The BBC should be glad that Gary Lineker won’t be their problem for much longer

A year ago, I challenged him face-to-face. I begged him to understand that this was a war. I asked him to mention the hostages, which he has still not done. I also told him that he was retweeting Hamas fans who displayed the terrorist group’s inverted red triangle to his seven million followers – something he has done only once (I think) since.

Small mercies, eh? After our very public row, he’s no longer retweeting obvious terrorist fans, just daily hatred for Israel.

So now to this week. Over Easter, Lineker sat down with Amol Rajan for the Radio 4 Media Show in one of those slightly surreal conversations where one BBC person asks another BBC person about the BBC and BBC rules on the BBC.

Rajan challenged him on the controversy of his social media use in March 2023 when he said then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman’s announcement to stop migrant boats crossing the Channel was "an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s."

As the backlash mounted, Lineker was taken off Match of the Day and some of his co-stars came out in support, leading to a huge crisis for the corporation, which eventually backed down and even apologised to him.

Crossing his arms as Rajan brought it up – the previous minutes of the show were rather easier on him – he insisted that it was a "ridiculous overreaction" and insisted, "I was right, what I said was accurate". However, he admitted that he "wouldn’t do it again because of the kerfuffle that followed and I love the BBC and I didn’t like the damage that it did to the BBC."

He then said the real problem with the BBC was that they spent too much time listening to people who criticise it – ie, people like you and me and millions of others who pay for it and his gargantuan salary. "The BBC tries to appease the people who hate the BBC and who always go on about the license fee. They worry way too much about them rather than the people who love the BBC."

Rajan did not challenge Lineker on the way he continues to breach BBC social media neutrality guidelines, but did wonder whether he’d crossed a line when he put his name a letter condemning the BBC for taking off air the documentary Gaza: How to Survive A Warzone which featured the son of a Hamas official – and paying him for it.

Even though BBC chair Samir Shah had described the scandal as a "dagger to the heart" of the British broadcaster"s impartiality and the BBC admitted "mistakes" which were "significant and damaging" in the making of the programme Lineker, along with a handful of other BBC names, all called for the documentary to be reinstated. What is more, they said those who had demanded it be taken down for – let us remind ourselves again, paying the son of a member of a terrorist organisation – were perpetuating "a racist trope".

Lineker, so convinced of his own moral superiority, insisted that he was simply a humanitarian. And although he has worked in television for decades – has done documentaries and must therefore be aware of the usual rules that work around them in terms of accountability and box ticking – he claimed he simply could not see why the documentary couldn’t be aired apart from the shadowy forces – the lobby (we all know who they are, don’t we?) stopping it.

"I think they just capitulated to lobbying that they get a lot," he insisted. There we go again, with that brazen arrogant stupidity, mixing facts with conspiracy.

Lineker is just one face making a mockery of the idea of BBC neutrality. A few weeks ago, in the light of the documentary scandal, the Royal Television Society withheld a special award it was going to present to the journalists of Gaza. Presumably it wanted time to check how many were affiliated with Hamas (the irony being that anti-Hamas journalists are tortured and killed and they won’t be the ones getting the award).

There was another letter and this one was signed by BBC journalists, including at least three who work on the Middle East patch – Orla Guerlin, Fergal Keane and Alice Doyard – demanding the award be reinstated and also asking "what lobbying did the RTS become subject to?" It was sent out under the banner of a completely new organisation called "UK Screen Industry" by the larger group Artists for Palestine – which is perhaps the least neutral name on the planet.

There couldn’t be a clearer breach of BBC neutrality guidelines but having disregarded and ignored Lineker’s musings for the last 18 months, it appears that now extends to the BBC newsroom. Demands for accountability for these journalists have been ignored. Complainants were told that these were just journalists standing up for other journalists.

Lineker epitomises a problem for the BBC. The Israel-Hamas conflict is just part of it. From Brexit to trans issues to any number of culture wars topics, He represents a worldview that doesn't even know anymore what neutrality means.

Towards the end of the interview, Rajan rightly told Lineker: "Your free speech is not more important than the BBC’s reputation - in a time of culture wars and social media - for trust and impartiality. If people associate the BBC with your views on refugees or climate change or whatever it might be, they might not trust the BBC in other domains." But alas, he was too late. Much too late.

Thanks to Lineker and others – too many others - the BBC’s reputation for trust and impartiality is already in tatters. And they only have themselves to blame, but at least now Gary Lineker’s bias will be someone else’s probelm.