BBC shows its biases and then caves (Gary Lineker vs. BBC)

BBC continues the selective application of its "impartiality guidelines" and they applied them to the wrong person. Sports presenter Gary Lineker stood his ground and it all blew up in the BBC's face. Let's talk about it.
✔ SUPPORT ✔
Patreon: / councilofgeeks
KZbin Membership: / @councilofgeeks
Paypal tip jar: PayPal.me/councilofgeeks
Ko-fi: ko-fi.com/verawylde
✔ OTHER CHANNELS ✔
Break Room of Geeks / @breakroomofgeeks
Vera Wylde: / verawylde
✔ SHOP ✔
Merch: www.teepublic.com/user/counci...
My Book on Gender Fluidity: a.co/d/atfibBA (Amazon Associate link, commissions earned)
My Fantasy Novel: amzn.to/2SCxB8j (Amason Associate link, commissions earned)
✔ SOCIAL MEDIA ✔
Twitter: / councilofgeeks
Facebook: / councilofgeeks
TikTok: / verawylde1
Instagram: council.of....
Twitch: / councilofgeeks
✔ OTHER PROJECTS ✔
Council of Geeks Podcast (home of What the Frell & Jumpgate): councilofgeeks.libsyn.com/
✔ CONTACT ✔
E-mail: [e-mail]
Mail:
Council of Geeks
PO Box 4429
St. Johnsbury, VT 05819

[@MrTARDIS]

One additional element here as well is that the BBC caved because 'Match of the Day' co-hosts Alan Shearer and Ian Wright also dropped out of hosting the show in a mark of solidarity. The team who would edit commentary and crew the show also walked off (this all happened the day before the show was due to broadcast) and large chunks of the BBC Radio department across the UK walked off so they were forced to play syndicated, pre-prepared programming. Unity and solidarity won out here, because we are stronger together. Footballers in the UK are highly unionised and I think the BBC and the Conservative Government really picked the wrong enemy to fight here.

[@kinolibby6580]

Also the footballers were let out of their contractual obligation to give the BBC interviews so that they too could stand in solidarity

[@CapriUni]

Solidarity forever!

[@paulhammond6978]

@@kinolibby6580 Yes, this actually become policy of the Premier League - their contract mandates players to give interviews to the channels that cover the matches. Many current players were going to refuse to talk to the BBC in solidarity with Lineker. Their clubs publicly stated that they would pay the fines their players got, and then the Premier League itself also stated that it would not fine players who refused to talk to the BBC. Something along those lines (I mean, I only heard the details after it all happened). But yes, a popular groundswell of support for Lineker (even if a lot of people also said they didn't agree with what he said) after the BBC nobbled him on the orders of the right wing press and the BBC's right wing masters.

[@hiddenechoes]

❤

[@daviniarobbins9298]

He certainly knows who his friends are now.

[@henrymendoza8295]

Hi Vera. Great video. Speaking as a Brit who watched this keenly, would just like to clarify - The BBC is not actually a branch of government, it is a separate and *nominally* independent broadcaster from the government of the day. The difficulty they have is that, aside from money they get from BBC Studios, their commercial arm that sells things like Doctor Who overseas and handles merchandising agreements for the few shows it has that are marketable like Doctor Who is, all of the BBC's funding comes from the public, through us paying our TV licence fees - this is something we need to pay for if we either wish to watch live television or watch anything on catch-up services for UK channels, such as the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 or 5, or similar (we do not have to pay a TV licence to access other streaming services such as Netflix, Disney Plus etc., or to watch KZbin or Internet content on our TVs). The TV licence model *in theory* means that because it is effectively voluntary depending on how you use your TV or support public service broadcasting, then the BBC is rendered independent from government and it should give them more space to challenge and criticise where appropriate. However, the BBC relies on a Royal Charter with the government to continue the existing funding model, and that Royal Charter has to be renewed each decade. The consequence of this is that the government of the day can dangles the carrot and stick of Charter Renewal over the BBC's head, either effectively bribing or blackmailing them over any issue or potential criticism of them, because the threat or implied threat is, 'Do what we say, or we will cut your funding' (because they can dictate how much the BBC is allowed to charge for a Television licence, and have crippled them in the past by freezing the licence fee (resulting in real terms funding cuts when factoring in inflation), or more recently making the BBC foot the bill for TV licences for peoppe over the age of 75 (this was something paid for by government since the early 2000s and the government made the BBC foot the bill for about 5 years in exchange for the BBC being allowed to charge a TV licence for watching their programming on their online catch-up/streaming service, BBC iPlayer - in exchange for closing the so-called 'iPlayer loophole' for them then the BBC agreed to cover the costs of TV licences for the over 75s, but with the freeze in the TV licence cost then the BBC could not afford to do this for more than about 5 years. Once those years were up, the over 75s were forced to foot the bill for TV licences themselves, but this way the BBC got the blame instead of the Conservative government who simply no longer wanted to pay for those licences. Anyway. The threat of what the government of the day could do to the BBC through charter renewal, including scrapping the existing funding model altogether in exchange for one that would make the BBC even less money, means the BBC are terrified and cowed into towing the government line regarding certain issues, or at least forced to apply their impartiality rules inconsistently. This is also somewhat responsible for the BBC's coverage of trans issues as the UK government is so hostile to trans people. There is a reasonable chance this government will lose reelection next year and so the BBC will be somewhat liberated by a change in government to a party not as hostile to criticism and public service broadcasting in general, but we will also have to hope The Labour Party chooses to reform the BBC's funding model to further its independence from government and thus its coverage should start to balance out if its funding is put on a more secure footing.

[@JamesCorp]

Wow great explanation of what the BBC is and how it’s funded, and how the current Tory government is manipulating the BBC!

[@ftumschk]

@@JamesCorp True. The BBC isn't perfect, but we need to be aware of the fact that we - and the BBC - are living in a particularly nasty political climate. The current batch of Conservatives are easily the worst I can remember, and I've taken an active interest in British politics since the 1970s.

[@TheGerkuman]

what the BBC needs is a root and branch tear-down and reassembly of the entire news and current affairs department, plus the executives for the entire corporation. The rest of it is doing fine. Edit: unfortunately, replacing the Tories with Labour will be an improvement but not much of one by itself, given that Kier's not been very strident in pro-trans rhetoric. Dude even seemed to say he wasn't fond of Gillick Competency, which is a BAD sign. (Then again, Kier Starmer's Labour is basically a return to the centre-right New Labour days, so...)

