Sugar Baby?
Masaj
Shemales

Author Topic: GB News launch date has been announced!  (Read 3309 times)

Offline winkywanky

I see they are using this: External Link/Members Only

If this delivery method has anything to do with the awful sound level issues, then either the software is utter shite or it's been set up badly. They do need to get this sorted, it's frequently nothing short of embarrassing.

Offline mh

Guto Harri: interesting one...I think they fucked up suspending him, they simply look like they are treading on free speech. They say he breached their standards by making a political gesture, yet their standards are to combat cancel culture. Well they have cancelled him! Bad move on their part.

Read his resignation letter, I think he could get them for constructive dismissal if he felt the need.

External Link/Members Only

His action wasn't spur of the moment, he discussed it in advance with producers, head of newsroom and co-presenters. Yet they hung him out to dry.

Director of Programming has also resigned at being told to go full culture wars with the announcement of the new NF show.

They know their plan to be a serious news channel has failed already. Andrew Neill knew that quicker than anyone and ran for the hills. Now they are just rolling the dice. I anticipate falling foul of broadcasting regulation pretty quickly.

Offline sparkus

The Katie Hopkins Hour does surely beckon!

Offline winkywanky

Read his resignation letter, I think he could get them for constructive dismissal if he felt the need.

External Link/Members Only

His action wasn't spur of the moment, he discussed it in advance with producers, head of newsroom and co-presenters. Yet they hung him out to dry.

Director of Programming has also resigned at being told to go full culture wars with the announcement of the new NF show.

They know their plan to be a serious news channel has failed already. Andrew Neill knew that quicker than anyone and ran for the hills. Now they are just rolling the dice. I anticipate falling foul of broadcasting regulation pretty quickly.

They have handled this really badly. Who is the actual bossman, anyway? Presumably not Andrew Neil?

I dip in and out of it frequently. It's a mixed bag, little consistency. One day you'll have four people in the seats, all saying Lockdowns are a load of shit, other times you'll actually hear a real, full and frank discussion about race issues from people with properly varying opinions.

It can be very refreshing at times, other times I want to throw a brick at the screen. I quite like the way they shake things up, and I believe they could be (have been, now?) a force for good, because I do feel stuff that needs proper talking about gets suppressed on the MSM.

I doubt whether Hari will sue them, that's not his style. He will have no trouble getting other gigs, the guy is a very good journalist.

As for breaking Ofcom regs: well I think they break them pretty well every day to be honest, to some degree? Perhaps if you watched for a whole week, you might say that they're overall balanced. But over the course of one day they will frequently be very UN-balanced.

To be honest, I'm not sure whether they are constrained by exactly the same rules as BBC/ITN/C4/Sky, who are all technically public service broadcasters?  :unknown:


« Last Edit: July 19, 2021, 02:57:48 pm by winkywanky »

Offline mh

To be honest, I'm not sure whether they are constrained by exactly the same rules as BBC/ITN/C4/Sky, who are all technically public service broadcasters?  :unknown:

All broadcast news is subject to regulation, more stringent in election periods. Sky are not a "public service broadcaster". BBC, ITV and C4 are. C4 might not be for much longer and ITV have been trying to get out of the service obligations for some time.

Offline sparkus

All broadcast news is subject to regulation, more stringent in election periods. Sky are not a "public service broadcaster". BBC, ITV and C4 are. C4 might not be for much longer and ITV have been trying to get out of the service obligations for some time.

As I recall, several oddball outlets (Russia Today, Press TV) have fallen foul of Ofcom rules.

Ofcum should be a thing.

Offline winkywanky

All broadcast news is subject to regulation, more stringent in election periods. Sky are not a "public service broadcaster". BBC, ITV and C4 are. C4 might not be for much longer and ITV have been trying to get out of the service obligations for some time.

I think I'm right in saying that Sky voluntarily abide by the same PSB regs as the BBC et al.

I seem to remember them making a point of doing that some years ago, in an effort to be seen as equally credible?

I didn't know about ITV trying to get out of it! Interesting! That would strengthen the BBC's hand politically of course, they could say they were whiter than white!  :D

C4 as you are probably alluding to, being considered for selling off by the govt. They are of course publicly owned despite having adverts.

I find the media landscape interesting anyway, but interesting to see how things are shifting now.

Offline winkywanky

As I recall, several oddball outlets (Russia Today, Press TV) have fallen foul of Ofcom rules.

Ofcum should be a thing.


Yes, certainly RT have fallen foul of the rules before.

