money?A day ago the Sun were reporting that the BBC were taking no action and Lineker would be presenting as normal on Saturday.
Then suddenly he’s removed.
It’s beyond naive to think that wasn’t due to government pressure and directed by Sharp?
The Guardian says there are 800 of them, though I can't find the names. Some of them will come out on the right side, others won't.Who are the others?
Come on, you’re better than thisPutting something on iplayer is not “censorship.” Choosing not to put something in a prime time BBC1 slot isn’t either.
Come on, you’re better than this
There's a slight illogicality here. Because this isn't a question about whether Lineker should have freedom of speech - of course he should, and if he quits his job no-one will bat an eyelid about what he says. The question is whether he should have freedom of speech while being one of the BBC's highest paid presenters.I think we all know they spout sh1te but this isn't about that, this is a lot bigger than that and is about censorship. If you are happy with people being censored, you have come to the wrong place.
Not sure the cameramen are bbc, it’s a feed from sky cameras isn’t it?Superb solidarity. Cameramen next.
nobody ever said the workforce was, only the executive and politics and current affairsMaybe the BBC workforce isn’t entirely Right Wing after all.
Christ, what have I done to you fella?He’s really not.
Some people do say that, obviously not you.Not sure the cameramen are bbc, it’s a feed from sky cameras isn’t it?
nobody ever said the workforce was, only the executive and politics and current affairs
And if your point is right, should it not apply to others who have broken the same rule?There's a slight illogicality here. Because this isn't a question about whether Lineker should have freedom of speech - of course he should, and if he quits his job no-one will bat an eyelid about what he says. The question is whether he should have freedom of speech while being one of the BBC's highest paid presenters.
Should the BBC be politically neutral? If yes, the Lineker shouldn't continually post politically motivated threads, especially in such inflammatory terms. But if the BBC shouldn't be politically neutral, then all the posts about how it's right wing suddenly become redundant, because it;s allowed to be.
I agree he isn't directly responsible for this but what is accused of and the overwhelming evidence of what he did. Gary lineker's sacking is not a good look and potentially a legally bad thing for him down the line.Sharp won’t even be involved. Contrary to the way it’s been portrayed recently he is not responsible for the day to day running of the BBC. He SHOULD resign however, but only the government can sack him.
If they don’t even stop the political people from being loud and unbiased against trade unions and Labour and the EU then why should they silence a football presenter?There's a slight illogicality here. Because this isn't a question about whether Lineker should have freedom of speech - of course he should, and if he quits his job no-one will bat an eyelid about what he says. The question is whether he should have freedom of speech while being one of the BBC's highest paid presenters.
Should the BBC be politically neutral? If yes, the Lineker shouldn't continually post politically motivated threads, especially in such inflammatory terms. But if the BBC shouldn't be politically neutral, then all the posts about how it's right wing suddenly become redundant, because it;s allowed to be.
It agree it would be a terrible look and he won’t be sacked. I actually don't think any of them have any idea how this will pan out yet, including Lineker himself.I agree he isn't directly responsible for this but what is accused of and the overwhelming evidence of what he did. Gary lineker's sacking is not a good look and potentially a legally bad thing for him down the line.
Not a clue.36 Tory MPs demanding the BBC make Lineker apologise and also want an investigation into him and his BBC future.
I bet you can guess the names of the MPs listed:
Does this only apply to Lineker or should it apply to the likes of Alan Sugar, Andrew Neil etc?There's a slight illogicality here. Because this isn't a question about whether Lineker should have freedom of speech - of course he should, and if he quits his job no-one will bat an eyelid about what he says. The question is whether he should have freedom of speech while being one of the BBC's highest paid presenters.
Should the BBC be politically neutral? If yes, the Lineker shouldn't continually post politically motivated threads, especially in such inflammatory terms. But if the BBC shouldn't be politically neutral, then all the posts about how it's right wing suddenly become redundant, because it;s allowed to be.
Some people do say that, obviously not you.