Jump to content

Let's welcome GB News


helen
 Share

Recommended Posts

Funny goings on at the new GB News channel. 373 complaints to Ofcom after only four hours on air. Talk of an orchestrated boycott campaign. Big brands pulling their advertising over concerns about programme content.

I must declare I only saw a few minutes of the opening night, and I haven’t been tempted back yet, so I missed presenter Dan Wooton’s opening monologue which, according to Ofcom, was the subject of some of the complaints, “comments made during the programme about coronavirus”
He is quoted by several sources as saying:
“tragically, the doomsday scientists and public health officials have taken control…  

They’re addicted to the power and the government are satisfied its 15 month long never‑ending scare campaign has suitably terrified the public into supporting lockdowns…

“But if we don’t fight back against this madness, some of the damage will be irreversible…

It’s increasingly clear now that there is a move among some public health officials and politicians to create an ultra‑cautious biosecurity state, copying the likes of China.”

Quite high on the scale of journalistic hyperbole; but maybe not out of place in the Sun or the Express, we are just not accustomed to hearing it on TV. Perhaps we are seeing the birth pangs of our first tabloid TV news channel and this was a publicity stunt to get the show on the road. Or maybe it is a cunning trap to expose Ofcom’s own left‑wing bias and lure it to its ultimate destruction.

The one thing I did notice in the few minutes I was watching was Mr Wooton’s gratuitous plug for the Mail online. for which he also works. He deserves s slap from Ofcom for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have watched a few of their pieces on YouTube.

I find it ironic that self professed leftists/anarchists etc are putting pressure of corporations to stop GB's sponsorship.

I think all media has agendas - I am ok with that if they are honest and open about it. I support free speech and find the idea of trying to shut down opinions and views I might not like quite repulsive and totalitarian.

Edited by Norm_uk
spelling mistake
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

What is going on at GB News?
Andrew Neil (its chairman no less) went on indefinite holiday after only two weeks. Alastair Stewart is on leave after breaking his hip and also doesn’t know when he will be back.
Poor old Guto Harri has been cast out for ‘taking the knee’ live on air and no one seems to know if he will be back. He has been condemned out of court as a woke, Marxist sleeper agent by some viewers. After barely a month on air this has created so much outrage online that it has led to a boycott that reduced the channel’s measurable viewing figures to zero for a while this week.

As a one time BBC man from the distant past they should have known he couldn’t be trusted. And he’s not even English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Good work at GB News.
The Royal National Lifeboat Institution has raised more than £200,000 in single day after being accused, by Nigel Farage on GB News, of running a “migrant taxi service”.

Well done Nigel, another day another good deed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've still not managed to tune in my television set to watch GB News.  My milkman told me Nigel Farage has a job on GB News and has to get up really early in the morning to go and report from the sea. My milkman told me Nigel Farage saw the French royal navy escorting the little boats with the poor people on into the bit of the sea which belongs to Kent. My milkman also told me that Pritti has given the French 55 million pounds to help the French royal navy keep the poor people on the little boats safe.  I think Pritti forgot to take her brain pill because she should have given the 55 million pounds to the Lifeboat men who are the good people who are really looking after the poor people in the little boats.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/06/2021 at 08:50, Norm_uk said:

I have watched a few of their pieces on YouTube.

I find it ironic that self professed leftists/anarchists etc are putting pressure of corporations to stop GB's sponsorship.

I think all media has agendas - I am ok with that if they are honest and open about it. I support free speech and find the idea of trying to shut down opinions and views I might not like quite repulsive and totalitarian.

"self professed leftists/anarchists etc are putting pressure of corporations to stop GB's sponsorship."

Citation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 03/08/2021 at 17:06, helen said:

Citation?!!
This is the Off Topic Forum, the home of alternative truth, we don’t do things like that.

Happy to prove you wrong....I just posted half a dozen links from a variety of sources left and right.

However I'm not convinced this is a search for truth. We tend to dismiss sources that don't agree with our opinions I find.  And online we're more interested in finding phantom enemies to condemn than to exchange ideas and examine things we disagree with to at least understand even when don't accept them.

 

N.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Norm_uk said:

@Norm_uk thanks, I will have a look at those. Yes I can---  and do---- read a lot of academic research, and I look for the number of citations in them and who has cited them and used in support of what other position. I'm no expert in any other subject except my own. 

 I enjoy these discussions too, I prefer that statements that are perhaps somewhat outliers in the paradigm of fact should come with a first grade helpful link in support. Just my instinct.

I guess online its difficult to parse irony and reverse statements especially when it's delivered deadpan.

Not everyone does search for supporting research and  links that are verifiable, peer reviewed and reputable, and obviously its not yhe Law to do so! ?

