The BBC Thread

[wadesmith]

Will be shown with no presenters.

Edited 10 March, 2023 by wadesmith

[Warriorsaint]

4 hours ago, SotonianWill said:

blessing in disguise this MOTD stuff, can they finally just show us the highlights with a few comments after instead of the useless, boring analysis they normally do. Big Match format so much better, if adapted with all games you could show long highlights of high scoring games, then shorter for boring ones. 

And there it is! Lolololol 

[Lighthouse]

He should be allowed to speak his mind, that said I do find GL to be a massive weapon, especially after his comments on Just Stop Oil after last years British Grand Prix.

[Warriorsaint]

5 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

He should be allowed to speak his mind, that said I do find GL to be a massive weapon, especially after his comments on Just Stop Oil after last years British Grand Prix.

Point is double standards. How come right wing loons paid by BBC like Sugar, Neil, Bruce, Kuensburg all allowed their right wing bias not sanctioned but someone, who it may be said lauded for comments on Quatar on Bbc, is not allowed to comment on Govt. 

I think his comments on 1930’s Germany proved correct.

[Colinjb]

MOTD will get record recent viewing figures, the BBC will see this a sign that the presenters are not needed, can them, then it will bomb. 

So, the BBC will see no need to buy PL highlights anymore, and will say goodbye to match of the day. 

As far as the Beeb is concerned that will be another problem/expenditure dealt with. And the public move onto pay tv and youtube.

Edited 11 March, 2023 by Colinjb

[whelk]

9 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

If GL had said what he said whilst in the pub, rather than putting it on Twatter, would the reaction have been the same ? Or are all BBC empoyees not allowed to ever hold or reveal their personal opinions ?

He is not even a BBC employee

[CB Fry]

I wonder how many people on their "who is going on strike next" bingo card had, er, Match Of The Day?

This is the millenial equivalent of the 1970s bin bags piling up in the street.

[SotonianWill]

7 hours ago, Warriorsaint said:

I think his comments on 1930’s Germany proved correct.

I don’t agree with the bill and felt they should have opened more legal routes but how exactly has it been proved correct? 🤦‍♂️

Also why are you trying to compare Sugar saying to Lynch to go to work on his 80,000 salary and Lineker comparing this government to one that killed 6 million jews. it’s just a childish comment and pathetic. Lineker was allowed previous political views I seem to remember but unsurprisingly this one didn’t slide with the state owned broadcast.  

[Weston Super Saint]

44 minutes ago, whelk said:

He is not even a BBC employee

Which makes him a 'freelancer' then?  In which case he should know his contract can be cancelled at any time....

[hypochondriac]

Does anyone seriously think that the ratings for Motd will take a huge hit if Lineker isn't the one presenting? The only real worry if they bin him is that hey will almost certainly have to get someone in to fit their diversity quotas and I don't much fancy watching whilst the main presenting duties are fulfilled by Sol Campbell or Rachel Yankey. 

Edited 11 March, 2023 by hypochondriac

[whelk]

Imagine being so sad that you actually agree a sports presenter putting an opinion on Twitter justifies him being cancelled? Oh but the fucking nazis don’t ever mention the fucking nazis ever
 

although not far behind are the twats who say who needs a presenter or analysis….or maybe even commentary 

[whelk]

41 minutes ago, SotonianWill said:

I don’t agree with the bill and felt they should have opened more legal routes but how exactly has it been proved correct? 🤦‍♂️

Also why are you trying to compare Sugar saying to Lynch to go to work on his 80,000 salary and Lineker comparing this government to one that killed 6 million jews. it’s just a childish comment and pathetic. Lineker was allowed previous political views I seem to remember but unsurprisingly this one didn’t slide with the state owned broadcast.  

Nice use of bold text mate. Do you even know what he said?

[badgerx16]

49 minutes ago, SotonianWill said:

I don’t agree with the bill and felt they should have opened more legal routes but how exactly has it been proved correct? 🤦‍♂️

Also why are you trying to compare Sugar saying to Lynch to go to work on his 80,000 salary and Lineker comparing this government to one that killed 6 million jews. it’s just a childish comment and pathetic. Lineker was allowed previous political views I seem to remember but unsurprisingly this one didn’t slide with the state owned broadcast.  

He didn't make a comparison with a regime that killed 6 million Jews and triggered WW2. I know it is a semantic point, but he made a comparison with Germany in the early years of the NSDAP Government - a Government that was elected democratically, ( with the aid of a bit of gerrymandering ), and once in power started to slowly change the Political landscape by controlling the media and manipulating public opinion. He was not inferring that he thought the current UK Government was on the path to a potential future genocide, just that some of their current actions appear to mirror similar acts in Germany in the early 1930s.