[@AndersWatches]

I think you’re being very generous by claiming that the current Labour Party are less hostile to criticism than the tories. Starmer is a cowardly bully and has eschewed any pretence of democracy within the party to make sure his utter bullshit goes unchallenged. That said, and it pains me to say, labour is unfortunately the only feasible option we have to get rid of the most morally bankrupt government this country has seen since thatcher and probably even worse than her. Hopefully starmer doesn’t take it as a challenge to become even more morally bankrupt himself.

[@NeilCWCampbell]

It not technically part of government but it is ran by Richard sharp who paid money to Boris to become head honcho

[@barryhomeowner9293]

Our Lord and Saviour Russell T Davies, in the midst of all this, posted a video from an awards show where he says "There's money in this room which means there are tory voters here... You are voting for murderers, bastards, abusers and liars" I love him so much

[@mystic_mimi21]

Hello british person here, I would like to add that the current 3 most senior members of the bbc who run it have strong links with right wing policts and the tories, one even ran to be an mp for the tories. Explains everything

[@oliverraven]

AFAIK he actually ran to be a local councillor not an MP but yes, that still makes him far too close to the governing party of the day for a supposedly non-partisan position.

[@honestiago4738]

Glad you enjoyed this Vera, as a Brit it was bloody satisfying to watch. One of the best parts of it was it showed the power of solidarity. Watching Lineker's colleagues one by one make it clear they backed him completely and wouldn't take part in the programme without him, watching players and managers refuse to speak to the BBC was so heartening. It was so good when things feel bleak to see someone stand up for what they feel is right, to be supported by their friends and colleagues and to win. Think we all needed that one. Oh, and thanks for calling the game football and not soccer 😁

[@WiloPolis03]

"Stop talking about politics" has almost always meant "Stop talking about politics *that I don't share* ". It's crystal clear every time.

[@hazardsigns]

Gary is a National Treasure in the UK. He is a genuinely nice guy, who is highly respected in his field and participates in so many charitable endeavours. He has never been afraid to state his opinions and stand up for the underdog. I mean, the response from his peers speaks volumes. No wonder the shambles of the BBC had to back down. The UK is a mess these days. Most of my family is stuck there and they are worried about everything from their weekly shop, to medication availability to their pension plan suddenly going up in smoke. Don't even get me started on She Who Must Not Be Named and all her damage. Yikes. I'm glad Gary got his apology and I hope it does lead to changes. Won't be holding my breath though

[@camipco]

I want to add I think he's remains a pretty centrist figure. He's popular, or at least not disliked, among a broad range of people. It's not like he had a bunch of more right wing brits pissed off at him and this was the final straw of his leftist demagoguery or something.

[@nineteenthly]

I wish I could like this more than I already do! We're all laughing over here in Britain. As Owen Jones said, who'd've thought the revolution would be led by sports commentators? And people are also, I hope, going to join up the dots between the Tories' and the BBC's racism and their transphobia now this has happened. Gary Lineker is from my home city and his family has a fruit and veg stall on the market here, and he's so much considered a "nice guy" that he's even been in commercials for Walker's Crisps playing that up. He's the best person to have done this!

[@Stringer13ell]

Ah yes your home city, the bastion of modern day slavery thanks to mass immigration

[@CritterKeeper01]

Here's hoping Lineker can make use of his newfound freedom of speech to draw some attention to the BBC's transphobia next!

[@Stringer13ell]

@@CritterKeeper01 the BBC is transphobic? Oh maybe I'll pay my licence fee after all then.

[@mrwho995]

A few additional points that I think are worth including. On the BBC: - The BBC Chairman Richard Sharp has donated over £400,000 to the Tory party and is now under investigation due him helping Boris Johnson secure a £600,000 loan and never disclosing this - The BBC Director General Tim Davie stood as a Tory candidate in local elections Obviously, both of these things make the BBC's bias and corruption look even worse. Two two previous political editors, Laura Kuennsberg and Nick Robinson, were also both arch Tories. Although the new guy Chris Mason actually seems to be genuinely impartial with no political ties. And on the illegal asylum bill: - The bill is illegal under international law and violates the European Convention on Human Rights. Braverman even admitted this in a letter to Tory MPs literally saying it's illegal but they should vote for it anyway - The UK offers aboslutely NO safe routes for people from multiple countries, including places like Afghanistan, so by rejecting people on boats there are outright banning asylum seekers from many countries For the record by the way, the BBC is NOT supposed to be a branch or arm of the government. The entire reason for its existence is that it's supposed to be impartial. As you say, it's always had a bit of a 'pro-estiablishment' bias, but nowhere close to today.

[@wajidmannan2618]

As a first generation child of migrants, it was Gary Lineker who first made me feel patriotic and proud to be English when I was six, and again when I was ten. Whilst I now know there is a lot in our history (and present) to not be proud of, Gary Lineker is still proving himself to be the epitome of the ideal of an Englishman.

[@NeilCWCampbell]

Love you brother

[@simonesalvatore9345]

Not gonna lie, "American Doctor Who KZbinr talks about Gary Lineker" wasn't exactly on my 2023 Bingo Card. A welcome surprise, but a surprise nonetheless.

[@ZoeMalDoran]

The BBC are supposed to be impartial in order to hold the government to account... at least in theory. In practice, "impartiality" all too often seems to be applied in a cowardly way, and taken to mean whatever the guy at the top wants it to mean... such as "agree with the government without being seen to agree with them"

[@bertieblack5639]

Found it a bit ironic that it was Lineker of all people who made the BBC s*** their pants. (For those who don't know the context, check out England vs Ireland in the 1990 FIFA World Cup.) Loved to see you covering this, Vera. It's actually opened a lot of people's eyes over here as to how bad the BBC can behave. Love from the UK! ❤

[@deterlanglytone]

You know, I expected worse googling this as England Vs Ireland could've lead toa number of things. But what happened was a bit funny. I mostly feel bad for him of course. Geese.

[@EmoBearRights]

This is it - Lineker had a rep as a footballer as a nice young man with a wife and a small son whose recovery from leukaemia got him interested in charity work. A comedian called Arthur Smith wrote a play called An Evening with Gary Lineker where he called the Queen Mother of footie players I think this is why the Tories look so bad over this Middle England small town Tories like Gary.

