Depends what your second language is. If you grew up in former French colonies you’ll probably want to settle in France etc. The remnants of the Empire/Commonwealth plus the domination of English speaking tv make the UK as a safe and practical option. Another interesting comparison are the few complaints as we host and look after Ukrainians displaced by war. But others displaced by war are treated with much less tolerance as the enemy in those cases isn’t a common one or so prominent in the media.
Do these people who get influenced by influencers have a brain of their own. I read a load of s hite but I still make my own mind up.
Some people do. Did you see that Prime energy drink? People were selling it for upward of a tenner a bottle. I know people who going down back alleys to do deals for it with dodgy geezers. All because it was endorsed by a pair of influencers. Look at Gary Lineker's tweet. 21 pages of discussion on this site alone. You can't say that he's not had an influence.
The BBC have every right to take action against their employees for what they write on social media. The same as everyone else's employers... Many employees think that their personal social media accounts are just that; personal. They may believe that any activity on these accounts is no business of their employer and cannot have repercussions on their work relationship. However, this is not true. In fact, potentially there could be far reaching repercussions, including dismissal. What action can an employer take against an employee for possible discriminatory action on social media outside of the workplace? The key issue is whether the conduct in question relates to the employment relationship. The extent to which an employee’s activity on their personal social media affects the employment relationship will depend on the particular nature of the work or general considerations about damage to the employer’s reputation. https://www.brachers.co.uk/insights/can-i-discipline-an-employee-for-their-social-media-posts But we want to say he's losing his freedom of speech
The big issue in this case is the perceived government influence over the BBC response. In this case a contractor of the BBC has been singled out for expressing an opinion that is critical of government policy. If the tweet had instead been in support he still SHOULD be subject to the same sanctions but we all know that would not have happened. This makes it a politically motivated attack rather than one of simply enforcing BBC policy.
I disagree, I think the problem is the analogy, not the criticism. I think if he doesn't mention 1930s Germany, and all that that implies, he doesn't get suspended and this is a non-story. The freedom of speech thing is a red herring to defend a disproportionate statement. He can (and is right to) criticise but the analogy crosses a line.
He has been singled out for his comment comparing the current government to 1930's Germany. If he hadn't have made that remark, it's a non-issue.
I think you’re certainly right that the 1930’s Germany analogy is what ignited all the attention, but I stick by the reaction being political. Illegal immigrants have been demonised since Nigel Farage first oozed into view. It’s at what point you think the thin edge of the wedge starts. Interesting poem by Martin Niemöller, initially an antisemitic Nazi supporter who later changed his views. Certainly the current government are highly critical of the socialists and trade unions. I suspect it’s time to lie low after this post but please bear in mind this isn’t an accusation that this is what is happening now. I’m just posting it as Russia moved from Glasnost back to state control, China suppression of free speech and persecution of the Uighers. If we hold ourselves to the highest standards of freedom and democracy then we shouldn’t be afraid of criticism and welcome it, not stir up a huge **** storm over an ultimately inconsequential crisp muncher. First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me
Exactly. Go on Facebook and start expressing extreme opinions and see how long it takes before you get pulled.
Great Post! For what it's worth, I think we've already reached the thin end of the wedge. But, as you may have seen me post elsewhere, I am critical of both ends of the political spectrum as both ends are engaging adversarial politics rather than reasoned debate. Also as I've said elsewhere the kind of polarisation this creates can be seen in Weimar Germany and pre-Civil War Spain. That is worrying.
quite enjoyed MotD without the (failed) managers pointing out how each team was wrong and the sarcastic digs at each other.
I agree. Politician'surge to grasp the useless simplicity of a one sentence argument has utterly diminished proper debate, and has greatly exacerbated the polarising of the public discourse. It all makes it to too easy to demonise the guy in " the other shirt", and lionise tbe guy in the right one. Hence the cries of " far left nutter" , or "Facist!" rather than look at what has been said, although it is true that what has been said is frequently so shallow now that it might evaporate in a second.
I was talking about the horrific hounding of Rowling, Weisz, Moore, Stock and others for stating known biological facts. On the Lineker thing, frankly I couldn't give a toss what he says. Or what Chris Packham says, or Neill, or any of them. To me here, the BBC, and the way it is funded at point of law is the problem. They do little or nothing that others now do not do as well or better, and the idea that people who may never, or will never use it , are forced by law to pay for it in order to use something else is utterly indefensible in today's world . A £10 a month sub, maybe less would cover a core service, if they cut out some or the mountains waste and duplication., and though I rarely watch it, I'd probably pay it. No problems at all then.
Fair enough but I'm sure they can stand up for themselves ... ... I've been hounded by idiots but, however loud they shout, they're just idiots.
The only people 'dying on a hill' are the BBC top brass ... ... they obviously haven't a clue what to do next. Lineker can just sit back and laugh.