In it interesting that many people in Germany seem to agree with him.

[badgerx16]

Up to press; no presenters, no pundits no commentators, no post match interviews.

This is going well.

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

and once in power started to slowly change the Political landscape by controlling the media and manipulating public opinion. He was not inferring that he thought the current UK Government was on the path to a potential future genocide, just that some of their current actions appear to mirror similar acts in Germany in the early 1930s.

 

Did they lock up people who didn’t like the state broadcaster and therefore refused to pay for it? 
 

The issue is the ridiculous way the BBC is funded, 1930’s style as opposed to a 21st century subscription model. Presenters should be able to say what the hell they like, and punters should be free to decide they don’t want to watch or pay for it. 

[swannymere]

1 hour ago, SotonianWill said:

Lineker comparing this government to one that killed 6 million jews. it’s just a childish comment and pathetic. 

That's not what he said. He compared the language being used by our Government as similar to the language used in 1930's Germany. If you go and do a little research you'll be surprised at how right he is. The holocaust was later and is a disgusting blight on the 20th century society and shouldn't be forgotten.

[saint1977]

Here’s the hypocrisy from the government and BBC director general around impartiality. Not hard to hard to understand really is it? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64634914 and https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/10/bbc-apologises-failure-scrutinise-nadine-dorries-claims-sue-gray and https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/10/david-attenborough-bbc-wild-isles-episode-rightwing-backlash-fears

Dyke calling it well, Richard Sharp has re-ignited a storm in a teacup. Another culture war attempt by Sunak and Braverman which has backfired although it will be lapped up by their core vote https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

The rest of us are just sick of record high bills, energy market failure, IT infrastructure collapses, NHS collapsing, empty shelves, very expensive dentists, mortgage costs soaring after the Truss/Kwarteng disaster, transport woes and millions of businesses lacking skilled staff. The focus on MOTD and boats carrying less than 5% of asylum seekers to the UK is nuts. But then the likes of Lee Anderson would rather express their support for the BNP protesting outside hotels than tackle any of the above issues making life a misery for his constituents. Stupid fuckers will probably still re-elect and as for the stupid skates electing Braverman in Fareham. 

If Sunak is so proud of his £500m deal with Macron to help stop the boats, why fan the flames on this? Although I see the increasingly sour DT putting the boot into Sunak on the deal. They are still sulking after Truss, Kwarteng and the IEA failed disasterously.

Edited 11 March, 2023 by saint1977

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Imagine being so sad that you actually agree a sports presenter putting an opinion on Twitter justifies him being cancelled? Oh but the fucking nazis don’t ever mention the fucking nazis ever
 

although not far behind are the twats who say who needs a presenter or analysis….or maybe even commentary 

When another former footballer put his opinions on Twitter plenty of people were up in arms about that and he lost his job as a sports presenter. No outcry about that. 

[OldNick]

I have not followed this as I try and do not read the sensationalist media. If I rock up in America, France, Australia, China etc without a passport do they wave me in?

Are these illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?

My little understanding of the rules is that if you land on a safe territory you can claim asylum, not choose which country you go to that is to your best benefit. I'm all for immigration as we need fresh young blood for jobs that our young dont want to do. They should not jump the queue for people wishing to come into our country legally.

The local authorities are creaking trying to house and feed them, the NHS also will take on further burden to help with their needs. I assume the schools will also be under strain as they have to deal with children who do not speak the language that in turn lessens the schooling for the children already there.

 

 

[whelk]

9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

When another former footballer put his opinions on Twitter plenty of people were up in arms about that and he lost his job as a sports presenter. No outcry about that. 

What did Phil Thompson and Charlie Nicholas say that lost them their jobs?

[OldNick]

20 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

 

The rest of us are just sick of record high bills, energy market failure, IT infrastructure collapses, NHS collapsing, empty shelves, very expensive dentists, mortgage costs soaring after the Truss/Kwarteng disaster, transport woes and millions of businesses lacking skilled staff. The focus on MOTD and boats carrying less than 5% of asylum seekers to the UK is nuts.

There are a variety of reasons for these problems. People blame the Gov for high energy bills but seem to forget that Putin has been largely responsible for that and Brexit of course is another reason. Before you say that Brexit was down to Tories, it was voted for by a large part of traditional Labour areas. 

 

[saint1977]

5 minutes ago, OldNick said:

I have not followed this as I try and do not read the sensationalist media. If I rock up in America, France, Australia, China etc without a passport do they wave me in?

Are these illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?