[@raggletaggle8827]

As a citizen of terf island, I just want to express how thankful I am for the increase of international BBC viewers at times like this. Because it also means we get more voices to hold them to account. Like sure, I get mad that the BBC keep increasing the 'tv license' fee every frickin' year, since I strongly believe that, if anything - them now allowing international viewers to use their services means they should have more profits and thus can *surely* decrease the mandatory license fee in the UK (Netflix even stream BBC shows inside the UK, and there was the whole thing with 'Brit Box' before it flopped too. They must be getting so much income now that private companies are paying them for their content). But hey, I'm mad at the Tory BBC execs for being so greedy - not at the international viewers for that. I love the fact that they probably didn't consider that accepting money from international television networks and streaming services was always going to mean more eyes around the globe would be on them, and those viewers and onlookers alike would have a right to criticise and ridicule their acts of poor judgement and corruption just as much as anyone else. It feels oddly comforting when people as far away as Vera know who Graham Norton and Garry Lineker are. If something like this happened 10 or 15 years ago, I think controversies like this might have felt weirdly quiet. Mainstream media was corrupt then, and it is now - but at least thanks to both social media and everyone's ability to view more news and general media from abroad, it makes said corrupt outlets have to ground themselves and u-turn more than they'd like to and otherwise would. That gives me hope (which we need in this increasingly authoritarian society).

[@ItsMeHarry]

Even if this amounts to little direct change within the BBC, this was very therapeutic to see the wide fit Linekar in this situation and the public being unable to ignore the right leaning bias of the BBC right now

[@SMAnthonyW]

Love that Gary dug his heels in. We will not budge or compromise human rights. I love a good old fashioned, “I said what I said”, to quote Nene Leakes.

[@QuarterMoonRachel]

As a Brit, it's interesting to see an outsider's perspective. It deeply hurts me that my country's government (not that I will ever in my life vote Tory!) Is acting in such an awful inhumane way towards migrants crossing the channel. Their rhetoric has even inspired some truly cruel comments on twitter in response to the RNLI - the independent lifeboat charity that has stepped in to help several small boats that have gotten into trouble in the channel - including notions that these people do not deserve help - i.e. should be allowed to drown within easy reach of help just due to the nature of their journey. Public well liked figures speaking out about this is so important. As you say, he has the privilege and means to make a statement that gets noticed. I just hope it has actually reached the hearts and minds of some of on-the-fence Tory voters.

[@iciajay6891]

I was just reading up on why a lot of the legal asylum seekers have to go by boat. If they fly the airline is responsible to fly them back home. So the UK created this issues. By having this law in place. Then ( the Tory's) yelling about the boats. Like fam, you are the problem. And engaged in ilegal acts by trying to stop migrants, and asylum seekers. They will be looked at in history as Germany 1930's shit. Like with the way the US is operating with asylum seekers and lgbtq ppl. It is Germany 1930's bs. The spade is a spade. The current regime is fascist. That is why they are reacting like this. They don't want to admit they are. When everyone in the world is watching them be fascist.

[@AndersWatches]

The MP for my constituency is the creature known as Jonathan Gullis, who is one of the especially callous and vocal anti-migrant (etc) voice boxes in the Tory party. I do not trust my city to about-turn from its descent into right wing political support, but stranger things have happened. Fingers crossed this whole thing opened enough eyes.

[@paulhammond6978]

@@iciajay6891 This has been said before. "Your language is not dissimilar to 30s Germany" "How dare you say that. That is so insulting. I'm gonna get you fired for saying something so outrageous". So, really, the way to convince people that you're not an authoritarian is to scream for the person criticising you to lose their position?

[@iciajay6891]

@@paulhammond6978 um? This makes no sense. If someone one is acting fascist, they are acting fascist. Regardless of what there job is. This seems like the comment you made is projection. And says a lot.

[@paulhammond6978]

@@iciajay6891 I think I have written it badly. I'm impersonating the Tory MPs who are doing the pearl clutching here. They get offended at being compared to the Nazis, then they decide that the best way to deal with that criticism is to try to silence Lineker. So, really, trying to get your critics sacked is like... proving the point that you are an authoritarian who doesn't actually believe in free speech. You are trying to prove that you're not like the Nazis, by behaving like the Nazis? I'm saying that Tory MPs doing this are being authoritarian.

[@Ellie_Kat]

I have to admit this whole situation gave me a glorious feeling of Schadenfreude 😂

[@JamesCorp]

The other thing was it was pressure from Tory MPs towards the BBC and then making a fuss over it that brought the tweet more into the public view and the bbc suspending him was a stupid move.

[@SMAnthonyW]

I didn’t know who Gary was before this video but I do now. Thanks Vera for another great video. Disgusted by the BBC, but not surprised.

[@purpleraider8105]

Little thing that is really nothing to do with the discussion at hand, but I genuinely love that you said Football and not Soccer or profess it in anyway. Gives me joy

[@scarletfatefan8793]

Honestly any win is a good thing. It’s stuff like this that gives me hope that this wave of far right awfulness can be defeated-as well as showing a good example of using your privilege for a good cause

[@kevin10001]

I liked that the bbc played a game of chicken and had to be the one that swerved first to save their sports coverage of footboul that is once of Europes most popular sports

[@Pidove727]

