About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

user104658 · 12-03-2023, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Pretty sure if it did NOT

we would have heard that by now

So its just a breach of contract issue and hopefully he will be terminated

If it is stipulated in contract then half of the BBC will have to go - that's the issue here. I imagine if it is in contract, it's been casually unenforced for a long time... If they start they have to be consistent. A lot of BBC programming in general would be under a large question mark.

In practice I doubt the contract stipulates political neutrality OUTSIDE OF WORK because that would be very, very unusual. It sounds more like they've entered into negotiations with him requesting he tone it down, and he's said no.

bots · 12-03-2023, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Backing down when you're wrong is not a weakness, but should be seen as a strength.

well, thats where there is genuine disagreement. Part of my agreement to pay the licence fee is that the bbc remain impartial. If they back down, the "strike" will move to the bill payers and then the BBC will have a much bigger issue

user104658 · 12-03-2023, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

well, thats where there is genuine disagreement. Part of my agreement to pay the licence fee is that the bbc remain impartial. If they back down, the "strike" will move to the bill payers and then the BBC will have a much bigger issue

When has the BBC ever been politically neutral though? I can give examples of them leaning both ways (impartiality doesn't mean neutrality!) and they'd need to put an end to both in all of their programming and not just that - for all of their presenters, and actors in BBC shoes, regardless of context.

Its not sustainable.

But from my perspective that's really the only answer here; the BBC/license fee is not fit for purpose in todays media and social landscape.

bots · 12-03-2023, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

When has the BBC ever been politically neutral though? I can give examples of them leaning both ways (impartiality doesn't mean neutrality!) and they'd need to put an end to both in all of their programming and not just that - for all of their presenters, and actors in BBC shoes, regardless of context.

Its not sustainable.

But from my perspective that's really the only answer here; the BBC/license fee is not fit for purpose in todays media and social landscape.

it's never been sustainable, just ignored or covered up and social media and the availability of a plethora of alternative channels makes a mockery of impartiality.

Not being funny here, but i bet the majority of people supporting lineker at this point, don't even pay a TV licence. It becomes more and more likely, the longer this continues, that people will simply refuse to pay the licence. You can bet that if support coalesces behind lineker, there will be a similarly activated group that refuses to provide the BBC any further funding. If that becomes an organised group, the BBC is properly ****ed

The Slim Reaper · 12-03-2023, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

well, thats where there is genuine disagreement. Part of my agreement to pay the licence fee is that the bbc remain impartial. If they back down, the "strike" will move to the bill payers and then the BBC will have a much bigger issue

Lineker and Sugar both attacked Corbyn on Twitter, Sugar, right on the eve of elections and more than once. Yet I don't remember him being taken off the air, or the left (the only participators in cancel culture apparently) kicking up the same storm. there has been a wholly unsettling unity and forced conformity from the rw press on this.

If you haven't been moaning about Andrew Neil's twitter use over the years, then you're not really being honest or sincere. You don't want to hear opinions that challenge your own opinions on refugees, and that's the crux of it.

Crimson Dynamo · 12-03-2023, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Lineker and Sugar both attacked Corbyn on Twitter, Sugar, right on the eve of elections and more than once. Yet I don't remember him being taken off the air, or the left (the only participators in cancel culture apparently) kicking up the same storm. there has been a wholly unsettling unity and forced conformity from the rw press on this.

If you haven't been moaning about Andrew Neil's twitter use over the years, then you're not really being honest or sincere. You don't want to hear opinions that challenge your own opinions on refugees, and that's the crux of it.

the new updated impartiality guidelines were made in 2020

the sugar stuff etc was before that

bots · 12-03-2023, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Lineker and Sugar both attacked Corbyn on Twitter, Sugar, right on the eve of elections and more than once. Yet I don't remember him being taken off the air, or the left (the only participators in cancel culture apparently) kicking up the same storm. there has been a wholly unsettling unity and forced conformity from the rw press on this.