My little understanding of the rules is that if you land on a safe territory you can claim asylum, not choose which country you go to that is to your best benefit. I'm all for immigration as we need fresh young blood for jobs that our young dont want to do. They should not jump the queue for people wishing to come into our country legally.

The local authorities are creaking trying to house and feed them, the NHS also will take on further burden to help with their needs. I assume the schools will also be under strain as they have to deal with children who do not speak the language that in turn lessens the schooling for the children already there.

 

 

Don’t disagree with much of this. If Braverman STFU about net migration limits - we need migration with an ageing population - I’d have more sympathy with the Conservatives position. But limits and very strict ones will be in the Migration Bill, that’s the problem I’m afraid Nick. It screws the economy and health services/social care and all because Braverman is trying to be Enoch Powell and Nigel Farage.

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, OldNick said:

I have not followed this as I try and do not read the sensationalist media. If I rock up in America, France, Australia, China etc without a passport do they wave me in?

Are these illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?

My little understanding of the rules is that if you land on a safe territory you can claim asylum, not choose which country you go to that is to your best benefit. I'm all for immigration as we need fresh young blood for jobs that our young dont want to do. They should not jump the queue for people wishing to come into our country legally.

The local authorities are creaking trying to house and feed them, the NHS also will take on further burden to help with their needs. I assume the schools will also be under strain as they have to deal with children who do not speak the language that in turn lessens the schooling for the children already there.

 

 

1) The 'boat people' are about 5% of immigrants to the uK. They are not 'jumping the queue', but are held in what are colloquially themed Detention Centres.

2) It seems that it is not the rule that you have to seek asylum in the first 'safe' country you reach.

3) Some schools in London and the other metropolis' can already have upwards of 40 different languages spoken by their pupils.

Edited 11 March, 2023 by badgerx16

[Baird of the land]

No presenters might be an improvement.

Can sort of  understand the BBC position, having a major face of the bbc making political interventions when you've made a big deal that rest of staff can't do that. Maybe time for bbc move on from Lineker and get someone cheaper inhouse to do the job and Gary can fully transition to commercial tv.

[Lighthouse]

13 minutes ago, OldNick said:

I have not followed this as I try and do not read the sensationalist media. If I rock up in America, France, Australia, China etc without a passport do they wave me in?

Are these illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?

My little understanding of the rules is that if you land on a safe territory you can claim asylum, not choose which country you go to that is to your best benefit. I'm all for immigration as we need fresh young blood for jobs that our young dont want to do. They should not jump the queue for people wishing to come into our country legally.

The local authorities are creaking trying to house and feed them, the NHS also will take on further burden to help with their needs. I assume the schools will also be under strain as they have to deal with children who do not speak the language that in turn lessens the schooling for the children already there.

By definition, they are illegal immigrants. You aren't an asylum seeker if you only claim asylum when you get caught, that's a cop out. I think you're confusing them with refugees who should, by law go to the first safe country they can reach. It's then up to the international community to decide how to redistribute them, if applicable, like with Ukrainians. You can claim asylum anywhere, much like Assange with Ecuador.

[whelk]

14 minutes ago, OldNick said:

I have not followed this as I try and do not read the sensationalist media. If I rock up in America, France, Australia, China etc without a passport do they wave me in?

Are these illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?

My little understanding of the rules is that if you land on a safe territory you can claim asylum, not choose which country you go to that is to your best benefit. I'm all for immigration as we need fresh young blood for jobs that our young dont want to do. They should not jump the queue for people wishing to come into our country legally.

The local authorities are creaking trying to house and feed them, the NHS also will take on further burden to help with their needs. I assume the schools will also be under strain as they have to deal with children who do not speak the language that in turn lessens the schooling for the children already there.

 

 

What the fuck has this got to do with BBC?

[OldNick]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

1) The 'boat people' are about 5% of immigrants to the uK.

2) It seems that it is not the rule that you have to seek asylum in the first 'safe' country you reach.

3) Some schools in London and the other metropolis' can already have upwards of 40 different languages spoken by their pupils.

Try not to confuse these people with boat people who were escaping the Viet Cong and certain death. Whilst France is a awful place they are not under any threat. 

I dont know if they have changed the rules re first safe haven.

No wonder our schools are in crisis and have no funds if they have to cater for 40 different languages. Tome this is a scary scenario for our future, 

[OldNick]

5 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

By definition, they are illegal immigrants. You aren't an asylum seeker if you only claim asylum when you get caught, that's a cop out. I think you're confusing them with refugees who should, by law go to the first safe country they can reach. It's then up to the international community to decide how to redistribute them, if applicable, like with Ukrainians. You can claim asylum anywhere, much like Assange with Ecuador.