So I gave it a day before watching the video because; firstly I'm sick and tired about hearing about Lineker (it's been headline news every day all of last week in the UK), and secondly I think it's too tied up in UK politics for someone who doesn't follow too closely to properly understand the complexities. Whilst your video does an amazing job at covering the broad strokes I think to some extent I was right with the nuance and complexities. Here are a few corrections and elaborations that other non-natives of the UK might find helpful: -Firstly Gary Lineker isn't just 'a famous footballer', he's a national treasure, he was a top goal scorer in all of the clubs he played for and played for England's national team, being the fourth highest goal scorer on the team ever. Not only has he been doing match of the day since the 90s but he's also the face of Walkers crisps, and a household name. -When it comes to 'small boats' we aren't talking about canoes or rowboats but dingies with about 50-100 people all packed on, making a perilous journey accross the channel. To understand this better, watch the RTD drama Years and Years. In the past so-called 'illegal migration' has been people being smuggled into the UK on lorries, but since 2018 increasingly the 'small boats' are how migrants will travel into the UK, often helped by organised gangs who extort thousands of Euros out of them for the 'privelege'. In 2022 45,000+ migrants made their way across the channel this way, something our news media is only too aware of, often having daily headlines or even live reports of the 'migrant crisis' being presented on boats in the channels watching the people struggle in the overcrowded dingies. - The illegal migration bill, is intricately linked to the recently passed Nationality and Borders Act, which (if it ever manages to pass through the UK supreme court and ECHR) would send migrants that cross the border in small boats, straight to Rwanda. This has been an incredibly controversial topic in the UK since the Tories introduced it last year. It's unbelievably cruel and has a bunch of problems not least that Rwanda has its own issues with human rights abuses. Given that RTD has been very outspoken about this issues and Ncuti Gatwa is Scottish-Rwandan, I wouldn't be surprised if we see a metaphor of this in one of the stories in S14 of Doccy Who. -As for the BBC reassessing it's impartiality rules, this is absolutely not a win for Lineker, but rather a move to appease the BBCs Tory detractors who were angry at Lineker being reinstated. By reassessing the rules it can be implied that whilst by the current rules they don't have a leg to stand on for criticising Lineker, they will (as you pointed out) likely be tightened in the future to stop this happening again. -It wasn't just Linekers stubbornness that turned the tables, but the collective action of not just his fellow MOTD presenters, but radio commentators, other BBC football pundits and even footballers and managers at the clubs who came out in solidarity with Lineker! -The BBC *absolutely* is not an arm of the British government, or rather it isn't meant to be. The head of the BBC is appointed by the Prime Minister, and many other appointments are mired in politics galore (again which have been highlighted in recent political scandals, which only prove how impartiality at the BBC is a lie). However the BBC is *intended* to be a public broadcaster rather than a government broadcaster. This distinction is what makes this scandal with Lineker so important as the pressure to remove him from the air (as they didn't do so, right away), most likely wasn't an soley an internal decision but due to pressure from powerful Tories and possibly even Number 10. As I final comment I'll just say, whilst you can gloat, as someone from the UK this just makes me sad. The BBC (despite the transphobia in its news division) is still a thing I am hugely proud of as a British person. It produces not only great entertainment and drama programming such as Doctor Who, but also radio, global news. The majority of it's programming is made accessible with BSL, it makes niche content such as it's Welsh language and Gaelic content. Whenever I need to find a recipe it will be BBC GoodFood, and my schooldays were boosted with the educational BBC Bytesize website. The sheer variety of content that the BBC manages to produce, some of it world leading in quality, and all of it on a budget. Not to mention the impact it has on the UK media industry, many professionals in the UK get their first job in either the BBC or Channel 4, it does wonders for the talent we have in the UK. Overall the BBC is something that I'm incredibly proud exists and something that I feel gives the UK incredible soft power around the world. So to see this institution attacked and undermined by the Tory party makes me incredibly angry.

[@naveenbhalla4557]

Also, thanks so much for calling it Football 😂!

[@NeilCWCampbell]

Actually was hoping you'd pick up on this from across the pond

[@alicebell7975]

This is a stunning assessment of the absolute shitshow which went down and, as you say, a rare but amazing example of someone using their wealth for good. I too was gloating when the BBC was forced to bow down to Lineker over this. It really was very fun to watch.

[@tokublwhovian]

As much as BBC (well, CBBC and CBeebies) were a part of my childhood (same goes for many 90s-2010s Brits) and the corporation produces some great comedies and shows, they need bringing down. I’m not surprised by anything they say or do anymore. It’s a shame that they can’t follow ITV and Channel 4 or 5’s ways (saying that, Channel 4 recently released a not so nice documentary on George Michael) a part of our culture, tarnished. Because one side suddenly has access to cry and scream about minorities just living/breathing and working in the UK.

[@FOJO27]

Channel 4 did a George Michael doc? How recent? Can one find it outside the UK? Be interesting to check it out if available.

[@tokublwhovian]

@@FOJO27 Last week. It’s called George Michael: Outed, but I don’t know if it’s available outside of the UK. Sorry.

[@NeilCWCampbell]

This is what happens when Richard sharp can buy his position

[@Maisonikkokufan]

Idk why people always jump to the most extreme conclusions when it comes to formerly decent corporations becoming pretty bad. Yes the BBC in its current state is horrible, and it absolutely needs reforming, but it doesn't need to be completely taken down. Like you said, they do make great content and they were certainly far better overall from the 80s to the 00s. They just need to get rid of the "virus" (Tim Davie and his Tory cronies)

[@tokublwhovian]

@@Maisonikkokufan Fair enough :)

[@pattiwicksteed3731]

As a Brit? Gloat away, Vera! I have been watching the BBC spiral downwards for a long time and it makes me sad. Once upon a time Aunty Beeb was a voice for freedom and human rights. The World Service still tries to be... but as a whole, the organisation has been steadily losing my respect. I'm glad they're going to revisit the impartiality thing but have no great hopes for the regeneration of the institution as a whole. Be well, midear!

[@hiddenechoes]

It's awesome to see something happen to cause you so much joy/mirth! ❤ I do love it when people who can afford financially to take these kinds of stands do.

[@enchantedlight]

I have only a passing knowledge of what has been happening in the UK, but I really enjoyed this story. Your coverage of the BBC in general has shown me how bias they can be. Because I am not familiar with the culture / political climate, and the BCC is one of the few news UK organizations I recognize as not being a tabloid, I have in the past given more sway to their articles than I probably should have. I really appreciate your outlook here.

[@CFHWolfe]

Lineker is from my home town. Great guy. He also took asylum seekers into his own home - so he has literally invited people into his personal space. No grandstanding - just doing the right thing

[@lucypreece7581]

Striking has been happening across the UK for a while now from nurses to rail workers to doctors to postal workers. Not much has changed or happened to help those workers and Gary Lineker essentially caused a mass strike which was in closer proximity to the government and they had to listen and do something to prevent escalation because believe me as a British person I can tell you we are stubborn. I feel if the BBC hadn't caved it may have spread. Not just the Sports broadcasters but I do have a feeling that some of the other news presenters, broadcasters and TV personalities would have joined him. Lineker is beloved and respected across the BBC. Getting rid of him is like getting rid of football as a whole and like football is our national sport. Lineker is Mr Football. I feel the BBC knew that this could and would escalate so they bent and they caved because Lineker wouldn't because they knew that if they didn't the BBC as a whole would collapse. The government wouldn't have it's fave mouthpiece anymore and people would get their news from other sources that would be critical of the Tories and that would mean that in the next general election (next year) the Tories would be out and Labour would be in. The Tories know they are failing and that the country hates them and they are doing everything they can to cling to power. They have just over a year to regain support and they are failing. I think their mentality is if they appease Lineker and quell the mass walkouts and look like they are actually making changes they can convince people to keep them in office next year but I think it actually caused the opposite. From the reactions I have seen to all of this. Not just the situation with Lineker but the policy in general people was the Tories out. Moves and Counter moves.

[@paulhammond6978]

They seem to be talking to the junior doctors now, and the nurses I think have accepted something. But boy did it take the government a long time to come to the negotiating table!

[@lucypreece7581]

@@paulhammond6978 the "something" they have been given is barely anything. They have given the bare minimum possible to quell the striking.

[@mother_at_law]

Thank you so much for explaining this in your usual hyperintelligent and accessible manner. I would honestly rather come to you for commentary on current events than to a "typical" news outlet.

