@a-unique-nickname said"Freedom of speech" can obviously be limited by the terms of a contract. Lineker still had "freedom of speech" but he surely understood that he could legitimately be suspended for exercising it especially when he had agreed to the limitation.
Freedom of speech however should be a right regardless of a contract.
@a-unique-nickname saidThis, to you, is a reason why the BBC wasn't within its rights to suspend him?
I doubt he read the contract.
@a-unique-nickname saidThat was the "mistake" that meant the BBC pretty much had no choice but to suspend him.
I think he might have made a mistake comparing it to 1930s Germany, that was unfortunate and takes the shift away from his disprovel of the new law.
Freedom of speech however should be a right regardless of a contract.
@a-unique-nickname saidIs there part of Lineker's contract you think was illegal?
Just because a contract is signed doesn't mean everything inside it is legal. You should know that.
-Removed-He cant be sacked he sub-contracts himself out, the Beeb know they would loose all round, gary would sue the pants of em,they would loose the best football presenter around, he has already been aproached by BT SPORT so rock on Gary and tell the TRUTH about these Tory pariahs.....The BADGER has spoken.
@a-unique-nickname saidI doubt it. I'd imagine that a healthy chunk, maybe half, of the UK population more or less agree with the government's hardline stance on immigration. Let the politicians and talking heads and vox pops battle it out. The BBC doesn't need one of its presenters sneering at maybe half the population/audience by suggesting that they support Nazi policies.
I think most are siding with the footballer.