Thank you for that. 

[egg]

9 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

1) The 'boat people' are about 5% of immigrants to the uK. They are not 'jumping the queue', but are held in what are colloquially themed Detention Centres.

2) It seems that it is not the rule that you have to seek asylum in the first 'safe' country you reach.

3) Some schools in London and the other metropolis' can already have upwards of 40 different languages spoken by their pupils.

Edit. Just realised this was a BBC thread.

Edited 11 March, 2023 by egg

[AlexLaw76]

I wonder what that slob, G.Davies thinks of the goings on.

He was impartial, wasn't he?

[iansums]

10 hours ago, Warriorsaint said:

Point is double standards. How come right wing loons paid by BBC like Sugar, Neil, Bruce, Kuensburg all allowed their right wing bias not sanctioned but someone, who it may be said lauded for comments on Quatar on Bbc, is not allowed to comment on Govt. 

I think his comments on 1930’s Germany proved correct.

You appear to have an odd understanding of the phrase ‘right wing’

[Lord Duckhunter]

20 minutes ago, iansums said:

You appear to have an odd understanding of the phrase ‘right wing’

Wasn’t Sugar a Labour peer until Steptoe’s mob took over? 

[AlexLaw76]

Speak out/question the Tory Government - power to free speech 

Speak out/question Covid - luntatic, get off the airwaves

[badgerx16]

Football Focus will not be broadcast today, it will be replaced by an episode of Bargain Hunt. ( Is that a documentary on Saints' recent recruitment strategy ? )

Jason Mohammad has said he will not present Final Score. ( Edit: this appears to now have been replaced with an edition of The Repair Shop ).

Edited 11 March, 2023 by badgerx16

[Lighthouse]

12 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Speak out/question the Tory Government - power to free speech 

Speak out/question Covid - luntatic, get off the airwaves

Correct, one is a political party, the other is an infectious disease. Hope this helps.

[aintforever]

So Match of the Day and Football Focus can be added to the list of things ruined by the Conservatives.

[badgerx16]

Just now, aintforever said:

So Match of the Day and Football Focus can be added to the list of things ruined by the Conservatives.

And Final Score.

I am waiting to find out whether Radio 5's programming might be affected.

[Lighthouse]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

So Match of the Day and Football Focus can be added to the list of things ruined by the Conservatives.

No, they were ruined by Saints, years ago.

[gandalf]

[moonraker]

David Attenborough being censored now, 

[whelk]

BBC playing a blinder here. Apparently no 5Live either this afternoon 

[Wade Garrett]

Lineker is a fucking bellend.  I care as much about his political views as I do about my dog’s.

I love MOTD, I record it and watch it on a Sunday morning.  It’s great, because I don’t have to watch all the boring analysis.

Hopefully tomorrow morning there will be more actual football to watch and less of the boring shite that comes from Wright, Shearer and the worst one of all, Danny fucking Murphy.

[OldNick]

I wonder if Lineker and followers will put pressure on the camera and editing crew to also walk out???

[Tamesaint]

The BBC is shit scared of upsetting the Tory party. Lineker is just the latest example.

The unsuitability of Boris Johnson's dad's knighthood was raised on Thursday's QT. It was claimed that he was a wife beater having in the past broken his wife's nose in an argument. Presumably to keep her BBC job  Fiona Bruce then pointed out that  "but he had only once" beaten his wife so badly that she needed hospital treatment!!0

Like Trump, the Tories want to silence media opposition. Unlike Trump with CNN it looks as if they are winning with the BBC.

 

[iansums]

I’m a fan of Lineker, he is a great presenter and I would be sad to see home leave the BBC. The problem here is that Lineker went too far by comparing the government to the Nazis, this is disrespectful to so many. It is a problem that many on the left have, consistently accusing the government of being right wing or racist, it really isn’t. They lose credibility because of this.

[swannymere]

3 hours ago, OldNick said:

I have not followed this as I try and do not read the sensationalist media. If I rock up in America, France, Australia, China etc without a passport do they wave me in?

Are these illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?

My little understanding of the rules is that if you land on a safe territory you can claim asylum, not choose which country you go to that is to your best benefit. I'm all for immigration as we need fresh young blood for jobs that our young dont want to do. They should not jump the queue for people wishing to come into our country legally.

The local authorities are creaking trying to house and feed them, the NHS also will take on further burden to help with their needs. I assume the schools will also be under strain as they have to deal with children who do not speak the language that in turn lessens the schooling for the children already there.

