Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[garbon]

Gary Lineker to step back from presenting Match of the Day
Presenter will stop appearing on the football show until agreement is reached on his social media use

Gary Lineker is to step back from presenting Match of the Day until an agreement is reached on his use of social media.

The government had put the BBC under pressure after Lineker posted a series of tweets criticising Rishi Sunak's asylum policy and likened the language used by ministers to "that used by Germany in the 30s".

A BBC spokesperson said: "The BBC has been in extensive discussions with Gary and his team in recent days. We have said that we consider his recent social media activity to be a breach of our guidelines.

"The BBC has decided that he will step back from presenting Match of the Day until we've got an agreed and clear position on his use of social media.

Between this and the David Attenborough story, interesting take on neutrality by BBC.

[The Larch]

Gary Lineker to step back from presenting Match of the Day
Presenter will stop appearing on the football show until agreement is reached on his social media use

Gary Lineker is to step back from presenting Match of the Day until an agreement is reached on his use of social media.

The government had put the BBC under pressure after Lineker posted a series of tweets criticising Rishi Sunak's asylum policy and likened the language used by ministers to "that used by Germany in the 30s".

A BBC spokesperson said: "The BBC has been in extensive discussions with Gary and his team in recent days. We have said that we consider his recent social media activity to be a breach of our guidelines.

"The BBC has decided that he will step back from presenting Match of the Day until we've got an agreed and clear position on his use of social media.

Between this and the David Attenborough story, interesting take on neutrality by BBC.

Which Attenborough story?

[Grey Fox]

Asylum laws are wonderful in theory, but too easily game-able.  I don't know of an easy fix.

You don't say. 

[Sheilbh]

Between this and the David Attenborough story, interesting take on neutrality by BBC.

Very unsure on the Attenborough story.

Although presumably this will mean Lord Sugar will finally be removed from our screens.

Having said that I have some sympathy with the BBC teams trying to manage this - working in a media organisation very prominent, free-lancers not having to follow social media guidelines and wading into controversies (or worse being perceived as starting/encouraging pile-ons) is a big, recurring issue.

[Jacob]

What's the Attenborough story? Did he pull a John Cleese?

[The Larch]

Apparently...

BBC will not broadcast Attenborough episode over fear of rightwing backlash


BBC will not broadcast Attenborough episode over fear of rightwing backlash
Exclusive: Decision to make episode about natural destruction available only on iPlayer angers programme-makers

The BBC has decided not to broadcast an episode of David Attenborough's flagship new series on British wildlife because of fears its themes of the destruction of nature would risk a backlash from Tory politicians and the rightwing press, the Guardian has been told.

The decision has angered the programme-makers and some insiders at the BBC, who fear the corporation has bowed to pressure from lobbying groups with "dinosaurian ways".

The revelation about Attenborough's programme comes at the end of a week in which another broadcaster, Gary Lineker, has been condemned by Conservative ministers for his criticism of the government's immigration bill.

[Barrister]

What's the Attenborough story? Did he pull a John Cleese?

I assume it's this:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/10/david-attenborough-bbc-wild-isles-episode-rightwing-backlash-fears

(if so, then no he didn't pull a John Cleese)

[Sheilbh]

What's the Attenborough story? Did he pull a John Cleese?

BBC will not broadcast Attenborough episode over fear of rightwing backlash
Exclusive: Decision to make episode about natural destruction available only on iPlayer angers programme-makers
Helena Horton Environment reporter
Fri 10 Mar 2023 15.00 GMT
Last modified on Fri 10 Mar 2023 16.30 GMT

The BBC has decided not to broadcast an episode of David Attenborough's flagship new series on British wildlife because of fears its themes of the destruction of nature would risk a backlash from Tory politicians and the rightwing press, the Guardian has been told.

The decision has angered the programme-makers and some insiders at the BBC, who fear the corporation has bowed to pressure from lobbying groups with "dinosaurian ways".