The  Daily Express and Daily Mail are past master's at suggestive statements mixed in with otherwise reasonable articles. Goves soon to be ex wife comes to  mind. :58674bddb5b72_EmojiSmiley-01:

Edited by JamesandNadine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Norm_uk said:

Happy to prove you wrong....I just posted half a dozen links from a variety of sources left and right.

However I'm not convinced this is a search for truth. We tend to dismiss sources that don't agree with our opinions I find.  And online we're more interested in finding phantom enemies to condemn than to exchange ideas and examine things we disagree with to at least understand even when don't accept them.

 

N.

Yes, thanks my friend. I take your general point. Its a feature of our online world. Strong statements are made, and I often have cause to stop and think. Bias unchecked can be distorting, and im sure most of us know we carry them in many way overtly or not , cognitive, unconscious confirmation memory even humour has an effect ...etc etc. I'd make a good moderator I think. But I'm biased ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Norm_uk said:

Happy to prove you wrong....I just posted half a dozen links from a variety of sources left and right.

My problem is; I can’t be bothered to click on links put there by people who can’t be bothered to make their point in their own words.
If I want to know what is going on at GB News I can watch it, and that’s another of my problems. It is just too boring to watch.

I should have thought of that when I started this thread.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I should have thought of that when I started this thread."

Lol.

Funny.

?

I don't think people post links without making the point.

Rather the reverse....occasionally some pretty far out there assertions fired out in a sort of stream of consciousness that perhaps there is no supporting evidence that stands up to a good read.

I'd hate to think anyone is under the impression that  is gulped down without sometimes people's internal brakes going on!

And I don't mean quoting a reporter writing a puff piece on behalf of the editor of the Daily Mail or Spectator! 

I like that its an interactive discussion, if not so, it becomes just unfettered rants...which is entertaining though in the end uninteresting, to me at least. 

Anyway, its all good friends....got Talksport on, watching the warm summer rain fall now, as the bright clouds hide the summer sun in the sky. Nadine pouring me a cup of tea from the pot on the stove.... ?

 

Edited by JamesandNadine
Sp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/08/2021 at 15:16, JamesandNadine said:

@Norm_uk thanks, I will have a look at those. Yes I can---  and do---- read a lot of academic research, and I look for the number of citations in them and who has cited them and used in support of what other position. I'm no expert in any other subject except my own. 

 I enjoy these discussions too, I prefer that statements that are perhaps somewhat outliers in the paradigm of fact should come with a first grade helpful link in support. Just my instinct.

I guess online its difficult to parse irony and reverse statements especially when it's delivered deadpan.

Not everyone does search for supporting research and  links that are verifiable, peer reviewed and reputable, and obviously its not yhe Law to do so! ?

The  Daily Express and Daily Mail are past master's at suggestive statements mixed in with otherwise reasonable articles. Goves soon to be ex wife comes to  mind. :58674bddb5b72_EmojiSmiley-01:

I hope the links have some interesting info for you. 

My wife is an academic and lecturer at the University level, and I am not stranger to separating opinion from fact. Unfortunately even 'peer reviewed' doesn't guarantee truth but anyone with a thirst for facts will be able to separate opinion from fact. 

I think most people understand how to separate information and often end up either blindly trusting 'experts' or going the opposite way and not trusting anyone. Even more of us judge with our feelings rather than reason. We live in an era where being offended is taken more seriously than having considered opinions or facts at hand.

N.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Norm_uk said:

I hope the links have some interesting info for you. 

My wife is an academic and lecturer at the University level, and I am not stranger to separating opinion from fact. Unfortunately even 'peer reviewed' doesn't guarantee truth but anyone with a thirst for facts will be able to separate opinion from fact. 

I think most people understand how to separate information and often end up either blindly trusting 'experts' or going the opposite way and not trusting anyone. Even more of us judge with our feelings rather than reason. We live in an era where being offended is taken more seriously than having considered opinions or facts at hand.

N.

 

Yes. I'm all for a bit of jolly to and fro, strong statements need backing up! ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Never a dull moment at GB News. “Britain’s News Channel”.  It is finding its feet nicely.

Another four new Ofcom investigations, to add to the three already underway, into the channel’s political partiality and use of sitting Conservative MPs as ‘current affairs’ presenters, which is allowed but straying into news presenting is not. The line is blurred.

GB News has a team of four Tory MPs. Jacob Rees‑Mogg, tonight presenting his political monologue from his own home, with family photos in the background; wife and husband team Esther McVey and Philip Davies, and party deputy chairman Lee Anderson. There is nothing they like better than to interview each other. Esther and Philip even got to interview Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt on their own, but we can be sure they did it with due impartiality and journalistic rigour. It must have been one of the toughest interviews of his career.
 
