Wright Steps Back in Solidarity with Jug Ears

[kettering_baggie]

Yes but, would you say other last and current presenters have been impartial? Andrew Neil writing for the right wing spectator, Sugar giving his views, Fiona Bruce? If the answers no then why are we fixated on Lineker?

No, not necessarily. I think that the language used by Lineker was what made it hit the headlines. He must have known that his analogy to 30’s Germany would cause outrage and that he must think that he is beyond the rules of the BBC, even if they are vague. He is, of course entitled to his opinion but must surely take into account his position in relation to the BBC, which serves all people in the UK and beyond, even Daily Mail readers. There used to be a word in the English language called ‘reasonable’, now sadly, obsolete.

[Omegstrat6]

I suppose the concept of a broadcaster being "impartial" may mean different things to different people. Some may argue that impartiality means that the BBC should "sit on the fence" and refrain from passing any comment or expressing an opinion and simply report the "facts" -ie the when/where/who. For myself, I would argue that this would present quite a dangerous situation as it would too easily allow harmful actions to occur without criticism. Would it not be better if analysis of events and debates over them (more of the why's and hows) were allowed but that the views of opposing positions were all equally presented so that viewers/listeners could make their own minds up?

As a previous poster said, one of the issues in today's society seems to be the temptation to see things in black/white and the increasing polarisation of issues. Political views are too often portrayed in this manner yet I would wager that the majority of posters on here would likely support some aspects of both Labour and Conservative policies/beliefs whilst disagreeing with others.