[@mother_at_law]

I would be interested in a compare/contrast between the BBC and the CBC (not that I'm suggesting that you do one but, if you know of one...). I don't *think* there is the same political influence on CBC employees but even if there were, the CBC doesn't have the same huge world-wide audience that the BBC does so any impact would be negligible.

[@MrsMelrom]

as a British person raised in England, this bullying behaviour is part of the culture. Fair play is an aspiration not part of the culture. The BBC is acting like a bully's henchman, more scared of the actual bully than of the consequences of their actions. And the present gouvernment are the worst type of bully that think they're entitled to everything. One of the reasons that they are getting a little pushback is that English people will accept the staus quo if there is some veneer of civility and the Tories lost that with Boris.

[@Elwaves2925]

I've been somewhat defensive in regards to the BBC for certain aspects, while being against them for others. This 'drama' shows how seriously bad they are at handling situations like this. They want control over all personal social media output from people they employ. It's one thing if Lineker had said this on MOTD, or the Beeb's own social media but it was his personal account, never mind that he was right IMO. The Beeb were 100% in the wrong to act on it. I don't watch MOTD, or follow football but Lineker is a local to me and is very respected for what he does. Even of they got rid of him, he'd be snapped up in a second. This was the Beeb trying to kiss the arse of the govt, the same govt that is trying to rip them apart so they can get a huge payday. They just restocked the govt's ammo for them.

[@theaureliasys6362]

Congrats to him, congrats to the others who walked out. They stood for what is right.

[@joeritchie6989]

Hey Vera, love the video! I’m British so I’m very familiar with the bbc and think you bring up loads of great points here The issue of ‘impartiality’ is something I’m really interested in, and I feel like this bring up a really interesting discussion on whether it is actually possible to ever be completely impartial. I feel that this situation with the bbc shows the major issue with it, which is that by trying to be impartial as a company or even as an individual, you have to define what you consider to be a political opinion or what it is acceptable to say or not to say. Which in itself will inherently reflect the opinion or political standpoint of whoever is setting those rules, as whenever you have to set a boundary, the exact extent of what is and isn’t acceptable is defined purely on the basis of the individual who is defining it. There is a similar issue that has been talked about in formula 1 recently, where they are trying to bring in a rule that forbids any driver from making any political statement without the consent of the governing body (the FIA), with the stated intent being to ‘keep politics out of sport’. The huge issue with this is that the only notable political statements made by drivers in recent years have been showing support for BLM and for the LGBTQ+ community, particularly by protesting and speaking out against racing in countries such as Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East who have a frankly medieval stance on gay rights. So whilst the stated intent is to keep the sport neutral, by bringing in these rules they are literally doing the opposite and inherently showing their own political opinions, in much the same way that the BBC are by only punishing certain people who break the ‘impartiality’ rules

[@Frey12]

Impartiality and non-bias have always been a tool of conservativism. Because being non-bias and impartial is linked to maintaining the status quo. Fascist policies do maintain the status quo.

[@gamewrit0058]

Well done, Vera. ❤

[@oliverwisniewski]

Great video, Vera!

[@AlmightyCRJ]

Lord Sugar of BBC The Apprentice show actually tweeted someone to vote for a Prime ministerial candidate the day before the election.

[@DanteSolablood]

There is additional background to the immigration issue here in the UK. Under Labour and previous Conservative governments there have been safe routes for migrants and refugees to reach our country, they'd reach our shores.. we'd process them and anyone that shouldn't be here would be deported meaning net migration was low. However, the Conservatives have been cutting services to the bone for years (blaming migrants for the effects this has had on everyday lives) including the Home Office, the civil servants who process those migrant's claims, meaning we basically can't process them & we can't deported them so net migration is through the roof! This is why the Conservatives have closed the safe routes for refugees & why people are risking their lives in boats. The boats are caused by the Conservatives. BTW, did you hear about the Chairman of the BBC being grilled by a select committee as he helped Brois Johnson secure an £800,000 loan shortly before being put in charge of the BBC? Suspicious eh?

[@randomdogdog]

I didn't know that they were reconcidering their ~~impartialality~~ transphobia platforming policy over this! Cool!!

[@marocat4749]

Probably helps its football which is big, like a lot europeabs national sport with fanatic fans big ,but goood! I mean if a sportscoloseum can start the nika uprising in rome, and the emporer has to cater to sports fans, makes sense thats where isthemost uproar. Nika nika nika!

[@ohauss]

If the BBC insists they can dictate the conduct of a freelance contractor even when he's off the clock for them and possibly even billing someone else, above and beyond issues that directly relate to his contractual activities for them - i.e. talking about football on camera - that begs the question if he's really as "free" a freelancer as laid out on paper. And that may mean a host of legal troubles for the BBC as well....

[@carpevinum8645]

Thank f*** he had enough capital behind him, in terms of time, professional respect, and popularity to pull this off. Stoked. But 90+% of BBC employees would have stood no chance at this outcome.

[@herbivarsawus4359]

He did not break the rules, so no one could ever say which rule(s) he even came close to breaking!

[@davidabercrombie5427]

Like many, if not most, people watching this, I saw this unfold in real time. The BBC really showed their ass on this issue. Everything that Gary Lineker said is what a lot of people think. I hope that this review they are talking about is done honestly and completely but as we all know these things can be manipulated, we'll see how it unfolds.

[@johnking5174]

The problem for Gary Lineker is he is paid for out of public money. His £1.3 million salary ($1.6 million) is all funded out of the license fee, public money - and when that happens, having any sort of political view whilst you are on the BBC and paid for by the public is not liked by a lot of people.

[@johnking5174]

@@huwzebediahthomas9193 BBC paid him that salary, but BT Sport and ITV had offered him a lot more, more than double to join them, but Gary has never left. I wonder why? And now since this storm has arisen, he could command an even higher salary at those rivals if he chose to quit. He is freelance remember.

[@rachelbecknell4259]

Lovely shade of green today.

[@Hothersalls]

I agree with the majority of what you said in the video. The only thing you got wrong was that the BBC is not, officially anyway an agency of the government. The chariman is appointed by the Government as a representative of the people paying the license fee, but that is as far as it should go. The fee is not colleted by the Government but by an agency. The BBC is bigger than a lot of people from outside the UK realise. Our most listened to radio stations are run by the BBC both nationally and locally. We have gotten used to having channels with not adverts and those that do carry adverts have to give notice they are coming. So yes you are 95% correct in what you have said. It has been a big issue over here. The ruling Conservative Government has over reached itself in several areas.