The revelation about Attenborough's programme comes at the end of a week in which another broadcaster, Gary Lineker, has been condemned by Conservative ministers for his criticism of the government's immigration bill.

The fresh row focuses on Wild Isles, a highly anticipated new series looking at the beauty of nature in the British Isles, which will begin broadcasting on Sunday.

Narrated by David Attenborough, it is expected to be a hit, with five episodes scheduled to go out in primetime slots on BBC One.

A sixth episode has also been filmed, which is understood to be a stark look at the losses of nature in the UK and what has caused the declines. It is also understood to include some examples of rewilding, a concept that has been controversial in some rightwing circles.

The documentary, which was part-funded by nature charities the WWF and RSPB, will not be broadcast along with the others and will instead be available only on the BBC's iPlayer service. All six episodes were narrated by Attenborough, and made by the production company Silverback Films, responsible for previous series including Our Planet, in collaboration with the BBC Natural History Unit.

Senior sources at the BBC told the Guardian that the decision was made to fend off potential critique from the political right. This week the Telegraph newspaper attacked the BBC for creating the series and for taking funding from "two charities previously criticised for their political lobbying" – the WWF and RSPB.

One source at the broadcaster, who asked not to be named, said "lobbying groups that are desperately hanging on to their dinosaurian ways" such as the farming and game industry would "kick off" if the show had too political a message.

They added: "Frankly, this idea that you sort of put it in a separate programme to almost parcel it to one side is disingenuous. Why don't they integrate those stories into all of them at the time?"

Laura Howard, who produced the programme and used to work at the BBC's Natural History Unit, said she did not believe its messages to be political.

She told the Guardian: "I think the facts speak for themselves. You know, we've worked really closely with the RSPB in particular who are able to factcheck all of our scripts and provide us with detailed scientific data and information about the loss of wildlife in this country. And it is undeniable, we are incredibly nature-depleted. And I don't think that that is political, I think it's just facts."

The producer said the film would touch on how farming practices had harmed wildlife, but would also profile farmers who had done the right thing.

"Those farmers are there to make the point that every farm in the country ought to be able to do a little bit at least of what they do, and that it is possible to farm alongside nature, to make a profit, to produce healthy food and to still run a business," Howard said.

She added that she hoped a young audience would be able to find the film, as they are used to streaming on iPlayer rather than watching a broadcast.

Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP for Brighton Pavilion, said: "For the BBC to censor of one of the nation's most informed and trusted voices on the nature and climate emergencies is nothing short of an unforgivable dereliction of its duty to public service broadcasting. This government has taken a wrecking ball to our environment – putting over 1,700 pieces of environmental legislation at risk, setting an air pollution target which is a decade too late, and neglecting the scandal of our sewage-filled waterways – which cannot go unexamined and unchallenged by the public.

"BBC bosses must not be cowed by antagonistic, culture war-stoking government ministers, putting populist and petty political games above delivering serious action to protect and restore our natural world. This episode simply must be televised."

Chris Packham, who presents Springwatch on the BBC, also criticised the decision. He told the Guardian: "At this time, in our fight to save the world's biodiversity, it is irresponsible not to put that at the forefront of wildlife broadcasting."

Stephen Moss, a natural historian and TV producer who has worked for the BBC on nature programmes, said focusing on a conservation angle could win political support for the cause. He said: "Often, if you lead on environmental issues, people genuinely turn off. But if you drip feed it within the programmes and then hit people with a message at the end when you convince them how brilliant wildlife is, it tends to work.

"With Blue Planet, you got Theresa May standing up and Philip Hammond, the chancellor at the time, saying: 'this is the BBC as its very best', doing what Conservatives never do, basically praising the BBC and saying: this is fantastic. So maybe that will happen with this. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Tory politicians jump on the bandwagon and go on and on about how brilliant it is."

The charities involved in the programme are already using it to launch a campaign – unaffiliated with the BBC – called Save Our Wild Isles. They have gained the support of the National Trust, the Guardian understands.

