GB News

[SteveM70]

Very much looking forward to Dewbs and Co tonight at 6pm live from Whitehaven. Nigel Farage will also be in attendance.

Of course he will

 

[Mojo]

As i said in an earlier post the channel can get rather repetitive at times but reading the majority of the stuff on here i really have to wonder if any of the posters have ever actually tuned in to watch it, i suspect not!

I completely agree, watching Dewbs & Co right now you've got Corbynite Aaron Bastani getting cheers from the audience and self-titled Popular Conservative Mark Littlewood getting a frosty reception.

 

[Condor7]

We don't watch a lot of its output but find ourselves increasingly watching the breakfast show in preference to the BBC, ITV, or Sky.

 

[Typhoon]

GB News is going to go crazy about the £1m memorial for Muslims who died in the two world wars.. Look at the comments on X (I recommend you don't) where the outrage is turned all the way up to 11.

Today, day after the budget, I tuned in to GBNews just after six to find out both what was this evening's headlines (missed) and what they were concentrating on today (having commented yesterday). After telling us that she knew Twitter was now called X, Michelle Dewberry (Apologies if not quite right) dived straight in to the memorial for Muslim members of the armed forces, many of whom fought in theatres of war which were largely to defend this country rather than their own.

 

[1D54]

So you must have missed her interview with Naveed Asghar who is the Deputy Chair of the Conservative Muslim Forum who obviously supports the building of the monument and she said she agreed with everything he said..

 

[nw1]

With regards to the "Don't Kill Cash", both GB News and Greatest Hits Radio got in trouble for this at roughly the same time. The operators of such services are not permitted under the code to express opinions on "matters of political or industrial controversy or current public policy". It's not the presenters who are prevented, it's the broadcasters themselves - Nigel Farage is allowed to - GB News isn't. If they were interviewing Nigel Farage about his personal campaign, that would be ok - for them to launch the campaign as a station wide activity is not permitted.

Ah interesting. Would this extend to the BBC for instance; would BBC presenters be allowed to make political comments as long as they made it clear it was their own opinion and not that of the station?

I ask that as I remember one specific example of a BBC presenter making a comment that I interpreted as taking a particular standpoint on a big political issue.

 

[dosxuk]

I ask that as I remember one specific example of a BBC presenter making a comment that I interpreted as taking a particular standpoint on a big political issue.

If it's the incident I believe you are referring to, then correct, those statements were not a breach of the broadcasting code.

 

[Typhoon]

So you must have missed her interview with Naveed Asghar who is the Deputy Chair of the Conservative Muslim Forum who obviously supports the building of the monument and she said she agreed with everything he said..

Yes, once I knew they were going back to that topic, I expected the worst. As a consequence I listened to it on catch up, he was bloody good, I would hope they would find a way of getting him into parliament, coherent, well thought out arguments. There were times when she did seem to be trying to drive a bit of a wedge (why it was first up in the budget). Unfortunately, straight after that it was Kelvin McKenzie, there is only so much of him I can take - if he is a member of this forum, most of the Commonwealth troops were not fighting for their country, they were fighting for ours, and losses were often great. The second guest was pretty good too (the animals in war memorial is in Park Lane, if he is a member). Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

 

[1D54]

Kelvin McKenzie is a regular on that show and although i tend to agree with some of what he says he is a complete pillock and an embarrassment as was shown tonight.

You were fortunate if you gave the Farage show straight after a wide berth. It kicked off with the same subject. I gave it ten minutes and switched over to Yes Minister on Talking Pictures!!

 

[jon0844]

I guess if they keep talking about that, they can divert attention away from the rest of the budget.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Under the Broadcasting Code, news, in whatever form, must be presented with due impartiality. Additionally, a politician cannot be a newsreader, news interviewer or news reporter unless, exceptionally, there is editorial justification.

In line with the right to freedom of expression, broadcasters have editorial freedom to offer audiences a wide range of programme formats, including using politicians to present current affairs or other non-news programmes. Politicians may also appear in broadcast news content as an interviewee or any other type of guest.