If you haven't been moaning about Andrew Neil's twitter use over the years, then you're not really being honest or sincere. You don't want to hear opinions that challenge your own opinions on refugees, and that's the crux of it.

as i've just said, previous breaches have been brushed under the carpet. People are just not impartial and never have been, but that IS the basis on which the BBC is funded and it is the single biggest issue the new director general has chosen to hang his hat on

Tom4784 · 12-03-2023, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it's a much wider problem than lineker now. BBC staff have downed tools and arent covering any football. Womens football has been zapped today. If the BBC back down, any pretence of impartiality is out the window. If the BBC stand firm, the "strike" will expand.

This just doesn't have a good outcome for the BBC. The only course i see is to terminate linekers contract immediately and try and move on. The stepping back till they agree social media behaviour is feeding the fire

'The only way to fix this fire is to throw chip fat onto it!'

That's basically what you are saying.

If they sack Linekar, the problem will explode because the problem here is that they are claiming impartiality to punish Linekar when they NEVER hold the tory supporters in the BBC to the same standard. They're claiming impartiality to punish someone who has basically opposed the tories when they'll allow tory viewpoints to run wild without limitation.

The problem isn't Linekar, it's that the BBC has no impartiality and no grounds to act in the guise of impartiality.

user104658 · 12-03-2023, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it's never been sustainable, just ignored or covered up and social media and the availability of a plethora of alternative channels makes a mockery of impartiality.

Not being funny here, but i bet the majority of people supporting lineker at this point, don't even pay a TV licence. It becomes more and more likely, the longer this continues, that people will simply refuse to pay the licence. You can bet that if support coalesces behind lineker, there will be a similarly activated group that refuses to provide the BBC any further funding. If that becomes an organised group, the BBC is properly ****ed

It can only possible be in its final days anyway, broadcast television is ending. It obviously has decades left because stoll plenty of people who grew up with it, but today's teens and young adults mostly just don't watch it. It's just... Not part of their day. My sister in law is 26 and just broke up with her partner and moved into her own place - hasn't even bothered connecting the TV for broadcast telly in any way. Just Netflix and YouTube. My daughter's 14 and her (and most and her friends) have basically NEVER watched broadcast TV... My daughter only watches the TV - at all - if we're all watching a film together. She gets all of her entertainment via her phone and laptop. That's just the norm these days and the BBC model just isn't compatible.

Crimson Dynamo · 12-03-2023, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

It can only possible be in its final days anyway, broadcast television is ending. It obviously has decades left because stoll plenty of people who grew up with it, but today's teens and young adults mostly just don't watch it. It's just... Not part of their day. My sister in law is 26 and just broke up with her partner and moved into her own place - hasn't even bothered connecting the TV for broadcast telly in any way. Just Netflix and YouTube. My daughter's 14 and her (and most and her friends) have basically NEVER watched broadcast TV... My daughter only watches the TV - at all - if we're all watching a film together. She gets all of her entertainment via her phone and laptop. That's just the norm these days and the BBC model just isn't compatible.

Broadcast TV is not a thing at all for smallest boy LT

Liam- · 12-03-2023, 03:26 PM

The people harping on about ‘impartiality’ wouldn’t be doing so had Linekar expressed his support for the policy he was criticising and that’s just an unavoidable fact of the matter, he’d have been on motd last night and this situation wouldn’t have happened to start with, this whole saga has nothing whatsoever to do with impartiality

Tom4784 · 12-03-2023, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liam-

The people harping on about ‘impartiality’ wouldn’t be doing so had Linekar expressed his support for the policy he was criticising and that’s just an unavoidable fact of the matter, he’d have been on motd last night and this situation wouldn’t have happened to start with, this whole saga has nothing whatsoever to do with impartiality

Yup, it's just Tory backlash for speaking against their barbaric plans.

bots · 12-03-2023, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Broadcast TV is not a thing at all for smallest boy LT

i watch live football on satellite channels, i don't watch any terrestrial tv, the last time i watched bbc news was in the very early days of covid

