Gary Lineker, the BBC’s highest-paid on-air presenter, is to leave the corporation in a matter of days.
The Match Of The Day host will step away from the broadcaster at the end of this month, with his last appearance expected on 25 May, the last day of the Premier League season.
It was the latest controversial post by the 64-year-old, who has found himself at the centre of several rows over his social media usage, most of which involve him sharing his political views, which go against the BBC’s rules on impartiality.
In a statement on Monday, Lineker said: “I care deeply about the game, and about the work I’ve done with the BBC over many years. As I’ve said, I would never consciously repost anything antisemitic – it goes against everything I stand for.
“However, I recognise the error and upset that I caused, and reiterate how sorry I am. Stepping back now feels like the responsible course of action.”
Here is a round-up of the pundit’s most contentious comments as he prepares to leave the BBC.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:48
Gary Lineker to leave BBC immediately
Gaza documentary
Although not via social media, earlier this year, Lineker was one of 500 media personalities who condemned the BBC for pulling the documentary Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone after it emerged the child narrator, Abdullah, is the son of Ayman Alyazouri, who had worked as Hamas’s deputy minister of agriculture.
In an open letter addressed to BBC director general Tim Davie, chairman Samir Shah and outgoing chief content officer Charlotte Moore, Lineker joined hundreds of TV and film professionals and journalists who called the decision to remove the documentary “politically motivated censorship”.
The presenter later said the BBC had “capitulated”, adding that he did not see Abdullah as an issue, and maintaining that the corporation should not have admitted to “a number of serious failings in their commissioning and editorial processes”.
The BBC admitted the documentary’s failings were “a dagger to the heart” of the corporation’s impartiality.
Tory migrant policy
In March 2023, Lineker called a Conservative government policy on migration “immeasurably cruel” and compared the language around it to 1930s Germany.
Hitting out at a video of former home secretary Suella Braverman, where she unveiled the Illegal Migration Bill and claimed the UK was being “overwhelmed” by migrants, Lineker wrote on social media: “There is no huge influx.
“We take far fewer refugees than other major European countries.
“This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the ’30s.”
His comments sent politicians, pundits and social media platform X into a spin.
He later returned to the presenting role after the row prompted a boycott by his fellow football pundits and commentators, hitting TV and radio coverage across the BBC.
Lineker has been consistently vocal on the issue of migration. In 2020 the former England footballer welcomed refugee Rasheed Baluch into his Surrey home.
Mr Baluch, who was from Pakistan, stayed with the presenter for weeks, and spoke out in the pundit’s defence in 2023, describing him as a “very sympathetic, caring and human loving man”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:36
From March 2023: Gary Lineker stands by social media post
‘4 chaps Shapps’
Criticising former defence secretary Grant Shapps in December 2023, Lineker posted photos of the politician – who lost his seat in last year’s general election – along with different names he has been accused of using in the past.
It was in response to Mr Shapps defending the government’s Rwanda scheme. The politician said Lineker should stick to football and stop “meddling” in other matters.
Lineker replied on social media, saying: “A tad rich coming from someone who can’t even stick to one name. 4 chaps Shapps.”
At the time, a BBC source told Sky News that Lineker’s position as a freelance broadcaster, and a presenter who does not front news or politics programmes, meant he was clear of the corporation’s rules on impartiality.
As well as voicing his Brexit opinions, Lineker bemoaned “the absolute state of our politics”, saying “imagine how hopeless you’d have to be to still be behind the Tory party in the polls”.
BBC cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew hit back, criticising Lineker for speaking out on politics.
He posted on X: “Gary. You are the face of BBC Sport. Please observe BBC editorial guidelines and keep your political views, whatever they are and whatever the subject, to yourself. I’d be sacked if I followed your example. Thanks.”
Lineker made a barbed reply: “Jonathan, I’m the face of my own Twitter account. I’ll continue to tweet what I like and if folk disagree with me then so be it.”
What are the BBC guidelines on impartiality?
Gary Lineker signed a five-year deal with the BBC in 2020, under which he agreed to adhere to their impartiality rules.