A BBC spokesperson said: "Wild Isles consists of five episodes: Our Precious Isles, Woodland, Grassland, Freshwater and Ocean. Saving Our Wild Isles is a separate film inspired by the series that was commissioned by the RSPB and WWF. We've acquired it for iPlayer."

The reason I'm really unsure about that story is the paragraph from the BBC spokesman (and the line earlier about commissioning/funding by the RSPB and WWF) reframe that entire story.

The BBC commissioning a production company for a 6 part series and then putting one episode on iPlayer but broadcasting the others because of politics is a very big story. The BBC commissioning a 5 part series - and the production company doing a film on spec paid for by the RSPB and WWF - which they then sold to the BBC who put it on iPlayer is a very different story (and arguably not one at all).

The combination of the description of charities funding it (it is very unusual for charities or campaign groups to part commission programs with the BBC - I don't think it's really a thing), the BBC statement and lots of the "Guardian has been told"/"senior sources say" makes me suspect it's the latter - but the BBC statement came in ten minutes before publication so had to get shoehorned as the last paragraph.

I think the latter is also something that's happened before. So when the same production team were doing The Blue Planet they also did a documentary on specific conservation issues and a making of documentary - they sold them to the BBC. But they weren't part of the series - which sounds a lot like what's being described here.

Edit: And the WWF have now confirmed it is the latter - the Guardian got their story wrong:

WWF UK
@wwf_uk
No. Saving Our Wild Isles, which this article is referring to, is a complementary documentary produced by by Silverback, the National Trust, the RSPB and WWF. It is inspired by the Wild Isles series but not part of it and therefore BBC have acquired it for iPlayer.

Edit: Terrific PR for Saving Our Wild Isles though.

[Jacob]

That's a relief on several levels.

Glad that Attenborough didn't pull a John Cleese.

And also nice to see there's a non sinister explanation for the course of events re: the episode.

[garbon]

That's a relief on several levels.

Glad that Attenborough didn't pull a John Cleese.

And also nice to see there's a non sinister explanation for the course of events re: the episode.

Yeah agreed.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah - and I can sympathise. Universally beloved national treasure Sir David Attenborough v widely reviled right wing government is a story that's too good to check.

I can't imagine Attenborough going full Cleese - although worth noting Cleese is an angry and vituperative critic of the government too (and very anti-right wing press). It's just he's also anti-woke. And, possibly, just a generally angry old man which seems plausible with John Cleese...

Edit: And on Lineker - I love Ian Wright

Ian Wright
@IanWright0
Everybody knows what Match of the Day means to me, but I've told the BBC I won't be doing it tomorrow. Solidarity.

I hope all the regulars take the same stance.

Edit: Separately not just all these stories, but their chair and a series of I think very bad decisions on what services they're going to fund/focus on in the next decade and what they'll cut. It all feels like the BBC's in one of their crisis periods - just a very strong sense of a bit of an identity crisis/not really knowing what they're for any more. 

You wouldn't normally wish it on the BBC but I feel like they're probably in the need of someone like John Birt taking over again to try and work out what they should look/what public sector broadcasting is for with the rise of streaming

[The Larch]

NEW: Sky News understands the BBC statement on Gary Lineker is incorrect.

That Lineker has not agreed to 'step back', and has instead been taken off air as he is unwilling to apologise for his comments this week on social media.

[Sheilbh]

Alan Shearer also pulling out:

Alan Shearer
@alanshearer
I have informed the BBC that I won't be appearing on MOTD tomorrow night.

BBC have massively fucked up on this

[Josquius]

So shearer is backing linekar?

That's a surprise. All I've heard of him pegs him as a cunt

Meanwhile the BBC are refusing to air an episode of David Attenboroughs new series because the episode talks about the human effects on the environment in the UK and they don't want to upset any tories...

The BBC truly has lost any pretense of neutrality hasn't if.

[Sheilbh]

And in surprise cross-overs, Jeremy Clarkson supporting the striking strikers