GB News

[tbtc]

I wonder what this means for "the right", if there's not enough of a market for a sensible right of centre channel

Those on the right like to moan about the BBC being some left wing / communist propaganda channel (etc etc), so they might have expected that there was enough of a "silent majority" of "right thinking people" using their "common sense" to sustain something like The Times as a television channel - without having to titilate the cranks and conspiracy theorists or rely on "red meat" reporting to whip up controversy and enrage people into watching/ commenting/ phoning in

LBC has managed to strike a reasonable balance between Nick Ferrari and more reasonable presenters (they had Farage on for a long time, but also O'Brien/ Mair to create some kind of variety)

There are some right of centre voices who I do enjoy listening to (Geoff Norcott is on the opposite sides to me on most debates but he's very good at setting his stall out as well as pricking the pomposity of a number of people on "my" side of arguments)

Whilst I have a strong dislike for the Daily Mail, I've got to admire the clever/ calculated/ ruthless way that they operate, always managing to keep up a veneer of respectability and always pulling their punches just short of actually crossing the line (horrible mixed metaphor, I know, but the Mail are canny at knowing just where the line is between suggesting things and actually crossing over into being offensive - they hint at things without saying the quiet part out loud)

GB News seems to be going down the Daily Express route of sensationalist reporting though, I'm sure there are some people who love that kind of Fox News permanent culture war stuff, but I'm sure that Neil had hoped that there was room for a grown up right of centre channel that had the gravitas that he feels he has, rather than something that feels like it's only a few months away from hiring Kelvin McKenzie and the News Bunny. Topless Darts anyone?

 

[Typhoon]

Topless Darts anyone?

Have a pub setting. Put it on just after 'Talking Pints'!

 

[jfollows]

Old people (not that I do - a bit of catch up TV will do), especially during the pandemic, and during the cold and wet winter months. We can't catch the bus until 9.30!

I remember when it started, I was a student at the time, so more than a couple of years ago.
The problem is that the only format that's worked is one with a couple on a sofa who simper at each other and the audience. It's dreadful and I can't watch it. Channel 4 tried a "more serious" version (Angela Rippon, was it?) for a while, but nobody watched it.
I used to be a Radio 4 listener, Brian Redhead and John Timpson, all good stuff, William Hardcastle at lunchtime. I don't think I'm especially cursed with misogynistic tendencies, but I can't stand interviewers who interrupt the person they're interviewing when I want to hear what he/she has to say. It seems to me that the female radio presenters do this all the time, but I didn't find this the case with John Humphrys, let alone the other men mentioned, and others couldn't stand him for the same reason. So I guess it's my problem.
I simply don't watch or listen to any news in the mornings now. I'll probably read The Times and The Guardian and that gives me what I need.
But breakfast TV - yuk!

From what I understand from talking to people who work at GB News Andrew Neil was unhappy with the direction of the channel as he didn't want it to become the British version of Fox News which it's essentially become. GB News also seems to be covering stories that are controversial as they bring in the viewers but at the same time it can be seen as infotainment.

I can believe this - Neil is a competent journalist and whilst he has his faults (to some people they're irredeemable ones) I think he's good at his job. He's probably a bit "to the right" so he wanted his kind of journalism to prevail, but I think GB News is going down the dog-barking route and becoming as bad as Fox. So that's not his thing, so he left. Fair enough. For me, just about the only person I might have wanted to watch won't be on much anyway any more.

 

[nlogax]

I can believe this - Neil is a competent journalist and whilst he has his faults (to some people they're irredeemable ones) I think he's good at his job. He's probably a bit "to the right" so he wanted his kind of journalism to prevail, but I think GB News is going down the dog-barking route and becoming as bad as Fox. So that's not his thing, so he left. Fair enough. For me, just about the only person I might have wanted to watch won't be on much anyway any more.

