I made Lineker Walkers Crisps icon – but his ideas are the real junk food

That “one-off” went on to become the longest-running ad campaign in Europe. It helped launch my career. Lineker, meanwhile, went from hesitant pitchman to one of the most eloquent, witty and trusted voices on British television. It was a win-win — which makes what I’m about to write all the more difficult.

Because I am also a British Jew. And, like many others, I’ve watched with growing dismay as Lineker — someone whose nascent public career I was part of — continues to share content online that, whether knowingly or not, emboldens antisemitism.

Last week, he reposted a rat emoji alongside a video attacking Zionism. Perhaps he thought it was harmless. But for Jews, this image is not abstract. It is historical. It was central to Nazi propaganda and used for decades to dehumanise Jews as vermin. Its use in this context isn’t edgy or clever — it’s chilling.

Let me be clear: I don’t believe Lineker is antisemitic. In fact, he was a generous and heartfelt contributor to a film I wrote and directed for Holocaust Memorial Day. His participation was sincere.

Which is exactly why this moment is so disappointing. Because it’s not about intent. It’s about impact.

And that impact also fits a broader pattern. Earlier this year, in an interview with journalist Mehdi Hasan, Lineker was asked about criticism he’d received for his views on Israel and Gaza. His reply? “We know about October 7 and the Hamas thing.”

The Hamas thing? That “thing” was the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. Entire families murdered. Women raped. Children burned alive. Language matters, especially from public figures. To reduce such horror to a vague euphemism is more than careless. It’s minimising.

The exchange ended with Hasan saying, “So you’re in good company if you’re being accused of being pro-Hamas.” Lineker smiled and agreed.

Again, I am not accusing Lineker of supporting Hamas. But when someone with his influence brushes off such accusations with a shrug or a smirk, it sends a troubling signal: not just to Jews, but to anyone who values clarity, compassion and responsibility in public discourse.

I’m not a paranoid person who believes the whole world is against Jews. I don’t. I still believe in people’s ability to think for themselves and to act with fairness. I also believe passionately in the right to criticise the actions of any government — including Israel’s.

That’s not only legitimate; it’s a cornerstone of democracy. In fact, it’s a tenet of Zionism itself: the belief in a Jewish state that can be argued with, challenged, improved.

But with that right comes responsibility. And when someone with Lineker’s reach and influence reposts toxic symbols or trivialises atrocities, the line between criticism and incitement starts to blur.

The BBC finally bit the bullet last Sunday, when Lineker announced that he and the corporation had parted ways.

What took the BBC so long?

Over the past year, the Jewish community has engaged with the BBC in good faith. Roundtables. Public meetings. Hundreds of participants. The goal? To rebuild trust. To be heard.

At the end of that process, the BBC’s director of nations issued a brief statement: “I do not believe the BBC’s journalism is biased against Israel.” Not even a willingness to consider the possibility. That’s not impartiality. That’s denial.

I love the BBC. I’ve grown up with it. Defended it. I still believe it plays a crucial role in British life. But credibility isn’t maintained through silence or slogans. It’s earned — through listening, through action, through the willingness to acknowledge when something’s gone wrong.

Gary Lineker’s voice carries enormous weight. That’s what made him such an effective ambassador for crisps, daft as it may sound. It’s also what makes his careless posts and comments so damaging.

I’m not writing this out of anger. I’m writing it out of regret. Because I know that Gary is capable of so much better. And so is the BBC.

Looking forward, I wonder if we could reach out and help something positive to emerge. Something constructive for us that also avoids Lineker becoming yet another media victim. What if we explored the possibility of him fronting a serious, well-researched documentary on antisemitism? Perhaps also including an accurate history and examination of Zionism up to the present day and its attempted slaughter on October 7 2023 and “the Hamas thing”.

Because if the ultimate goal of our outrage and of the numerous petitions, articles and pressure wasn’t just to see him removed, but to effect genuine cultural change and public understanding, this could be an opportunity to turn a polarising figure into a conduit for education. It would reframe him not as a martyr but as someone willing to confront his own blind spots. Done properly – with the right editorial controls, Jewish voices centred and full transparency – it could reach audiences we struggle to engage.

Of course, the risks are clear: insincerity, defensiveness, or a perception of PR damage control. But if he is really open to learning, it could turn a moment of fracture into something constructive.

Might be a long shot. Might also be the one move no one expects.

And if he doesn’t agree, we can always approach that Crispy duck and pull her out of retirement.