 

 

You can claim asylum in the country of your choice, not necessarily the first one you land in. Many reasons why they may choose the UK is the previously stable society, family ties through the commonwealth, English as a first or second language, employment opportunities etc. 

as far as I’m aware there are very few people on this board who are refugees  so most people would be guessing based on their own politics or beliefs; including myself.

 

[AlexLaw76]

6 minutes ago, swannymere said:

You can claim asylum in the country of your choice, not necessarily the first one you land in. Many reasons why they may choose the UK is the previously stable society, family ties through the commonwealth, English as a first or second language, employment opportunities etc. 

as far as I’m aware there are very few people on this board who are refugees  so most people would be guessing based on their own politics or beliefs; including myself.

 

Are the boat-loads of Albanians illegal migrants or Asylum Seekers?

[tajjuk]

6 minutes ago, iansums said:

I’m a fan of Lineker, he is a great presenter and I would be sad to see home leave the BBC. The problem here is that Lineker went too far by comparing the government to the Nazis, this is disrespectful to so many. It is a problem that many on the left have, consistently accusing the government of being right wing or racist, it really isn’t. They lose credibility because of this.

He didn't compare them to Nazi's, he said the language was not too dissimilar to that being used in Germany in the 1930s, which he was factually correct on. Braverman's speech and the government's rhetoric vilifies and dehumanises asylum seekers, it seeks to divide and rule the populace getting them hate on minorities to distract from the real issues (like how this government has basically broken the entire country). He was making a point about the slippery slope of democratically elected governments and people in power using language like this and basically attacking minorities and where it leads. He wasn't saying they were literal nazis or that the government is going to commit a holocaust. 

There was nothing wrong with what he said, anyone with a knowledge of history would know that genocides, the holocaust, extreme regimes etc. they don't happen overnight, there are steps on the way that led to these things were not enough people spoke up and call this sort of stuff out, that is exactly what Lineker did. 

Also calling the government 'right wing' is hardly inaccurate, this government is the most right wing version of the Tory party in generations. It's actions, policies and rhetoric has appalled many former Tory party people. Even Thatcher and Churchill knew the importance of looking out for refugees and asylum seekers. 

-------------------------------------

Very much looking like the BBC has shot itself in the foot on this one. 

It's 'impartiality' is a complete lie being shown by its own hypocrisy. You only have to look at Fiona Bruce at least appearing to be defending or diminishing the proven domestic violence by Stanley Johnson. (and a clearly good reason, amongst others why he shouldn't get honoured). The BBC's own staff are scared of any government/tory criticism and if any happens they have to challenge back, even when its completely ridiculous like suggesting Boris Johnson;'s father putting his wife in hospital happening only 'once' or Laura Kinsberg taking issue with Boris Johnson being called a liar by the leader of the SNP.

They are so scared of losing their jobs or being hounded by the Daily Mail they will tell you the sky is green if it defends the government or protects a tory. 

According the Guardian a Sir David Attenbrough programme has been pulled because they were worried it was too critical of the governments lack of action on climate change, so now even one of the world's foremost nature broadcasters, who is a huge advocate for environmental issues isn't allowed to criticise the government or even appear to criticise the government. 

Meanwhile the director of the BBC is having lunch with Boris Johnson getting him a loan, another senior director at the BBC was literally a conservative councillor and was a conservative party member, who allegedly got the Mash Report cancelled because it was too critical of the Tories, another senior person at the BBC has made donations to the Tory party.

Alan Sugar is a BBC employee, he has mouthed off on twitter about Corbyn, about trade unions, and even said the Senegal football team looked like jewellery sellers on the beach on Marbella which caused a diplomatic incident. 

Andrew Neil was senior political editor and presenter at the BBC for years and spouted off all sorts of right wing tweets and was literally running one of most right wing magazines in the country whilst still a BBC employee. 

A Nadine Dorris unhinged and baseless rant about Sue Gray went completely unchallenged in a Radio 4 interview, there was zero push back or counter to it despite it being complete rubbish, to the point that multiple complained to the BBC about it and they have admitted fault. 

This is the 'impartial' BBC, it's a mouth piece for government lies and propaganda. 

[OldNick]

I have just seen this, this is now getting ridiculous

'He is superlative, he is absolutely extraordinarily good, not just as a football pundit, of course, but I think, in my 50 or so years of association with the BBC, I’ve never come across such a naturally gifted television presenter.' 

 

[AlexLaw76]

34 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

 

This is the 'impartial' BBC, it's a mouth piece for government lies and propaganda. 

No matter who is in power. That is why the telly-tax should be scrapped and this nonsense will go away and you only have to worry about your job if you're either over 50 or question the covid narrative - which of course the BBC played its part for the government

 

Edited 11 March, 2023 by AlexLaw76