I found their Russian Elections coverage quite interesting to say the least  :lol:  :lol:

I guess the Ofcum Rules are on UKP, no religion or politics  :blush:.

Offline sparkus


Yes, certainly RT have fallen foul of the rules before.

I found their Russian Elections coverage quite interesting to say the least  :lol:  :lol:

I guess the Ofcum Rules are on UKP, no religion or politics  :blush:.

I'd tune in for topless darts on RT any day of the week.

Offline winkywanky

I'd tune in for topless darts on RT any day of the week.


How about a topless Putin? Wrestling with sharks?

Offline winkywanky


Offline sparkus


Offline winkywanky

I would basically agree with most of that.

I disagree somewhat with the comment about it not being a news channel. I think it is, but it concentrates far more on opinion on that news, and it has an opinion on certain, if not most, of the news stories. The rolling ticker at the bottom of the screen carries all the major news headlines just like all the other news channels, but then the discussions will concentrate on certain things. It has a self-declared agenda, overall it will be right wing, but they do have dissenting voices on there. But then if the presenter doesn't agree with the contrary view, he will have the last word.

It's not what we're used to, and unless you're a committed right-winger you won't be agreeing with everything (or much of what) they say.

Of course they simply will not have the clout that BBC or ITN have, they don't have their own correspondents all around the world, and even on home shores the feel is that most of their reporters are fresh out of a journalism degree, or even something from the 'performing arts' arena. In amongst the Alastair Stewarts, it's very amateur in its presentation.

I think by and large what they set out to do was very valid, to challenge the so-called cancel culture, there are several issues which the MSM fail to see both sides of, for fear of 'upsetting harmony', but the irony is that those who keep banging on about we need discussions about this stuff, are only having their side heard. If you really want to talk about stuff properly, you have to be prepared to take all sides into account.

I do think it speaks volumes that Neil has very quickly disappeared, and certainly he was the very well-respected poster-boy for the channel. I should imagine we will hear why at some point, but for the time being it's all very cryptic.

Farage's opinions aren't mine but he's an agitator as we know, and he makes some very good points. Interesting that he now has his own show there, a bit cheesy that he presents it over a pint in a fake bar, but he has had some good guests and good discussions.

I suspect GBN might now either fail or go down a more extreme rabbit hole, it will therefore lose advertisers (or perhaps fall foul of Ofcom's rules) and will go down in a ball of flames and acrimony.

And then there will be the Andrew Neil book about it, who knows, perhaps he's writing that as we speak?  :D

Offline petermisc

I would basically agree with most of that.  I disagree somewhat with the comment about it not being a news channel. I think it is, but it concentrates far more on opinion on that news, and it has an opinion on certain, if not most, of the news stories.
What it is lacking is detailed analysis of the news by experts who can explain why and how things are happening.  Informed analysis and bigotted opinion are very different things.  Informed analysis can open your eyes to things you didn't know, whereas bigotted opinion only reinforces views you already have.

I must admit that I was wondering which way GB news was going to go.  Calling it GB News wasn't a good sign in itself, with an undertone that it would be news for patriots.  It had the choice to be a balanced broadcaster with a right-wing slant, or pander to narrow-minded right-wing bigots.  Unfortunately, it seems to have chosen the latter.  As the article says, the size of that audience is unlikely to sustain it for long.

I have a lot of respect for Andrew Neil, the "face" of GB News.  It was obvious that he was trying to pitch it as a serious centre-right news channel, with the same kind of in-depth broad-spectrum journalism as the BBC and ITN, just with a right-wing slant rather than the left-wing slant of the BBC.  However, Neil is not the money behind the channel, and it is obviously the money that talks.  As the article says, it has ended up more Talk Radio than Channel 4 News.  And the Harri affair has clearly demonstrated what GB News' viewers actually want, or what they don't want, and the money behind the company has decided to pander to that.  Whereas BBC News got people on air to discuss why they objected to taking the knee, as far as GB News is concerned taking the knee is apparently intolerable.

Offline winkywanky

What it is lacking is detailed analysis of the news by experts who can explain why and how things are happening.  Informed analysis and bigotted opinion are very different things.  Informed analysis can open your eyes to things you didn't know, whereas bigotted opinion only reinforces views you already have.

I must admit that I was wondering which way GB news was going to go.  Calling it GB News wasn't a good sign in itself, with an undertone that it would be news for patriots.  It had the choice to be a balanced broadcaster with a right-wing slant, or pander to narrow-minded right-wing bigots.  Unfortunately, it seems to have chosen the latter.  As the article says, the size of that audience is unlikely to sustain it for long.