[@R_SENAL]

If only more people of means had such moral fiber. And I know you struggle with Doctor Who being a BBC property, but remember, this is them producing a consistently left leaning program since the Pertwee era, if not the very beginning. It needs More support, not less. We need the Doctor on the air more than ever, showing off what Actual kindness and decency looks like to the next generations.

[@CulturePhilter]

Until the 1980s MI5 used to Vet BBC employees to make sure they weren’t too ‘left-wing’

[@theshadowdirector]

It's weird, football culture was never a thing I ever saw allying with in any way. I never saw it as adversarial but it was never my thing, and now I'm in a situation of expressing solidarity. Change, strange times.

[@spews1973]

Hooray for Gary Lineker!

[@AndersWatches]

I imagine it has been said before but oh well, just want to clarify that the BBC is by definition not actually supposed to operate in any way as a government arm or agency. It very specifically exists to be a provider of impartiality entirely independent from the government, as an individual entity. Which makes the current state of things just that little bit worse in context.

[@mylopintorizvi4349]

The comparison between the immigration policy and nazi Germany initially came from Joan Salter a holocaust survivor.

[@Beowolf1uk]

He didn't break impartiality rules. I have a copy of the contract guide lines.

[@electronics-girl]

How do you think this compares with the "impartiality" of US universities that platform hate speech? I was reading about how the University of Pittsburgh is hosting three transphobic speakers, one of whom is Michael Knowles. The Provost issued a statement talking about "free and open inquiry" and "intellectual exchange" which reminded me a bit of the BBC's excuses.

[@CouncilofGeeks]

Some universities are either falling back on such notions or caving to pressure from right wing groups (both student groups and outside groups) to let these speakers on campus on that basis. But it’s a much more localized case by case issue there than the BBC which is national.

[@qqqqqqqqqqqq121212]

Intresting to hear how all this looked from someone looking in. I’ll applaud Gary Lineker for not backing down but, despite the psycho-right insisting he is a woke lefty, this is a man who cheerleads for Tory Prime Minister’s and tears down left wing politicians (all without a peep from the BBC) For my entire adult life, the BBC’s claim to impartiality has been ridiculous, and it’s always towards right wing opinions and rhetoric - regardless of the government. I’m not quite optimistic for their review of the ‘impartiality guidance’

[@josgibbons6777]

Phil Moorhouse has released interesting videos on this, e.g. kzbin.info/www/bejne/mKrahYaEhrufaMU kzbin.info/www/bejne/oauvhIeqqrejaKs He points out a few things further to CoG's points: 1) The rules explicitly exempt sportscasters' tweets on their private accounts (among other examples), so the BBC never had a leg to stand on. 2) Lineker and others walking out are too popular outside of the BBC to be hurt by such moves, and it was always the BBC that would have to back down, especially in view of 1). 3) Many in the public disliked either Lineker's view or his comparing it to 1930s Germany, but they were madder about the BBC's response. 4) This happened in the same week as a decision not to air an Attenborough episode about climate change (it would have otherwise aired in a month or so), suggesting Conservatives across the BBC have suddenly lost their ability to keep their views out of their work, an issue Moorhouse argued was previously limited to their news team.

[@qwertyTRiG]

Adam Martyn, who makes KZbin videos about the history of UK broadcasting, had a good take on it too.

[@jacobvardy]

I first noticed BBC partiality when i found out they censored StarTrek:TNG for a throw away line about Irish re-unification (due next year according to Data). Then friends in Scotland pointed it out during the independence referendum. It was really obvious during the Corbyn leadership (and older friends say the BBC was just as hostile to Labour leaders before Blair). And now there is all the stuff that Vera and Shaun have been pointing out. It is hard to believe that the BBC reputation for impartiality was ever deserved. Anyway, mainly just a comment for the algorithm.

[@Maerahn]

I've never understood why attending Pride events violates 'impartiality' according to the BBC's rules. I'm always taken 'impartiality' to mean 'absence of opinion, just the facts.' Are the BBC trying to say that being a member of the LGBTQ+ Community is an 'opinion,' and cannot be a fact? That the very existence of the LGBTQ+ Community is purely an opinion, and that is in fact not real? I've heard of sticking your fingers in your ears and going "lalalaaaah" when you want to pretend something isn't real, but jeez...! And yeah, this whole business with Gary Lineker was VERY satisfying. It showed up the BBC's ever-creeping right-wing leanings in full daylight, for exactly what they are and have been for a LONG time. Gary LIneker was the ultimate nice guy of football back in the day, and remained the nice guy of football commentary since he retired from playing. They absolutely picked on the wrong guy to bully!

[@NeilCWCampbell]

Oh that easy. Conservatives party members don't like it

[@aproudsjw9640]

There is no such thing as impartiality. It’s just conservatism, if not fascism. If you are a decent human being, you are supposed to be partial to the progressive side.

[@superraegun2649]

Ngl the BBC really should’ve seen that coming, I don’t know why they thought he’d cave. Getting indefinitely suspended or even fired wouldn’t be a problem fir him. The guy’s already had a very successful career and there isn’t really much fir him to lose at this point.

[@LillyP-xs5qe]

And now to see if we can get Gary to fight for trans rights...

[@janepearce5382]

Well, I agree as far as it goes, enough to give it a couple of days before I vented, at least. But whilst your assessment of Linekers play is correct imo, it certainly was well played. As a Brit, all I can see is the masses talking about his Storm in a teacup, rather than the actual problem of immigration and the dakonian Tory policys they are actually implementing!!! To that, I can only speculate that the tories (and by extention the BBC) were perhaps the ones that played the better game.

[@FOJO27]

Sorry about Boba 🐁😕...

[@marocat4749]

The bbc saga is just sad. Through good you cover it Edit: ok another terrible uk topic,anti immigrant fearmongering. Ok its about thisonce when acted on when way worse very partial altright figure are working there. Ok forbiding employees being at a pride,not have a vart or public speech,just be there. Wtf Qutar?! Seriously,i agree, but thats very political to say.

[@hisuiantyplosion]

usually "national" channels support the local government, their views/policies and go up against their "threats"... it happens in the UK as it happens in Greece and other countries all around... as long as their paycheck is connected to the government usually their views will also "connect" ...

[@natasha8966]

He could easily go on another channel if someone offered him more money and could speak his mind, he pulls in a lot of viewers for match of the day.

[@carpevinum8645]

There have been so few wins, despite concerted efforts. Take this opportunity to revel.

[@azuraathena]

I was wondering if you would do a video on this. My current opinion on the BBC is they are impartial, as long as the current government is painted in a positive way. During the Gary thing I feel you could see the presenters struggling with what to say when someone they interviewed about it said something negative about the BBC/government.