Individual programmes can also feature a mix of news and non-news content and move between the two genres. If, however, a licensee chooses to use a politician as a presenter in a programme containing both news and current affairs content, it must take steps to ensure they do not act as a newsreader, news interviewer or news reporter in that programme.

What we found​

After careful consideration of the facts in each case – including forensic analysis of the content and detailed representations from GB News – we found that two episodes of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s State of the Nation, two episodes of Friday Morning with Esther and Phil, and one episode of Saturday Morning with Esther and Phil, broadcast during May and June 2023, failed to comply with Rules 5.1 and 5.3 of the Broadcasting Code.

All five programmes in question contained a mix of news and current affairs content. We found that host politicians acted as newsreaders, news interviewers or news reporters in sequences which clearly constituted news – including reporting breaking news events – without exceptional justification. News was, therefore, not presented with due impartiality.

Politicians have an inherently partial role in society and news content presented by them is likely to be viewed by audiences in light of that perceived bias. In our view, the use of politicians to present the news risks undermining the integrity and credibility of regulated broadcast news. We therefore considered it was necessary and proportionate to find a breach of Rules 5.1 and 5.3 in these circumstances.

We are also publishing our reasons for deciding that a sixth programme – a separate episode of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s State of the Nation – did not raise issues warranting investigation under these rules. This provides broadcasters with an example of what constitutes exceptional editorial justification as allowed by Rule 5.3. In the case of this live programme, Jacob Rees-Mogg was used as an eye-witness, in situ news reporter during an unforeseen security incident at Buckingham Palace.

These are the first breaches of Rules 5.1 and 5.3 recorded against GB News. Since opening these investigations, there has only been one further programme which has raised issues warranting investigation under these rules. We are clear, however, that GB News is put on notice that any repeated breaches of Rules 5.1 and 5.3 may result in the imposition of a statutory sanction.

Politicians acting as news presenters on GB News broke broadcasting rules

A series of Ofcom investigations today concluded that five programmes on GB news featuring politicians acting as news presenters broke broadcasting due impartiality rules.

www.ofcom.org.uk

I wish Ofcom would then say what they will do as a result of their findings. Otherwise, GB News gets off Scott free.

 

[jfollows]

Ofcom rules that politicians broadcasting on GB News broke rules (https://www.ofcom.org.uk/news-centr...resenters-on-gb-news-broke-broadcasting-rules):

A series of Ofcom investigations today concluded that five programmes on GB news featuring politicians acting as news presenters broke broadcasting due impartiality rules.

Under the Broadcasting Code, news, in whatever form, must be presented with due impartiality. Additionally, a politician cannot be a newsreader, news interviewer or news reporter unless, exceptionally, there is editorial justification.

In line with the right to freedom of expression, broadcasters have editorial freedom to offer audiences a wide range of programme formats, including using politicians to present current affairs or other non-news programmes. Politicians may also appear in broadcast news content as an interviewee or any other type of guest.

Individual programmes can also feature a mix of news and non-news content and move between the two genres. If, however, a licensee chooses to use a politician as a presenter in a programme containing both news and current affairs content, it must take steps to ensure they do not act as a newsreader, news interviewer or news reporter in that programme.

What we found​

After careful consideration of the facts in each case – including forensic analysis of the content and detailed representations from GB News – we found that two episodes of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s State of the Nation, two episodes of Friday Morning with Esther and Phil, and one episode of Saturday Morning with Esther and Phil, broadcast during May and June 2023, failed to comply with Rules 5.1 and 5.3 of the Broadcasting Code.

All five programmes in question contained a mix of news and current affairs content. We found that host politicians acted as newsreaders, news interviewers or news reporters in sequences which clearly constituted news – including reporting breaking news events – without exceptional justification. News was, therefore, not presented with due impartiality.

Politicians have an inherently partial role in society and news content presented by them is likely to be viewed by audiences in light of that perceived bias. In our view, the use of politicians to present the news risks undermining the integrity and credibility of regulated broadcast news. We therefore considered it was necessary and proportionate to find a breach of Rules 5.1 and 5.3 in these circumstances.

