GB News: a thread so you never have to watch it

[cupid_stunt]

Lawrence Fox putting the boot into GBNews on GBNews, there's lots of stuff about OffCom and other secretive cabals and repetition if the phrase "Jew Impartiality" and how OffCom and Jew Impartiality gave brought down the great Mark Styne.

I hate you for posting that, I couldn't resit going to have a look. /

I've never seen Fox as a presenter, he's dreadful, and I haven't checked anything out on GBN for ages, but his monologue was the most bizarre thing I've seen them show. He seemed to keep popping down various rabbit holes, a sort of full house in a game of conspiracy theories bingo, somehow knitting them into an auto-rant about OFCOM and why it should be abolished. He even used a German accent to pronounce 'OFCOM' a couple of times, implying they are Nazis and no doubt worst than Hitler,

Then he brings in Neil Oliver as a guest to discuss praise his monologue, and expand on it.

TBF it was gripping, because it's all such jaw-dropping fucking madness, it's as if it's some spoof news channel sit-com with shit writers, the scary thing is that some people actually believe this complete garbage.

After the break they brought in the token person to argue the opposite position for the last few minutes of this 25 minute segment, which passes for balance in the minds of these absolute clowns.

That was in the form of Michael Crick, ex-BBC & C4 News, who was booked to support OFCOM, but it was more about why OFCOM should have shutdown GB News from the start, and he was putting across very good reasons, leaving Fox & Oliver in a state of denial whilst trying to defend GBN. Not as bizarre as the monologue, but still very bizarre.

 

[CH1]

Lawrence Fox putting the boot into GBNews on GBNews, there's lots of stuff about OffCom and other secretive cabals and repetition if the phrase "Jew Impartiality" and how OffCom and Jew Impartiality gave brought down the great Mark Styne.

They have stuck the programme up on Youtube though.
He stars in this ?libelous? and to my eyes racist film (which I haven't watched yet)

 

[Lurdan]

Another twitter thread by from Matthew Sweet about Neil Oliver's show last weekend and his guest Will Keyte

twitter link.

The thread is archived here at threadreaderapp.


Following his appearance on Oliver's show Will Keyte appeared on the 'Liberty Tactics' podcast.

The Hardwicke Alliance meme in the above tweet is one which their twitter account regularly posts

Sweet posts examples of antisemitic articles and tweets by the Hardwicke Alliance, for example:

 

[DaveCinzano]

‘Gas of life’ wait, whut?!

 

[cupid_stunt]

There's an excellent piece in the 'i' looking at GB News.

GB News used to be a joke – now it’s dangerous​

What’s going on here? How is this stuff able to go out without Ofcom stepping in? Its rules demand that “factual programmes or items or portrayals of factual matters must not materially mislead the audience”. And yet outside of the two Steyn investigations, it seems extremely sluggish in its response.

For years, the regulatory environment in the UK was based on an assumption of gentlemanly conduct, in which they kept a vague eye on people who were ultimately acting in good faith. The BBC and Sky generally made sure that most debates featured voices from both sides. Stations like LBC approached balance across the schedule instead of per debate, alternating right-wing hosts with more progressive ones. But GB News has jettisoned that approach. It is quite clear where its hosts are coming from. There is no equivalent of James O’Brien.

They do invite liberal or left-wing guests on – there was a point where I was receiving a text from them every week until they finally got the message to fuck off. But inviting on some normal guests in order to conceal the overall thrust of your editorial position is not balance or accuracy. It is camouflage.

I learned this lesson for myself the hard way, when I used to go on Russia Today years back. Sweet naive child that I was, I thought it was a free speech issue. They had a right to broadcast. I would go on there and deliver the liberal message. As long as nothing I said was misrepresented or censored, there was no problem.

That turned out to be a deeply foolish assessment. No matter what you say as a guest, the overall structure of the narrative is designed to mislead and deceive. It is aimed not at expanding free speech, but making it impossible by undermining the evidential base it needs to function.

Media analysts sometimes suggest that Ofcom can only investigate something which took place if there was a complaint about it. But in fact this is not true. As Ofcom’s own procedures document states: “Ofcom may launch investigations on its own initiative as well as investigate complaints.” And yet it rarely does so.

For their part, Ofcom says: “In line with freedom of expression, broadcasters are free to broadcast controversial views which diverge from, or challenge, official authorities on public health information, or indeed other matters. Our broadcasting rules state, however, that any unproven and potentially harmful claims must be sufficiently challenged and put into context.”

You get this distinct sense that they just can’t get a handle on what’s happening with GB News. And that doesn’t just apply to them. It applies to all of us. Respectable journalists still go on there, validating its coverage. Mainstream news consumers act as if the channel has ceased to exist, and yet it remains there, pumping out poison to a sizable audience. Because that audience is inside its own echo chamber, they do not make complaints, so Ofcom does not investigate. And the whole tawdry process is allowed to continue.

People are allowed to say whatever nonsense they like on a news channel, even if it’s dangerous, patently false and malevolently intentioned. What they cannot do is spew out those lies unchallenged in a broadcasting outfit that has clearly decided to pursue a conspiracy news agenda. Journalists, audiences and the regulator need to wisen up to what they’re doing over there and they need to do it quickly.