Crimson Dynamo · 12-03-2023, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liam-

The people harping on about ‘impartiality’ wouldn’t be doing so had Linekar expressed his support for the policy he was criticising and that’s just an unavoidable fact of the matter, he’d have been on motd last night and this situation wouldn’t have happened to start with, this whole saga has nothing whatsoever to do with impartiality

i see you have used the word fact when you should have used the correct term conjecture

user104658 · 12-03-2023, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Broadcast TV is not a thing at all for smallest boy LT

I remember explaining to my eldest when she was about 9 that a shoe was on "later" and that you couldn't pick what to watch when, it was just on when it was on, and she was BAMBOOZLED. Couldn't get her head around it, and when she did, it was an immediate "It's a no from me!"

I can see negatives too, to be fair, there's a level of impatience and susceptibility to boredom that comes along with entertainment being always there at the push of a button.

Feel like a dinosaur saying things like that though

. "In my day you got Pokemon after school and Byker Grove then Neighbours before dinner and that was you until Saturday!!"

user104658 · 12-03-2023, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i watch live football on satellite channels, i don't watch any terrestrial tv, the last time i watched bbc news was in the very early days of covid

IMO sport is headed for non-professional commentary, people will stream and play commentator via social platforms for their subs and it'll be paid for via some mechanism of that - either ads or subs driven.

Probably a better model to get to pick & choose who you like to hear giving commentary tbh.

This already happens a lot "unofficially" already which is a good indication that they'll eventually figure out how to make it profitable.

joeysteele · 12-03-2023, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zizu

Breaking news

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That's only part of what he said.

Yes he said, it 'APPEARED' to be a 'TECHNICAL' breach of the rules.
However added that Lineker's status as a 'SPORTS' presenter, meant the row was a 'GREY' area.
Stating the BBC 'MUST' strike a balance when enforcing the rules.

From that the only assumption I would make is the BBC have acted way too heavy handedly on this matter.
The BBC are no longer in my view, adept at striking much in the way of balance, never mind the right balance at all now.

bots · 12-03-2023, 03:51 PM

all sorts of considerations need to apply. The fact that he was previously warned about it is a crucial factor that people seem to just ignore.

Also, can it be described as the straw that broke the camels back and i think the answer is a resounding yes. The appointment of the BBC chairman on the back of a massive loan to Boris pissed off most people across any political divide. Then we have a massive dose of perfectly reasonable "what about ism's"

My view is very simple, i pay my bbc contribution on the back of impartiality, and the BBC is not. It has broken its charter agreement and therefore i should not be under any further legal duty to continue to fund it. When I stop being legally compelled to fund the bbc, that is the point i don't care about how it is run. Until then, i will hold them to their charter

bots · 12-03-2023, 03:57 PM

as an aside, i'm watching a sports channel at the moment that has Ian Wright and Alan Shearer as pundits talking about the days games

user104658 · 12-03-2023, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeysteele

That's only part of what he said.

Yes he said, it 'APPEARED' to be a 'TECHNICAL' breach of the rules.
However added that Lineker's status as a 'SPORTS' presenter, meant the row was a 'GREY' area.
Stating the BBC 'MUST' strike a balance when enforcing the rules.

From that the only assumption I would make is the BBC have acted way too heavy handedly on this matter.
The BBC are no longer in my view, adept at striking much in the way of balance, never mind the right balance at all now.

The impression I get though is that they've had talks with him explaining this, and said he can't continue making political comments like this and stay in the job, and he has then made the decision to leave rather than have his opinion reigned in. Which is fair enough, and entirely his choice.

bots · 12-03-2023, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The impression I get though is that they've had talks with him explaining this, and said he can't continue making political comments like this and stay in the job, and he has then made the decision to leave rather than have his opinion reigned in. Which is fair enough, and entirely his choice.

he didn't make the decision to leave, he was told he couldn't return to the bbc until he agreed to their terms. Same effect, but different execution