[@Mrhullsie2]

Happy gloating. The BBC was once a respected British institution. However they have depended for too long on the licence fee and now the incumbent government are wielding the threat of removing this they pander to the Tory governments every wish.

[@theresamclean6635]

F the BBC, it was so satisfying to hear this story. Thank you for sharing it ❤

[@richardgale4827]

A great example of the chasm between the executive layer and the creative talent at the BBC.

[@camillagilmore1547]

Give yourself a treat and google Linekar hosting MOTD in his boxers. It was a bet he made, and lost, that Leicester wouldnt win the Premier League. It is... its just nice to watch. Mmm, dilf.

[@hannahlarge5738]

my biggest issue with the Beeb in the age of streaming is the fact that programs paid for by my grandparents are still locked behind a paywall when, imo, they should be in the public domain for anyone who wants learn from them; and that programs paid for by my parents are being sold off to private companies to make money from instead of also entering a free archive. it's supposed to be a unbiased source of news and public information, that's how they justify the licence fee. i like the christmas ghost stories, and i only got a licence in the first place to watch Dr Who, but i kept it for the news. at least i used to. i'm genuinely thinking of cancelling my licence over this.

[@daviniarobbins9298]

If you are talking about news and current affairs classic programmes yes I agree with you there should be made available to view whenever you want assuming they still exist in the archives but drama, no, well actors need to be paid a fee because of actor's union rules. I mean it is only fair that actors who appeared in these old shows should be paid something(even if it is just a few pennies for every streamer) or to their estates if passed away. Or are you calling for money to not exist anymore? By the way I love Big Finish and I try to support them where I can but I can't afford to buy everything. Don't know how much actor's audio acting fees are but I would assume every actor gets paid a few hundred pounds for each day's work plus fees from every sale I assume. Though I am sure most of them do it because they love it and the money takes a back seat. They know how much the fans love the content. Am sure some would do it for free if money wasn't a problem.

[@cullain3967]

I'm kind of ashamed to say that many of these ideas are actually taken directly from policies enacted here in Australia, and they are disgusting. But Australia has always been a haven for such racist policy making, and even Oswald Mosley thought we had developed a form of facism particularly well suited to the British Empire. Glad that the people in the U.K. are more hesitant to accept this travesty... And Cold Chisel wrote a song that sums up Linekers position pretty well - You Got Nothing I Want...

[@Brunoxsa]

Thank you for the video, Vera! Anti-immigration politics for poor and war refugees make no sense. Do people legitimately believe those immigrants would get admittance into a country and receive stable jobs and economic assistance from the government? The immigrants would not. They would see themselves in similar or worse situation of native people living under the poverty line. They would be forced to take jobs without legal protections, and they would even have to pay taxes for it. However, the same politics would make a lot sense for rich immigrants or visitors. When you hear news about millionaire or political figures visiting a country for a short time, the government offers them the best accommodations, free of taxes and expenses with food and transportation. All in order to earn foreign investments and/or political good will. At the end, the same rich people would still receive (a lot) money for the said investments. We need to stop of believing in conspiracy theories blaming minority groups and people of color for economic problems, and demand for more accountability and scrutiny over rich people. EAT THE RICH (not literally)!

[@herbivarsawus4359]

It's 20 miles at the closest point, and insanely perilous. As for the cold? Think Titanic.

[@dinosaysrawr]

Ah, so we're once again back to, "anything that noticeably deviates from the status quo is 'political.'" Personally, I'd rather commentators, journalists, and media outlets just be transparent and honest about their biases, values, contributors/supporters, and conflicts of interest than pretend these things don't exist in the name of *appearing* "impartial."

[@TaraBryn]

I love the snarkiness in this video 🔥

[@LoesserOf2Evils]

I’m surprised an organ backed down about anything. All too often in my experience and observation auch an organ hunkers down and waits for everything to blow over; or attacks the party that holds it accountable.

[@Treegona]

Hopefully this will clue less informed people in to how biased the application of the rules is at the BBC, see also evidentiary standard and That One "Trans people bad (lesbians say so)" article. Also: I darned a sock while listening to this. Hopefully they'll last me another year this way.

[@frankatronx8041]

Go on Gary.

[@mgrimble3975]

Any internal review will be in name only, the people doing the reviews were hand picked by the Tories, Ofcom the watchdog for TV as a whole is now run by selecte appointed Tories. Gary is in a pretty unique position, he's the highest paid presenter at the BBC, he's a from what at least in his day was a working class sport. His few presenters all refused to do the show without him. He's also very popular in the country. Even many current footballers refused to talk to the BBC.

[@paulhammond6978]

I don't feel hopeful about the review as Nathaniel does. It came across to me that the idea of the "review" was more to tie people down and firm things up even more, so that future Gary Linekers would *not* be in a "grey area". I don't think that is workable, and it may be that the BBC comes to a better position of just mandating impartiality for the news team and on the actual programmes and doesn't try to control the personal lives of staff (I mean, for goodness sake, rules like this *shouldn't* be applying to technicians and cameramen, I mean *they* are not public figures just because they work for the BBC) I'd feel better about it if the consultation on new impartiality rules was taking place under new management, with Tory stooges Davie and Sharp having resigned and people with less obvious right wing agendas were in charge.

[@meander112]

Engagement for the engagement god! Subs for the sub throne!

[@paulkelly1726]

The British public paid for the bbc service by TV licence

[@Ezeka93]

i don't get the name of the presenter, the subtitles writes kavasolical and i can't understand what Vera is actually saying 😅😅

[@CouncilofGeeks]

Kaveh Solhekol

[@Ezeka93]

@@CouncilofGeeks Thank you, english isn't my first language, so sometimes there are words/names i can't perfectly understand

[@CouncilofGeeks]

@@Ezeka93 no worries. I had to look up how to pronounce it.

[@nymphrodellsalavin]

✊

[@johnydl]

I do largely agree with you but... The BBC isn't supposed to be a government agency yes it's tax funded but the government or even parliament aren't supposed to have a say in how it's run. It's supposed to be PBS at least how I understand PBS to opperate.

[@johnking5174]

PBS however is funded very differently to the BBC. In the US, there is no compulsory license fee people have to buy to watch linear TV channels.