I have a lot of respect for Andrew Neil, the "face" of GB News.  It was obvious that he was trying to pitch it as a serious centre-right news channel, with the same kind of in-depth broad-spectrum journalism as the BBC and ITN, just with a right-wing slant rather than the left-wing slant of the BBC.  However, Neil is not the money behind the channel, and it is obviously the money that talks.  As the article says, it has ended up more Talk Radio than Channel 4 News.  And the Harri affair has clearly demonstrated what GB News' viewers actually want, or what they don't want, and the money behind the company has decided to pander to that.  Whereas BBC News got people on air to discuss why they objected to taking the knee, as far as GB News is concerned taking the knee is apparently intolerable.

Straying into disallowed territory on here if we're not careful, but with specific reference to the knee thing: Sacking Hari was ludicrous, far better to debate it fully, in effect they cancelled him which is hypocritical and just makes it look like those pulling the GBN strings are hidden away and not open to scrutiny. That surely is the whole argument against cancel culture, every argument has two sides, however painful or uncomfortable they might be. It goes both ways.

It originally came from the US (American Football in the sports context, and from decades before that of course) and the reasons for it (and the movement behind it) do have 'overtones' from that origin. To import it here and somehow reinvent it to say it is simply about allowing basic human decency for everyone is not only wide of the mark, it is naive to think so. IMO there is a full debate to be had about this, about its origins, and also (and equally important) about the whole landscape around it. That full and frank discussion hasn't been had on the main channels, it has had fleeted references but hasn't addressed the fact that the seemingly non-stop flood of this stuff gives a false (certainly overblown) impression of the way things are here in the UK, and along with that go feelings of neverending resentment and entitlement unless we're very careful. I have seen and heard some appalling articles on BBC News and Radio, so biased and factually incorrect, all in the name of harmony and not offending. If you tell one side of the story then that is in itself offensive, and causes great and divisive damage (I can't give details at risk of a ban, but as a lifelong fan of the BBC and as someone who understands their very nature will be of a liberal bent, nevertheless I was shocked).

You are correct I think about the branding of GBN, the logo certainly and perhaps even the name, and the loss of a highly respected figure like Neil will inevitably leave a vacuum. Cancel culture is a thing, it is divisive and pervasive, and if someone like Andrew Neil feels strongly enough to be part of GBN from the outset then that standpoint has validity. His apparent disappearance and the sacking of Hari will do them great damage, and rightly so. Neil was at pains to point out he would be back, that makes it even more intriguing. Is there a power struggle of some sort going on?

Offline chrishornx


Offline scutty brown

I see Andrew Neill has resigned

In any other organisation that would be welcomed as a sign of a return to rationality, however with GBN it can only herald increased hysteric irrationality. What little journalistic ability that existed there has now gone

Offline chrishornx

In any other organisation that would be welcomed as a sign of a return to rationality, however with GBN it can only herald increased hysteric irrationality. What little journalistic ability that existed there has now gone

wonder if he is ill ?

Offline tynetunnel


Offline sparkus


Offline Thephoenix

I was optimistic after the initial publicity that it might be a interesting alternative news channel.
Checked it out a few times, not impressed at all.
Back to Auntie.

Offline Matrix

It's shit, but then again, so is it's competition.  I think I'm done with "news channels".

Offline Thephoenix

Looks like other 'big names' leaving the sinking ship.

Offline Marmalade

The thing is, he had an iconic spot, something of a celebrity appearance for terrestrial tv. But his voice grates like fuck on a low budget outfit. It doesn’t do for any hopefully mainstream news catch-up to hear him launch in with agenda-laden tones as if he already has a chip on his shoulder. Farage is more subtle, but they urgently need a professional presenter that can open a show with vanilla, easy on the eye and ear introductions to the main stories.  On top of that the channel has been padded with phone ins. That might be ok but not for something advertising itself as a news channel.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2021, 06:41:25 pm by Marmalade »

Offline Bertiebeenthere

Simon Mc Coy said he joined GBN for "a challenge", he wasn't wrong!
And how did he meet Emma Samms?
« Last Edit: September 14, 2021, 08:49:56 pm by Bertiebeenthere »

Offline puntingking

From when the channel first launch it took me some time to get use to it new format and after a few hiccups (or should I say plenty of hiccups) and a few changes from the first few months it is now my number one news channel of choice.

The reason why I prefer it to the likes of the BBC and sky is because it tell news more positively and it not just doom or gloom all the time.
I turn on sky news and just like that I ran into erection problems .
 
The presenters have more soul and have personalities which is what I want. Yes when I want to turn on a news channel I want to get news but I don't want to switch off afterwards depressed from watching it.

