Free speech discussion

@a-unique-nickname said
BBC news used to be trusted, it isn't anymore.

Yes. During the Brexit campaign (and on other occasions) the BBC was repeatedly accused of pro EU anti govt bias; I frequently cited this with sources and examples in the Brexit thread in debates. So interestingly BBC has been anti govt itself and yet much of the current rhetoric is based on the BBC being a puppet of that same govt. However in the wake of the Johnson election win I do feel things have changed as the balance of Common’s power swung and the political axe started to fall on older pro EU Tories, Bercow (who deserved whatever he got) and the the BBC leadership.

Edit
The BBC is also accused of diluting the opinions of David Attenborough on climate change. I’m not sure what it was he said but in recent years he has become increasingly outspoken on his opinions especially during the unrest of just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion.

@a-unique-nickname said
I think most are siding with the footballer.

“Most” most people?
I don’t think this is correct. I think what we are seeing is a news media backlash against an apparent choking of free speech of one of their own mixed with rampant competitive opportunism. Sky News for example (and I watched almost all of it) ran the Lineker story on the day it broke continuously, with not one other news item, for nearly three hours. It was possibly longer. Sky is the major competitor with the BBC and while they appear less biased, they are a blatant click-bait advertising platform.

Edit
If you look outside of the anti govt policy news and social media echo-chambers, social media is awash with anti-Lineker/pro BBC rhetoric and debate.

@a-unique-nickname said
Everyone should have the right to criticize their own government, regardless of their job title.

Sure they should, absolutely.

However Gary Lineker is paid £1.4 million by the BBC, part of which is for him to abdicate his right to free speech on certain topics.

@a-unique-nickname said

Match of the day presenter 😂

We live in world of pouting, lip fillered, fake assed flakey influencers. Gary Lineker is a footballing legend and a superb presenter of the oldest footballing show in the world. He is also a regular Tweeter on controversial matters and an informal spokesperson for a huge slice of the population.

@a-unique-nickname said

Match of the day presenter 😂

Yes interesting isn’t it that the only presenters at the BBC who chose to stand in solidarity (as Ian Wright put it), were Lineker’s footballing friends who happen to share his political views.

As far as I know no other BBC presenter or employee has stood with him openly. It looks to me as though these three in particular (Lineker the protagonist, Alan Shearer and Ian wright) are flexing their political populist muscles to hold the BBC to ransom over Match of the Day airing. All are paid handsomely by the BBC to appear every week and talk about football.

Personally I’d fire the lot of them, along with the BBC Director General who is obviously linked to Johnson. I’d also get rid of the BBC in its current form, abandon the TV licensing tax and make it stand as an independent broadcaster. It’s had its day and it’s crippling Tory cronyism has become increasingly apparent since it’s become clear that the Labour Party have become unelectable post the December 2019 election and Starmer’s inability to to keep two principled thoughts in his head at any one time.

@fmf said
Do you, therefore, think Lineker made a mistake by signing a contract with the BBC in which he [1] agreed to refrain from making political statements in public, and [2] agreed to a salary of £1.4 million a year?

I doubt he read the contract.

I think he might have made a mistake comparing it to 1930s Germany, that was unfortunate and takes the shift away from his disprovel of the new law.

Freedom of speech however should be a right regardless of a contract.

@a-unique-nickname said
I doubt he read the contract.

I think he might have made a mistake comparing it to 1930s Germany, that was unfortunate and takes the shift away from his disprovel of the new law.

Don’t be naive Trev, of course he did. He’s got lawyers and no one signs a multimillion pound contract without reading it unless they are an idiot.

“You think” !!
He lost a lot of credibility and most of the political impact his tweet might have had. He did it deliberately to get attention but I agree it was a mistake. Just another click bait Tweet from a Champaign socialist celebrity who had a moment to speak his mind with poise and principle, but blew it.

@a-unique-nickname said
Freedom of speech however should be a right regardless of a contract.

Well that’s the important point in all this isn’t it. Protecting freedom of speech.

I would ask Gary Lineker if when he signed his multimillion contract wether he new that it was likely he was going to break the clause about not commenting on party political issues, or wether he was too blinded by the big bucks.

I wonder if the BBC will hold him to it in future and wether he will compromise his political principle for the money. It will be interesting to observe.

@divegeester said
Yes interesting isn’t it that the only presenters at the BBC who chose to stand in solidarity (as Ian Wright put it), were Lineker’s footballing friends who happen to share his political views.

As far as I know no other BBC presenter or employee has stood with him openly. It looks to me as though these three in particular (Lineker the protagonist, Alan Shearer and Ian ...[text shortened]... 019 election and Starmer’s inability to to keep two principled thoughts in his head at any one time.

Football focus, final score etc, match of the day presenters weren't the only ones. Was there any commentary on MOTD on Saturday night?

It wasn't imo people sanding by him because they agreed with the content of his tweet. It was a clear footballers union, stand by your mate kind of thing.

You'd fire the lot of them. How much do you think that would cost in lawsuits?

@a-unique-nickname said
Football focus, final score etc, match of the day presenters weren't the only ones. Was there any commentary on MOTD on Saturday night?

It wasn't imo people sanding by him because they agreed with the content of his tweet. It was a clear footballers union, stand by your mate kind of thing.

You'd fire the lot of them. How much do you think that would cost in lawsuits?

Correct I knew there were other footballers, I stand corrected. I meant what you said, “a footballers union”.

It wouldn’t cost anything if they are in breach of contract, but it’s not clear if they are.

@divegeester said
Well that’s the important point in all this isn’t it. Protecting freedom of speech.

I would ask Gary Lineker if when he signed his multimillion contract wether he new that it was likely he was going to break the clause about not commenting on party political issues, or wether he was too blinded by the big bucks.

I wonder if the BBC will hold him to it in future an ...[text shortened]... wether he will compromise his political principle for the money. It will be interesting to observe.

When did 1.4 turn in multi millions?

I don't think the money should be an issue here. If he was getting paid 1.4m or 14k it's the same.

Probably you agree with the law, and that's why you'd sack the lot of them.

@divegeester said
Don’t be naive Trev, of course he did. He’s got lawyers and no one signs a multimillion pound contract without reading it unless they are an idiot.

“You think” !!
He lost a lot of credibility and most of the political impact his tweet might have had. He did it deliberately to get attention but I agree it was a mistake. Just another click bait Tweet from a Champaign socialist celebrity who had a moment to speak his mind with poise and principle, but blew it.

Getting your lawyer to read something and reading it yourself are two different things.

I believe that you're employed.

Did you read the contract word for word?

@a-unique-nickname said
When did 1.4 turn in multi millions?

When it is a contract over multiple years.

@a-unique-nickname said
I don't think the money should be an issue here. If he was getting paid 1.4m or 14k it's the same.

Well that’s the big question for Mr Lineker isn’t it.

@a-unique-nickname said
Probably you agree with the law, and that's why you'd sack the lot of them.

I’d sack them for bringing an arm of my business to a halt. Nothing to with the law, except that I’d work within it.