The rules were then updated after his return to Match Of The Day in 2023.
The latest regulations say high-profile BBC presenters should be able to express their views on political issues as long as they stop short of campaigning.
It does not clarify what would constitute political campaigning for the big-name presenters.
The guidelines also stress the importance of “high standards of civility in public discourse”, which includes treating others with respect, even in the face of abuse and not using offensive or aggressive language.
The policy only applies to presenters outside of its news coverage. News presenters are still subject to stricter impartiality guidelines.
Russian donors
In February 2022, Lineker tweeted about the Conservative Party taking money from “Russian donors”.
Retweeting a story about the then foreign secretary Liz Truss urging football teams to boycott the Champions League final in Russia, he added: “And her party will hand back their donations from Russian donors?”
The BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) upheld a complaint and said Lineker’s post “did not meet the BBC’s editorial standards on impartiality”.
The ECU said Lineker was “one of the BBC’s highest profile stars” and said while not being required to uphold the same high standards of impartiality as its journalists, he had an “additional responsibility” because of his profile.
“We expect these individuals to avoid taking sides on party political issues or political controversies and to take care when addressing public policy matters,” the ruling said.
Row over sewage
A senior BBC journalist questioned Lineker’s commitment to the BBC’s impartiality rules after the presenter posted on social media about sewage in August 2022.
At the time, Lineker wrote on social media: “As a politician how could you ever, under any circumstances, bring yourself to vote for pumping sewage into our seas? Unfathomable!”
BBC journalist Neil Henderson asked Lineker whether he had a contract allowing him to breach BBC impartiality, writing: “The BBC lives or dies by its impartiality. If you can’t abide it, get off it.”
He subsequently apologised to the former footballer and deleted the tweets. Under the BBC’s social media rules, criticising colleagues is off-limits.
Lineker opened the BBC’s coverage of the 2022 Qatar World Cup with a scathing critique of the host country’s record on human rights and treatment of migrant workers.
The segment analysed the decision to award the tournament to Qatar amid corruption allegations and brought in pundits to discuss workers’ rights and discrimination against LGBT people.
Former BBC journalist Emily Maitlis – who was once found to have breached impartiality guidelines herself – compared that incident to the response to his other social media posts around the same time.
She said: “Curious that Gary Lineker was free to raise questions about Qatar’s human rights record – with the blessing of the BBC – over the World Cup, but cannot raise questions of human rights in this country if it involves criticism of government policy…”
At the time there were calls for Russia to be stripped of the World Cup or boycotted in 2014 after it annexed Crimea and was blamed by the West for supplying arms to pro-Russian separatists suspected of shooting down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine.
“I think we were all going how great it was, and this and that and the other, and that’s how sportwashing works,” Lineker said during a BBC Radio 4 interview.
“We’ve seen what Putin’s done subsequently, but he’d done it before.
“I think looking back now in hindsight, I think we should probably have spoken out more.”
Satire has long been an occupational hazard for politicians – and while it has long been cartoons or shows like Spitting Image, content created by artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly becoming the norm.
A new page called the Crewkerne Gazette has been going viral in recent days for their videos using the new technology to satirise Rachel Reeves and other politicians around the budget.
On Sky’s Politics Hub, our presenter Darren McCaffrey spoke to one of the people behind the viral sensations, who is trying to remain anonymous.
He said: “A lot of people are drawing comparisons between us and Spitting Image, actually, and Spitting Image was great back in the day, but I kind of feel like recently they’ve not really covered a lot of what’s happening.
“So we are the new and improved Spitting Image, the much better Have I Got News For You?”
He added that those kinds of satire shows don’t seem to be engaging with younger people – but claimed his own output is “incredibly good at doing” just that.
Examples of videos from the Crewkerne Gazette includes a rapping Kemi Badenoch and Rachel Reeves advertising leaky storage containers.