They face some not‑so‑stiff competition from Rupert Murdoch’s TalkTV, which is also under investigation over partiality issues. What TalkTV lacks in quantity it makes up for in quality with superstar Tory MP/not MP Nadine Dorries.

Ofcom is struggling to cope with the volume of this assault on broadcasting standards. Political impartiality and the separation of news and facts from opinion are the bedrock of all good  journalism. TalkTV and GB News ignore both.
We had a lucky escape when Boris Johnson failed to get his own placed man, ex Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, into the chair at Ofcom. That would have been a green light to both channels that they could do whatever they liked.
But they have not given up yet. Tory MP Caroline Dinenage is the chair of the Commons select committee that scrutinises the UK television industry. She recently hosted a drinks party for GB News in parliament.

We will hear a lot more in the coming months from GB News and the Tories about ‘free speech’ and ‘politically motivated’ attacks by Ofcom as we get closer to a general election. They are desperate and few things will suit them better than two, free‑to‑air, TV channels churning out Conservative propaganda thinly disguised as ‘current affairs’ seven days a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im all for sitting conservative MPs working for GB News. I don’t see any problem with that at all. Just as long as they, like professional, qualified journalists,  get sent to report from Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan, Niger, Afghanistan, the beaches of Northern France…or any of the worlds other hell holes…and not just report from the relative safety of their own study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/08/2023 at 06:25, Jessica In Heels said:

Im all for sitting conservative MPs working for GB News. I don’t see any problem with that at all. Just as long as they, like professional, qualified journalists,  get sent to report from Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan, Niger, Afghanistan, the beaches of Northern France…or any of the worlds other hell holes…and not just report from the relative safety of their own study.

Within shooting distance of the front line?

Okay, no problem with that.

Sue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I hear Nigel has been interviewing himself on GB News again.
This time railing against the BBC for allowing revellers at the last night of the Proms to be shown on our screens waving EU flags.

“It was blooming rude…    The whole thing was rude, insulting and inappropriate.”
“I’m afraid we do have this small group of people who hate this country, hate the flag, hate its history, hate its shared commonality and identity. There they were in the hall.”

“Mercifully, they’re a small minority. I know they’re having a rejoin march in London in a couple of weeks time…     the best thing we can do is ignore them”  said Nigel…    on the television; never the best way to ignore someone.

’They’ are a group called “Thank EU for the Music” (geddit?). who had been handing out blue and yellow EU flags outside the the Royal Albert Hall, to anyone who wanted one. An apparent show of support for musicians adversely affected by the Brex.

Flag waving is a long standing tradition at the last night; the BBC sets a limit on how large flags may be, for safety reasons, but does not stipulate the colours. Some Tory MPs are calling for the BBC to hold an inquiry into how this was allowed to happen.

To make matters worse the orchestra even had a woman conductor, and a foreigner too!

Whole country’s going to the dogs.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I can't believe they've suspended Laurence Fox and Dan Wooton for discussing the sexual attractiveness of women with whom they disagree.

Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

Do GB News not realise that we all want to know how a person's political views affect their sexual appeal in the eyes of nutty right wing misogynists? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

I can't believe they've suspended Laurence Fox and Dan Wooton for discussing the sexual attractiveness of women with whom they disagree.

Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

Do GB News not realise that we all want to know how a person's political views affect their sexual appeal in the eyes of nutty right wing misogynists? 

It's not just happening in your country. The 'woke' are doing this in the entirety of the civilized countries. You're gonna have to get used to it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, rowlf said:

It's not just happening in your country. The 'woke' are doing this in the entirety of the civilized countries. You're gonna have to get used to it!

rowlf playbook rule number 13

Feel free to discuss subjects about which you know nothing, but in general terms.

What Fox and Wooton said was personal, unpleasant and unedifying. It was said as a form of political commentary, though it was little more than abuse of a respected journalist. It isn't being "woke" to claim it was disrespectful and totally unacceptable. 

Especially as I doubt you have the faintest idea who either of them are, or what they said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

rowlf playbook rule number 13

Feel free to discuss subjects about which you know nothing, but in general terms.

What Fox and Wooton said was personal, unpleasant and unedifying. It was said as a form of political commentary, though it was little more than abuse of a respected journalist. It isn't being "woke" to claim it was disrespectful and totally unacceptable. 

Especially as I doubt you have the faintest idea who either of them are, or what they said.

Then, who done it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Then, who done it?

Is that your admission that you have no knowledge of the content of this discussion, despite your already having offered a view on it?

Your ability to talk at length on subjects about which your have zero knowledge is quite astounding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

Is that your admission that you have no knowledge of the content of this discussion, despite your already having offered a view on it?

Your ability to talk at length on subjects about which your have zero knowledge is quite astounding.