He'll be returning as a regular contributor / pundit to Farridge's show, which leaves the weird possibility for him being seen as a 'leftie' in the context of a news organisation that's leaning ever more to the right.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I wonder what this means for "the right", if there's not enough of a market for a sensible right of centre channel

I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion. GBNews pushed itself as a sensible right-of-centre channel and initially gained a significant audience on that basis. But it very quickly turned out that they were offering mainly comment and talk-show rather than news. That, as well as the awful technical standards, seems a plausible reason why their audience share quickly plummeted. For my part, that's certainly the reason why I switched off after initial enthusiasm. That tells us that there probably isn't much of a market for a sensible right-of-centre talk-show channel with terrible technical standards, but it doesn't really tell us anything about how much audience they might have retained if they had offered high-quality news from the start.

 

[thenorthern]

It's been announced this morning that News UK which is basically Rupert Murdoch's UK operations arm is launching a news TV channel next year after ditching plans earlier in the year. The market could get interesting.

 

[Dai Corner]

It's been announced this morning that News UK which is basically Rupert Murdoch's UK operations arm is launching a news TV channel next year after ditching plans earlier in the year. The market could get interesting.

I wonder if it will be Times Radio with pictures or something different, and whether Andrew Neil will be working for Murdoch (again).

 

[birchesgreen]

It's been announced this morning that News UK which is basically Rupert Murdoch's UK operations arm is launching a news TV channel next year after ditching plans earlier in the year. The market could get interesting.

Yes launched with Piers Moron. Yet more right wing drivel on TV, yay.

 

[Typhoon]

22.35 BBC1 one of the panellists on Question Time is Andrew Neil.

He hasn't taken any time to take a step away.

 

[brad465]

It's been announced this morning that News UK which is basically Rupert Murdoch's UK operations arm is launching a news TV channel next year after ditching plans earlier in the year. The market could get interesting.

Given Murdoch's age I do wonder what will happen once his time is up; he has successors in mind in his family but they don't seem to have the same calibre, and in the case of James Murdoch he's gone a different way with his father.

22.35 BBC1 one of the panellists on Question Time is Andrew Neil.

He hasn't taken any time to take a step away.

Maybe he's hoping to save face in the week he departed rather red-faced (well I say red-faced, that's what he normally looks like).

 

[the sniper]

22.35 BBC1 one of the panellists on Question Time is Andrew Neil.

He hasn't taken any time to take a step away.

Finally got the time slot he wanted...

 

[Mojo]

I wonder if it will be Times Radio with pictures or something different, and whether Andrew Neil will be working for Murdoch (again).

The press release says it’ll be called “talkTV,” so I’d expect something more in line with Talk Radio rather than Times Radio.

 

[thenorthern]

The press release says it’ll be called “talkTV,” so I’d expect something more in line with Talk Radio rather than Times Radio.

Yes it will be like talkRadio and GB News.

One thing to remember with GB News is there is strong presenter lead shows in that people tune into certain shows to specifically watch certain presenters who are on at a certain time. With the BBC News channel on the other hand people don't tune in to watch a certain newsreader they only tune in to watch the news.

Having strong presenter lead shows is very much an American thing.

 

[JamesT]

I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion. GBNews pushed itself as a sensible right-of-centre channel and initially gained a significant audience on that basis. But it very quickly turned out that they were offering mainly comment and talk-show rather than news. That, as well as the awful technical standards, seems a plausible reason why their audience share quickly plummeted. For my part, that's certainly the reason why I switched off after initial enthusiasm. That tells us that there probably isn't much of a market for a sensible right-of-centre talk-show channel with terrible technical standards, but it doesn't really tell us anything about how much audience they might have retained if they had offered high-quality news from the start.

My understanding is that Ofcom rules insist there has to be very clear separation between news (which should be impartial) and comment. So GBnews would need to have a separate studio/presenters to be able to do news bulletins in addition to their existing content. Which for a small operation presumably pushes them over the edge of viability.

 

[gg1]

He'll be returning as a regular contributor / pundit to Farridge's show, which leaves the weird possibility for him being seen as a 'leftie' in the context of a news organisation that's leaning ever more to the right.

Amusingly Andrew Neill was once called a leftie by one of Trump's zealots in an interview a few years ago.