We are also publishing our reasons for deciding that a sixth programme – a separate episode of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s State of the Nation – did not raise issues warranting investigation under these rules. This provides broadcasters with an example of what constitutes exceptional editorial justification as allowed by Rule 5.3. In the case of this live programme, Jacob Rees-Mogg was used as an eye-witness, in situ news reporter during an unforeseen security incident at Buckingham Palace.

These are the first breaches of Rules 5.1 and 5.3 recorded against GB News. Since opening these investigations, there has only been one further programme which has raised issues warranting investigation under these rules. We are clear, however, that GB News is put on notice that any repeated breaches of Rules 5.1 and 5.3 may result in the imposition of a statutory sanction.

I’m not convinced this means very much, rap on the knuckles and promise not to do it again …..? The last sentence above pretty much says this.

BBC reports (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68596973):

GB News said it was "deeply concerned" by the "chilling" decision.

 

[nlogax]

"Stop, or I'll shout 'stop' again". Ofcom continue to be an absolute joke.

 

[DarloRich]

I bet the billionaires funding GB News are quaking now that they are " on notice" from OFCOM. Would any other broadcaster get away so easily with some many code violations?

 

[jon0844]

BuT fReE sPeEcH!

GB News is actually going to gain more support from its limited audience, by convincing them that Ofcom is trying to take them off air. This is ideal for their victim status narrative.

 

[YorkRailFan]

We are all “funding hate”, according to a Byline Times analysis that reveals the UK Government is by far the biggest spender on GB News advertising.

Despite GB News often platforming racists and conspiracy theorists, and facing record numbers of Ofcom investigations, more than £1 million of UK taxpayer money has been spent on almost 10,500 ads since the channel launched in summer 2021.

That works out at an annual cost of around £340,000 to taxpayers, who subsidise a network owned by a Dubai hedge fund and billionaire Conservative Party donor Paul Marshall, which posted losses of £73 million in its first two years.

Excluding Sky – which bought more ads than the government but at a cheaper rate, due to it being a GB News ad sales partner – the second biggest GB News advertiser was MoneySuperMarket. The price comparison website company bought around a third of the number of commercials, although it stopped advertising on the station last July.Julian Petley
David Puttnam, the former Labour peer who was Chair of the chamber’s cross-party select committee which in 2020 recommended that political advertising should be regulated according to factual accuracy, said: “If you’re judged by who your friends are then I guess that the Government funding hate through GB ‘News’ should come as no surprise!

“As taxpayers, we seem to have reached a point at which there are no limits to political embarrassment when it comes to spending our money!”

The Crown Commercial Service (CCS) is run by the Cabinet Office and is responsible for Government ad spending. The Cabinet Office was asked last September in a Freedom of Information request how much it had paid GB News to advertise, but said it did not hold the information.

However, Byline Times’ analysis of advertising figures from Barb – an organisation which compiles audience measurement and television ratings – gives a breakdown of the type and number of GB News commercials funded by UK taxpayers, and their associated costs.

Since July 2021, the Government’s biggest outlay has been £152,000 on 1,198 adverts promoting cancer screening, £132,000 on 1,180 ads for ‘Help for Households’, and £127,000 on 802 commercials promoting teacher recruitment.

Around £146,000 has been spent trying to recruit youngsters into careers in the Navy (£48,00 on 824 adverts), the Army (£45,000 / 1,008), the Royal Marines (£36,000 / 491) and the RAF (£17,000 / 440).Josiah Mortimer
GB News, which employs as its star presenter former Brexit Party MEP Nigel Farage and is generally pro-Brexit, as is its major funder Paul Marshall, received £11,000 for running 73 adverts in June 2021 about ‘EU transition’.

In early 2022 the Government spent £5,500 appealing for GB News viewers to “pick pork medallions”.

GB News has faced criticism for spreading anti-vaxx conspiracy theories; just £433 was spent on a single Covid-19 advert, which spent one day on air in November 2021.