Bbc news to me and sky news to me is too agonising to watch most of the time.

Before anyone on here says about Gb news politics,  yes I am aware of their political viewpoint.  Its no different from bbc and sky being centre left.
I understand that gb news is seen to be on Centre right.  :hi:

In perspective compared to bbc and sky gb news biggest show is the Nigel farage show which gets about 100,000 viewers now. Up by 20,000 since September. 
Bbc news gets about three times that in prime hours. Sky news gets about two times.
Sometimes though is not because gb news is not any worst than sky or bbc. Is because is hard for viewers to change their old viewing habits. They may like gb news if only they give gb news a go but they to use to their old ways.

« Last Edit: November 24, 2021, 07:20:19 am by puntingking »

Offline mh

Its no different from bbc and sky being centre left.

BBC is not left, it is pathetically balanced to the extent that they will try to balance complete tripe with different complete tripe in general news output, when it isn't just a government mouthpiece. Though Question Time has been proven time and again to misrepresent the politics of the general public on both panelist and audience selection, with a considerable right wing bias to both, even when it was a young audience where nationally the skew is clearly left.

Laura Kuenssberg and Andrew Marr are simperingly adherent to the current government line.

Sky News isn't left either. Kay Burley left? She pulls low quality ministerial interviewees to pieces but that doesn't make her 'left'. Jayne Secker? Jonathan Samuels? Watch those for more than a few evenings and you can see what they think too.

I understand that gb news is seen to be on Centre right.

Ha ha! Nobody has complained that it is "centre right". It isn't centre right, it is dog-whistle pitched right.

Offline sparkus

BBC is not left, it is pathetically balanced to the extent that they will try to balance complete tripe with different complete tripe in general news output, when it isn't just a government mouthpiece. Though Question Time has been proven time and again to misrepresent the politics of the general public on both panelist and audience selection, with a considerable right wing bias to both, even when it was a young audience where nationally the skew is clearly left.

Laura Kuenssberg and Andrew Marr are simperingly adherent to the current government line.

Sky News isn't left either. Kay Burley left? She pulls low quality ministerial interviewees to pieces but that doesn't make her 'left'. Jayne Secker? Jonathan Samuels? Watch those for more than a few evenings and you can see what they think too.

Ha ha! Nobody has complained that it is "centre right". It isn't centre right, it is dog-whistle pitched right.

Hear hear!

Nigel Farage had been on QT a staggering number of times before even the Brexit referendum, disproportionately so given he was just an MEP and at many points not even the actual leader of UKIP at the time.  But he's good box office so that's what counts.

Offline puntingking

BBC is not left, it is pathetically balanced to the extent that they will try to balance complete tripe with different complete tripe in general news output, when it isn't just a government mouthpiece. Though Question Time has been proven time and again to misrepresent the politics of the general public on both panelist and audience selection, with a considerable right wing bias to both, even when it was a young audience where nationally the skew is clearly left.

Laura Kuenssberg and Andrew Marr are simperingly adherent to the current government line.

Sky News isn't left either. Kay Burley left? She pulls low quality ministerial interviewees to pieces but that doesn't make her 'left'. Jayne Secker? Jonathan Samuels? Watch those for more than a few evenings and you can see what they think too.

Ha ha! Nobody has complained that it is "centre right". It isn't centre right, it is dog-whistle pitched right.

 disagree.

Offline Proton

Personal announcement on Andrew Marr's Twitter . After 21 years, I have decided to move on from the BBC.  l leave behind many happy memories and wonderful colleagues.
 But from the New Year I am moving to Global to write and present political and cultural shows, and to write for newspapers..  :) "Global Corporation UK" has LBC,  so I wonder who will be replaced in the 2022 :unknown:


Offline puntingking

Personal announcement on Andrew Marr's Twitter . After 21 years, I have decided to move on from the BBC.  l leave behind many happy memories and wonderful colleagues.
 But from the New Year I am moving to Global to write and present political and cultural shows, and to write for newspapers..  :) "Global Corporation UK" has LBC,  so I wonder who will be replaced in the 2022 :unknown:

Knowing the BBC the Andrew Marr show will be replace with just a rolling of the BBC news channel for one hour most likely from 9 to 10 on the usual Sunday slot.

Online Dave33ws6

I turn on sky news and just like that I ran into erection problems

If I had a penny for every occasion I have seen that advert

Offline puntingking

Then again Rosie White of gb news soon gets my erection back again  :yahoo:
« Last Edit: November 25, 2021, 07:36:07 am by puntingking »