 

[thenorthern]

My understanding is that Ofcom rules insist there has to be very clear separation between news (which should be impartial) and comment. So GBnews would need to have a separate studio/presenters to be able to do news bulletins in addition to their existing content. Which for a small operation presumably pushes them over the edge of viability.

Yes, that is why almost all radio stations have a separate newsreader to the presenter as the presenter can often show bias whereas the newsreader is not allowed to.

The news is not allowed to have a sponsor either, sports news and the weather are allowed to be sponsored though.

 

[jfollows]

The Guardian reports (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...scenes-of-andrew-neils-departure-from-gb-news) that, rather than being on holiday at the end of June, Andrew Neil was in a "legal battle" with GB News. I don't think this is all that unexpected. He was unhappy about a "botched launch over which he had limited control".

Andrew Neil's remaining contributions as a "twice-a-week pundit" will only be temporary and was part of the agreement by which he was able to leave. He spent the summer first trying to renegotiate and then trying to exit his £700,000 annual contract - sucessfully in the latter case it would now appear.

The article suggests that GB News is now turning to "prominent Brexit supporters" such as Patrick O'Flynn for future appointments, in which case the future direction of the channel seems clear.

Viewing figures "are a constant source of despair", although Nigel Farage's viewing figures aren't too bad at all.

"[some] presenters are stupid and badly informed" is one quote from a unnamed individual

I don't find any of this in the least bit surprising or unbelievable.

Behind the scenes of Andrew Neil’s departure from GB News

Sources say presenter was in legal battle with rightwing channel’s bosses over his £700,000-a-year contract

Jim Waterson

@jimwaterson

Sat 18 Sep 2021 08.00 BST

When Andrew Neil took a leave of absence from GB News a fortnight after its 13 June launch, the rightwing news channel and its star presenter spent weeks insisting he was taking a long break to “recharge [his] batteries”.

The reality, sources have told the Guardian, is that rather than merely being on holiday Neil was locked in an increasingly fierce legal battle with the channel’s bosses from mid-July, with the station in turmoil as their lead presenter attempted to renegotiate and then exit a four-year contract believed to worth about £700,000 a year.

The chief executive, Angelos Frangopoulos, was overheard at the station’s west London headquarters over the summer cursing Neil’s name and pledging to sue the presenter for millions of pounds over alleged breach of contract.

At the same time, Neil is said to have claimed his reputation had been damaged due to being involved in a botched launch over which he had limited control. The presenter ultimately agreed to walk away without any money in order to get out of the channel, it is understood.

“More and more differences emerged between myself and the other senior managers and the board of GB News,” Neil told the BBC’s Question Time on Thursday night in his first public comments on the situation. “Rather than these differences narrowing, they got wider and wider and I felt it was best that if that’s the route they wanted to take then that’s up to them, it’s their money.”

Now, with Rupert Murdoch having signed up Piers Morgan to launch a rival channel, talkTV, staff at GB News are blaming the catastrophic legal battle between Neil and Frangopoulos for distracting from efforts to save the station over the summer. Many fear their station will be swiftly outgunned by a more professional Murdoch product, which at least in part seems to have been launched to exploit GB News’s failures.

The problem for GB News presenters is they may struggle to find jobs elsewhere with similar salaries, with some paid as much as £200,000 a year.

Simon McCoy, who left the BBC to present the GB News breakfast programme, has been overheard multiple times by colleagues openly despairing at his position and mocking the low ratings for his slots co-hosting with Kirsty Gallacher.

Some GB News producers have already made enquiries to see if talkTV will hire them, while dark jokes and gallows humour about the working environment were recently made real when an overworked staff member collapsed in the office.

There is a growing expectation that some of GB News’s current presenters could face the chop, with Frangopoulos interested in putting rightwing YouTubers on air instead, staff at the station believe. A last-ditch big-budget attempt to sign up Morgan as Neil’s replacement failed in August, while Morgan was in negotiations with News UK. Former Sky News presenter Colin Brazier will fill Neil’s prime time 8pm slot.