GB News used to be a joke – now it's dangerous

Journalists, audiences and the regulator need to wisen up to what they’re doing over there and they need to do it quickly

inews.co.uk

 

[Lurdan]

The 'Slow Creep of Ugliness' broadcasting last night.

John Bye offers some advice in a twitter thread

Twitter link

Thread (with helpful illustrative examples) here at threadreaderapp

 

[tim]

GBNews viewers know their heroes from their villains



((((30p))))

(Yes, I know that I also posted this on the Lee's dedicated thread, which is probably bad form)

 

[CH1]

I thought this was an apposite moment just now on the 1 o'clock news

 

[pbsmooth]

I mean I've shared one at least.

but anyway screenshots might not be directly affecting the algorithm but they're still putting it out there which will lead to a few clicks more than if they hadn't been posted

I just clicked on the three dots by a GB News video in YouTube and selected 'don't recommend channel' so that is presumably as strong a signal you can give to the algo...

 

[gentlegreen]

YT has been a bastard recently - I hate having to go to the channel concerned to confirm my suspicions.
I pay premium to remain safely in the echo chamber of my choice FFS.

 

[tim]

GBNews: a vote so you can mess up the Wooden's poll.



Let's conspire against him!

 

[mx wcfc]

GBNews: a vote so you can mess up the Wooden's poll.



Let's conspire against him!

There's a lot of work to do.

1,500 total votes. Over 92% of which are racist ring wing votes

 

[cupid_stunt]

There's a lot of work to do.

1,500 total votes. Over 92% of which are racist ring wing votes

It's down to 89.4% now, but hardly surprising considering GBN tweeted the poll an hour ago, and it's about to close, I am sure if the poll had been open longer, the internet would have screwed it over.

 

[two sheds]

Nice addition of the word "illegal" in there.

 

[Karl Masks]

GBN needs shutting down. No argument at this point.

 

[gentlegreen]

Hopefully it and Talk TV will go bust
How much do their vile presenters get paid and how are they funded ?

 

[Fuzzy]

The 'Slow Creep of Ugliness' broadcasting last night.

John Bye offers some advice in a twitter thread

Twitter link

Thread (with helpful illustrative examples) here at threadreaderapp

he looks like he's been marooned on an island tom hanks style

 

[Boris Sprinkler]

Yeah. But he didn’t make friends with the basketball due to its skin colour.

 

[not a trot]

he looks like he's been marooned on an island tom hanks style

But where's Wilson ?

 

[gentlegreen]

Is it 'cos Alice Roberts did so much better than him ?

 

[Karl Masks]

Hopefully it and Talk TV will go bust
How much do their vile presenters get paid and how are they funded ?

Get onto the advertisers

 

[gentlegreen]

Get onto the advertisers

Blimey.
I will have to see if there's a list and whether I inadvertently support them..

I suppose at some point, advertising on TV channels will be driven by Google etc based on your own preferences ...

 

[krtek a houby]

he looks like he's been marooned on an island tom hanks style

More Oliver Reed style

 

[nino_savatte]

Hopefully it and Talk TV will go bust
How much do their vile presenters get paid and how are they funded ?

GB News is funded by Sir Paul Marshall (father of Winston Marshall) and Legatum. TalkTV is a Murdoch outfit.

As for salaries, I'm not sure but I found this on This Is Money in which Isabel Webster gloats about buying a £1,000 handbag and tells the interviewer:

I like a new handbag. When I got my new job at GB News, I treated myself to the classic Louis Vuitton bucket bag. I think it cost about £1,000.

And

Was money tight when you were growing up?

I don't remember it being tight, but I've recently learnt there were times when my parents worried about paying my school fees.

So, she was privately educated and her parents "helped her to pay for a flat".

Let's put it this way, none of their on-air talent have to claim Universal Credit to make ends meet.

 

[eatmorecheese]

The 'Slow Creep of Ugliness' broadcasting last night.

John Bye offers some advice in a twitter thread

Twitter link

Thread (with helpful illustrative examples) here at threadreaderapp

 

[8ball]

Let's put it this way, none of their on-air talent have to claim Universal Credit to make ends meet.

Doesn’t necessarily mean she’s paid a lot by GBNews, just that she’s from a comfortable background.

Several of the presenters have other grifts on the go. I’m inclined to think Eamonn Holmes would still be at the Beeb if they’d have him.

 

[nino_savatte]

Doesn’t necessarily mean she’s paid a lot by GBNews, just that she’s from a comfortable background.

Several of the presenters have other grifts on the go. I’m inclined to think Eamonn Holmes would still be at the Beeb if they’d have him.

If she can afford to splash out £1000 on a handbag, then she's well-paid.

 

[moochedit]

he looks like he's been marooned on an island tom hanks style

If only

 

[Karl Masks]

Blimey.
I will have to see if there's a list and whether I inadvertently support them..

I suppose at some point, advertising on TV channels will be driven by Google etc based on your own preferences ...

Well, it's the only way innit. These channels are directly responsible, in part, for the events we saw last friday. No excuse anymore. It's not an issue of free speech IMO

 

[8ball]

If she can afford to splash out £1000 on a handbag, then she's well-paid.

Looks like we’ve got ourselves a reader.