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, rowlf said:

What do you think?

I think the fact that you don't answer the question proves my point.

You don't even consider the subject matter before rejecting it out of hand, even though you don't know or understand what has happened. It is a sign of a totally prejudiced and narrow mind. 

I suppose it is you you came to agree with Trump in his meeting with Putin at Helsinki when he gave to contradictory statements. Everything he says is right in your mind, even when it contradicts something he's already said and you've agreed with.

It shows the shallowness of your opinions and that you are happy for them to be made by others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a creepy coincidence that the Foxification of GB News is being led by Mr Fox.

There is no such thing as bad publicity at GB News. they hope, because they are getting plenty of it today.

Ava Evans said, on the BBC, when asked to comment on a Tory MP’s calls for a Minister for Men:
"I think that it feeds into the culture war a little bit, this minister for men argument.
"[Mental illness] is a crisis that's endemic throughout the country, not specific to men. And I think a lot of ministers bandy this about to, I'm sorry, make an enemy out of women."

The Tory MP in question is Nick Fletcher, Member of the ”Common Sense Group" and general anti‑’woke’ anti trans‑rights, right‑wing nut job. So Evans’s ‘culture war’ comment was right on target.
The combination of woman, culture war and BBC was irresistible for GB News.

Fox said:
"We're past the watershed so I can say this. Show me a single self respecting man that would like to climb into bed with that woman - ever, ever," he said.
"That little woman has been fed, spoon-fed oppression day after day after day.
"And she's sat there and I'm going like - if I met you in a bar and that was like sentence three, [the] chances of me just walking away are just huge.
"We need powerful strong, amazing women who make great points for themselves."
He then added: "Who'd want to shag that?"

Later he doubled down with a TwiX:
“I stand by every word of what I said. If a woman wants to go on television and belittle male suicide, she is totally within her rights to do so and not apologise, just as I am totally within my rights to say that I wouldn’t want to shag a hyper offended 4th wave feminist and not apologise, just as people are totally within their rights to be offended by my stating I would run a mile in the opposite direction from women like her, should our paths cross in a bar.

“It’s called free speech.

“I realise that the new woke world is low on laughter and high on offence, but it’s still worth trying to find the lighter moments in this joyless new cancel culture which has been created for us.”

The style is unmistakable. Pure Trump.

Following his suspension, he posted again, claiming he had conducted a “pre interview” with the channel “so they knew exactly what I intended to say”.

I think I believe that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, dappi said:

'They' are the people you had an opinion about, idiot.

It's just proof of his haste to post a counter argument that he doesn't consider the stupidity of what he is saying before posting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

It's just proof of his haste to post a counter argument that he doesn't consider the stupidity of what he is saying before posting it.

That excuse for a man has no shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

It's just proof of his haste to post a counter argument that he doesn't consider the stupidity of what he is saying before posting it.

What the hell is wrong with you? You badmouth ruby and her crime was to believe she could have an open and honest debate. Then you and your little sock puppet commence the personal slurs and idiotic comments.

Fuck you! You and your dappi can talk to yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, rowlf said:

What the hell is wrong with you? You badmouth ruby and her crime was to believe she could have an open and honest debate. Then you and your little sock puppet commence the personal slurs and idiotic comments.

Fuck you! You and your dappi can talk to yourself.

Ha, Ha, Ha, Hee, Hee, Hee, little old rowlf don't worry me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rowlf said:

What the hell is wrong with you? You badmouth ruby and her crime was to believe she could have an open and honest debate. Then you and your little sock puppet commence the personal slurs and idiotic comments.

Fuck you! You and your dappi can talk to yourself.

When I get angry or upset, I find a bar of twiX chocolate calms me down.

Twix - Wikipedia

Edited by c_cubed51
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rowlf said:

What the hell is wrong with you? You badmouth ruby and her crime was to believe she could have an open and honest debate. Then you and your little sock puppet commence the personal slurs and idiotic comments.

Fuck you! You and your dappi can talk to yourself.

That's brilliant rowlf.

You join in a discussion about people you don't know and what they said on a TV channel you haven't seen. I think it's pretty amazing that you can have a view on people you've never heard of, and a channel you've never seen. But you manage it by referencing other people in the debate rather than the subject under discussion. Then, when your ignorance of the subject trips you up, as it invariably does, you lose your cool and resort to obscenities.

You show of anger/passion doesn't act as a fig leaf for your ignorance on the discussion between Fox and Wooton. Nor does it hide the way you tripped yourself up when trying to tell others they wrong about a subject, when you weren't even clear what the subject was.

As for your threat not to converse. Please feel free to keep your ignorant and pre-judged opinions to yourself. It will make for a healthier debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...