A Cabinet Office spokesperson said: “The Government advertises across a wide range of platforms and channels to communicate to the widest audience possible. All advertising space is independently purchased by an agency, OmniGOV, to achieve this reach, while also prioritising value for money for taxpayers.”

GB News did not respond to a request for comment.

We're All 'Funding Hate': UK Government Biggest Spender on GB News Advertising – Byline Times

Film producer and former peer David Puttnam speaks up against taxpayer support for the controversial right-wing channel

bylinetimes.com

Some very interesting analysis by the Byline Times, I'm surprised that Sky News would have so many ads on GB News. The Government isn't surprising, especially as they'll want to win back voters who have defected to Reform and watch GB News.

 

[dosxuk]

I'm surprised that Sky News would have so many ads on GB News.

It doesn't say Sky News, it says Sky - the whole group. Since Sky do all the advertising sales on the channel, advertising their own products is a cheap way of filling the slots if nobody else will take them - and I suspect you'll be seeing a lot more Sky Sports offers and Sky Bet adverts than trailers for Sky News programmes.

 

[skyhigh]

The Government isn't surprising, especially as they'll want to win back voters who have defected to Reform and watch GB News.

That is clearly nonsense. Unless you think they're banking on viewers agreeing so much with the anti-smoking campaign they'd choose to vote Conservative.

 

[MotCO]

I assume that the same adverts appear on other commercial channels - the real issue is the media giants blacking of advertising on GB News, so that the small amount spent on Government ads on GB News gives it a higher percentage of all advertising revenue.

 

[bspahh]

I assume that the same adverts appear on other commercial channels - the real issue is the media giants blacking of advertising on GB News, so that the small amount spent on Government ads on GB News gives it a higher percentage of all advertising revenue.

... or that the quality of programming on GB News is not of a high enough to attract adverts from media giants. That would matter for a commercial organisation, perhaps not one with funding from investors with deep pockets.

 

[GusB]

I assume that the same adverts appear on other commercial channels - the real issue is the media giants blacking of advertising on GB News, so that the small amount spent on Government ads on GB News gives it a higher percentage of all advertising revenue.

Those adverts do appear on other channels; the cancer screening ads appear quite frequently (see the recent discussion about the "Jack in the Box" adverts in the "Annoying adverts" thread).

The Royal Navy campaign has been going on for several years - the one that springs to mind is the "I was born in Blyth, but I was made in the Royal Navy". The young lad in the ad, if he's a real person and not an actor, would probably have fulfilled his minimum service requirements by now and, if he's still serving, has probably gained a couple of promotions by now!

I'm the last person who'd defend GBeeBees but I'd agree with your comment that the government seems to be spending more, simply because other advertisers have ditched the channel.

 

[YorkRailFan]

That is clearly nonsense. Unless you think they're banking on viewers agreeing so much with the anti-smoking campaign they'd choose to vote Conservative.

I was thinking more about pensions.

 

[jon0844]

Sky manages the advertising for GB News and has been showing some Sky related ads of late, but those are fillers.

When the ads are like that, or Government ads, chances are they're free and running because nobody else wanted to pay anything to run their own commercial ad.

Even ITV often run no real ads at night, although in some cases this is intentional as they are limited in how many ads they can run in a day, or per hour, but have some tricks to maximise ads in peak times for higher rates, leading to them not running ads at other times when it would be peanuts.

I am not sure GB News has such luxuries of picking and choosing!

 

[Howardh]

If GB news is so good, they should charge a subscription!!

 

[jon0844]

They're trying. They want a lot more for access to their website than the TV licence fee also!

Update: seems the Government have spent over £130k on advertising on GB News. Wonder if they want anything in return?

 

[Howardh]

They're trying. They want a lot more for access to their website than the TV licence fee also!

Update: seems the Government have spent over £130k on advertising on GB News. Wonder if they want anything in return?

Preaching to the converted? Ha, even those are probably drifting towards UKI....sorry, what are they called today, Reform...this beautifully splitting the right wing vote.

 

[jon0844]

One of the main backers is going so that isn't great news.

I'm now going to have to find my violin.