The BBC’s announcement of an independent review of its social media guidelines was aimed at defusing the crisis over Gary Lineker’s tweets over government ministers’ language about its asylum policies and bring the presenter back into the fold, at least in the short term.
However, the practicalities of creating a set of rules to rein in star behaviour, while avoiding accusations of stifling free speech, are far from straightforward. Here are some key points for consideration.
Whatever emerges from the review will be hard to enforce
While the BBC stopped short of issuing an apology directly to Lineker, there is no question that the corporation’s biggest name won the day.
Lineker, who had said he would not apologise and was not overly fussed about any sanctions the BBC might inflict upon him, could not help but return to his theme of asylum seekers when he acknowledged his return to presenting duties.
“However difficult the last few days have been, it simply doesn’t compare to having to flee your home from persecution or war to seek refuge in a land far away. It’s heartwarming to have seen the empathy towards their plight from so many of you,” Lineker wrote on Twitter. “We remain a country of predominantly tolerant, welcoming and generous people.”
A final thought: however difficult the last few days have been, it simply doesn’t compare to having to flee your home from persecution or war to seek refuge in a land far away. It’s heartwarming to have seen the empathy towards their plight from so many of you. 3/4
— Gary Lineker 💙💛 (@GaryLineker) March 13, 2023
Tim Davie, the director general of the BBC, said Lineker had agreed to comply with the existing guidelines while the review was carried out. But a return to politically charged tweeting, however finely balanced, while still supposedly toeing the line of the BBC’s view of what constitutes existing social media guidelines shows how fraught this area is.
Might adherence to the guidelines have to be written more explicitly into star contracts?
The BBC’s attempts to justify cracking down on Lineker, including saying that while he should not be an “opinion-free zone” he needs to keep “well away” from politics, exposed the ultimately unworkable nature of the existing guidelines.
Strictly speaking, Lineker’s official status as a freelance employee and member of the sport department means he is not governed by the same social media rules as BBC news and current affairs staff.
Nevertheless, the corporation shoe-horned in a rule – referred to by staff to as the “Lineker clause” – which targets “others who are not journalists or involved in factual programming who nevertheless have an additional responsibility to the BBC because of their profile on the BBC”. The guidelines state that high-profile BBC presenters in general need to “avoid taking sides on party political issues or political controversies” – in a bid to capture all employees. This has abjectly failed.
The BBC has an opportunity to revisit the situation, either by formally exempting non-news presenters in updated guidelines, or via individual contracts – Lineker’s £6.75m deal comes up for renewal in 2025. The current guidelines say: “The extent to which a non-staff member, contributor or presenter is required to comply with the editorial guidelines will be set out in the BBC’s contractual relationship with them.”
What does Lineker’s ‘victory’ mean for other BBC staff and high-profile presenters?
Davie’s acknowledgment on Friday that current social media guidelines contain “grey areas” which have caused confusion over the last week is something of an understatement.
In the first two years after the 2020 implementation of the new policies just five BBC journalists were formally disciplined over their social media use, putting Lineker in a rare club of rule breakers.
And yet Lineker’s suspension for expressing political views proved a lightning rod for supporters pointing out comparisons with other BBC stars who have not been sanctioned for lacking impartiality.
The host of The Apprentice, Alan Sugar, has a long record of politically charged outbursts across various media; Mary Berry expressed scepticism of the government’s sugar tax; and Michael Portillo, the former Conservative cabinet minister has made a plethora of travel shows for the BBC, while also publishing political columns in newspapers.
When the BBC removed Lineker from presenting duties it was meant to be until there was an “agreed and clear position on his use of social media”. In reality, the outcome is a more woolly review of the BBC’s overall social media guidelines.
A recalcitrant Lineker, who is unlikely to change his habit of speaking out on issues, has established a formal precedent that when it comes to impartiality, stars are a special social media case.