More on Beth Rigby Interviews
Related Topics:
They even satirised our political editor Beth Rigby’s interview with the prime minister on Thursday, when he defended measures in the budget and insisted they did not break their manifesto pledge by raising taxes.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
The creator of an AI actress has told Sky News that synthetic performers will get more actors working, rather than steal jobs.
AI production studio Particle6 has ruffled feathers in Hollywood by unveiling Tilly Norwood – a 20-something actress created by artificial intelligence.
Speaking to Sky News’ Dominic Waghorn, actor and comedian Eline Van der Velden – who founded Particle6 – insisted Norwood is “not meant to take jobs in the traditional film”.
AI entertainment is “developing as a completely separate genre”, she said, adding: “And that’s where Tilly is meant to stay. She’s meant to stay in the AI genre and be a star in that.”
“I don’t want her to take real actors’ jobs,” she continued. “I wanted to have her own creative path.”
Instagram
This content is provided by Instagram, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Instagram cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Instagram cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Instagram cookies for this session only.
Norwood has been labelled “really, really scary” by Mary Poppins Returns star Emily Blunt, while the US actors’ union SAG-AFTRA said in a statement: “Tilly Norwood is not an actor, it’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers – without permission or compensation.”
Responding to the criticism, Ms Van der Velden argued that Hollywood is “going to have to learn how to work with [AI] going forward”.
“We can’t stop it,” she said. “If we put our head in the sand, then our jobs will be gone. However, instead, if we learn how to use these tools, if we use it going forward, especially in Britain, we can be that creative powerhouse.”
Image: Eline Van der Velden said she wanted the character to ‘have her own creative path’
Ms Van der Velden said her studio has already helped a number of projects that were struggling due to budget constraints.
“Some productions get stuck, not able to find the last 30% of their budget, and so they don’t go into production,” she said. “Now with AI, by replacing some of the shots […] we can actually get that production going and working. So as a result, we get more jobs, we get more actors working, so that’s all really, really positive news.”
Irish author Sally Rooney has told the High Court she may not be able to publish new books in the UK, and may have to withdraw previous titles from sale, because of the ban on Palestine Action.
The group’s co-founder Huda Ammori is taking legal action against the Home Office over the decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws in July.
The ban made being a member of, or supporting, Palestine Action a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Rooney was in August warned that she risked committing a terrorist offence after saying she would donate earnings from her books, and the TV adaptations of Normal People and Conversations With Friends, to support Palestine Action.
In a witness statement made public on Thursday, Rooney said the producer of the BBC dramas said they had been advised that they could not send money to her agent if the funds could be used to fund the group, as that would be a crime under anti-terror laws.
Rooney added that it was “unclear” whether any UK company can pay her, stating that if she is prevented from profiting from her work, her income would be “enormously restricted”.
More on Palestine Action
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:57
Why was Palestine Action proscribed?
She added: “If I were to write another screenplay, television show or similar creative work, I would not be able to have it produced or distributed by a company based in England and Wales without, expressly or tacitly, accepting that I would not be paid.”
Rooney described how the publication of her books is based on royalties on sales, and that non-payment of royalties would mean she can terminate her contract.
“If, therefore, Faber and Faber Limited are legally prohibited from paying me the royalties I am owed, my existing works may have to be withdrawn from sale and would therefore no longer be available to readers in the UK,” Rooney added, saying this would be “a truly extreme incursion by the state into the realm of artistic expression”.
Rooney added that it is “almost certain” that she cannot publish or produce new work in the UK while the Palestine Action ban remains in force.
She said: “If Palestine Action is still proscribed by the time my next book is due for publication, then that book will be available to readers all over the world and in dozens of languages, but will be unavailable to readers in the United Kingdom simply because no one will be permitted to publish it, unless I am content to give it away for free.”
Sir James Eadie KC, barrister for the Home Office, said in a written submission that the ban’s aim is “stifling organisations concerned in terrorism and for members of the public to face criminal liability for joining or supporting such organisations”.
“That serves to ensure proscribed organisations are deprived of the oxygen of publicity as well as both vocal and financial support,” he continued.
The High Court hearing is due to conclude on 2 December, with a decision expected in writing at a later date.