[@tobiaswhaley7030]

This isn't as clear a situation as this video suggests. Part of the idea behind the small boat ban is to make it clear that it isn't a viable option and those doing so are not coming from the dangerous lands they fled from but primarily france. Gary has also pushed the boundaries on what he could get away with but to compare his figure head status with "right wing" bbc employees such as alan suger (who was a labour party peer and had to take a break from working for the labour, not tory, government) or comparing the need for impartiality over british politics with foreign human rights show this video was more aganda than attempting to find balance. Gary uses his position as a bbc host and one of its leading personalities to share his views and has been allowed, this was a statement about British politics, not his political views. The bbc is also not part of the government but funded by a "tax" in the form of the licence, thats not the same thing. Unfortunately this video, like many lately, has just been an anti bbc rant which got more wrong than right, please try to take a step away from the bbc hate train, it doesn't seem to be a healthy obsession(and I am not a fan of the bbc or its funding model but so much of this video wasn't correct).

[@WhiteWolf496]

Every time I see sky TV stuff from the uk it's always progressive (idk if it is overall, just the bits I've seen are) but in Australia (where I am) its viciously conservative and awful. So it's like polar opposites.

[@SarcyBoi41]

I should probably add that there is currently another controversy going on regarding the BBC's Conservative-favouring bias, though it isn't getting anywhere near as much media coverage as the football incident (naturally) On Sunday evenings, the BBC are currently airing a new David Attenborough nature documentary (the last one he'll ever be on location for, according to him) called Wild Isles. This show is specifically focused on animals and plants found in the British Isles. However, according to many news outlets on both sides of the political spectrum, the BBC will not be airing the finale of the series on broadcast television. It will be available if you go looking for it on their streaming/catch-up service BBC iPlayer, but it will not receive a broadcast slot on any of the BBC channels. So why is this? Well, the finale of Wild Isles is set to focus on the threats to endangered UK wildlife. Threats that are being exacerbated by Conservative policies. A source within the BBC told the press that this decision was politically-motivated, that the BBC (due to a mixture of fear of the government and personal bias amongst the main three BBC higher-ups, all of which have links to the Tories) pulled the episode from broadcast because they did not wish to paint Tory policy in a bad light, even if it is simply objective facts that are doing so. So yeah. The BBC's bias has gone beyond selective enforcement of their impartiality rules. They are now restricting the accessibility of _pure objective facts_ if they make the Conservative Party look bad. Of course they can still be accessed through iPlayer, but the Conservative Party's main voter base are the elderly, who vote like crazy but generally still don't know how to navigate apps like iPlayer. Plus there's the fact that you need both a TV license _and_ a decent internet connection to use iPlayer, locking that episode behind an additional paywall. As far as the BBC is concerned, factual information is unfairly biased against the Tories and unfit for television broadcast. I wonder if the Conservative Party are essentially punishing the BBC for their coverage of the partygate scandal by forcing them to show this bias. Either way, I don't think it's hyperbole to say that if there is no dramatic course-correction in the BBC's leadership (and the government's), it will look like the British equivalent of Russian state media in 5 - 10 years. Also, you saying you're an eat-the-rich person made me like you even more than I already do ❤

[@covstarlite]

"Freedom of speech in the UK is not guaranteed to the degree that it is in the US"? Really? We're going there? No no no. I'm very sorry, but I'm not letting that one pass. Absolutely 100% agree with you on every other single thing in this video, and your other videos too on a wide variety of subjects. But no, as an American (particularly as an American) you don't get to fire off shots at UK freedom of speech as though the US is 'better'. That's US solipsism at its worst. For a start in the UK freedom of speech is regarded as a “human right” and in the US it is regarded as a “constitutional right”. So, only citizens protected by the constitution enjoy that right. Which is why immigrants and other non-citizens don’t enjoy the same protections. Here, the view is that every human being has that right and that right is protected by law. I'm really a little bit stunned that you seem to be siding with Americans who think they have unfettered “freedom of speech”, and that any limitations (like hate speech laws) means no free speech. Do I really need to put in the coda that clearly UK free speech has it's flaws, but that doesn't magically imply the US has "better" free speech , either. Spoiler alert: you don't!

[@CouncilofGeeks]

That’s a pretty huge leap to assume I meant the US is “better” when my only intent with that statement was to clarify to Americans that our blanket concept of “free speech” isn’t the lens they should be viewing this through.

[@goodpeople25]

@@CouncilofGeeks But that concept is at large incorrect and mythologized. "Freedom of speech in the UK is not guaranteed to the degree that it is in the US" is just an untrue statement, no leaps or assumptions required.

[@keithdeley7236]

What TF

[@TerryNutkins3]

The BBC is a complex issue, the government has no say over it’s content and hiring policy but it does get a say over funding, it’s entertainment output is rather diverse often progressive and left wing, while the News division less so but it was never afraid to hold the government to account. There’s been many unsuccessful attempts to weaken it with threats to its funding over the years but when David Cameron became Prime Minister and subsequently Boris Johnson who both had ties to Rupert Murdoch (who felt the BBC had an unfair advantage over his SKY TV) is when the attacks escalated, The rise of streaming services were a perfect excuse for funding cuts, laws around how the BBC was regulated were changed which allowed the Government more influence at top levels and with friends within the news department the bias towards the Government became apparent and with stories like this one it’s a perfect distraction from Government policy and great excuse for opponents of the BBC to give the organisation another kicking until there’s a drastic change of Government things will only get worse

[@danielk5231]

The thing I love about this is that the hubris of taking this action has led to the current BBC chairman, former banker/Tory toad/ass-puppet Richard Sharp, being the one whose job is called into question. Sweet, sweet karma. 🙂

[@paulhammond6978]

I live in the UK, so impossible to ignore what happened with Lineker! The problem is that the right wing press, and their stooges who run the BBC (Tim Davie, Director General, and former Conservative party candidate and Richard Sharp, Chairman of the Board, and person who is friends with former PM Johnson and helped him arrange a large loan without telling the people who appointed him that, and also former boss of current PM Sunak) picked on the wrong target when they went for Lineker. Lineker is basically independently wealthy by now, so isn't threatened by being threatened with the sack if he doesn't shut up and apologise. Plus, although he is the highest paid presenter at the BBC, he could surely earn more working for another channel should it come to that. But, yes, the week long monstering of Lineker in the right wing press for daring to speak out about the human rights of refugees (on Twitter, btw), and the cruelty of a proposed government policy to blanket-remove anyone who arrives on a boat "illegally", coupled with Tory MPs who usually witter on about "free speech" and the "free press" signing letters and making statements in the House of Commons calling for Lineker to be sacked have brought the fact that the BBC is basically a craven creature of the government into sharp relief. I am now calling for Davie and Sharp to resign at every opportunity, and since the Lineker situation my thoughts have crystallised such that I have now bothered to teach myself their names so I can do that.