The channel has instead increasingly turned to prominent Brexit supporters for its hires, with ex-Ukip MEP Patrick O’Flynn suggested as a possible appointment to run its news operation. He did not reply to a request for comment.

While Neil ultimately agreed to remain as a twice-a-week pundit as part of his exit package, this is a temporary measure for the next few months and was designed to limit the public relations damage caused by his departure.

The Guardian has learned Neil began using the services of an employment lawyer in mid-July, less than a month after he launched the channel as lead presenter and chairman of the board. Staff said one issue is that the station never enacted a plan to let him present his show from home studios at his bases in the south of France and New York.

Frangopoulos has now become the undisputed boss at GB News following the departure of experienced programming chief John McAndrew, pushing the channel to the right with Nigel Farage as the flagship presenter. He also retains the backing of the company’s investors, who are perceived to be involved for ideological reasons as much as for financial return. Paul Marshall, the Brexit-backing hedge fund boss whose son used to perform in Mumford & Sons, is a major investor and has told employees he will temporarily replace Neil as chairman of the company’s board.

Viewing figures, emailed around the GB News office every morning, are a constant source of despair, although Farage is performing relatively well in the evenings and the channel continues to push its online offering. However, staff morale remains low, with Frangopolous said to be increasingly bothered by leaks to the press.

“The rightwing Fox News channel [approach] isn’t working and won’t work, [some] presenters are stupid and badly informed, and it wasn’t the right strategy for the channel,” said one individual with knowledge of the channel’s workings.

GB News and Andrew Neil did not respond to a request for comment.

 

[Typhoon]

The Guardian reports (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...scenes-of-andrew-neils-departure-from-gb-news) that, rather than being on holiday at the end of June, Andrew Neil was in a "legal battle" with GB News. I don't think this is all that unexpected. He was unhappy about a "botched launch over which he had limited control".

Andrew Neil's remaining contributions as a "twice-a-week pundit" will only be temporary and was part of the agreement by which he was able to leave. He spent the summer first trying to renegotiate and then trying to exit his £700,000 annual contract - sucessfully in the latter case it would now appear.

The article suggests that GB News is now turning to "prominent Brexit supporters" such as Patrick O'Flynn for future appointments, in which case the future direction of the channel seems clear.

Viewing figures "are a constant source of despair", although Nigel Farage's viewing figures aren't too bad at all.

"[some] presenters are stupid and badly informed" is one quote from a unnamed individual

I don't find any of this in the least bit surprising or unbelievable.

Rather ironic that when I go on the GBNews website I see:

Colin Brazier: The BBC needs to learn to survive by winning and keeping customers​

 

[tbtc]

I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion. GBNews pushed itself as a sensible right-of-centre channel and initially gained a significant audience on that basis. But it very quickly turned out that they were offering mainly comment and talk-show rather than news. That, as well as the awful technical standards, seems a plausible reason why their audience share quickly plummeted. For my part, that's certainly the reason why I switched off after initial enthusiasm. That tells us that there probably isn't much of a market for a sensible right-of-centre talk-show channel with terrible technical standards, but it doesn't really tell us anything about how much audience they might have retained if they had offered high-quality news from the start.

I don't get the connection between the technical standards and the jump from "respectable mainstream right-of-centre news" to "shock-jock sensationalist Faragism" though

If Andrew Neil is to be believed, there was a market for a version of BBC News for all of these "silent majority" "common sense" people ignored by the these marxists at the BBC (in the way that a respectable publication like the Times can shift a lot of newspapers without going full Daily Express), but GB News has quickly given up on that kind of market - maybe they are leaving it for Murdoch's channel, allowing Piers Morgan to look like the sensible mainstream voice, which is just how skewed our news market has become!

Shame, as GB News could have been an interesting voice, rather than doing all the dog-whistle culture war stuff (where people with newspaper columns and book deals regularly come on television to complain about how they are big "silenced")

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don't get the connection between the technical standards and the jump from "respectable mainstream right-of-centre news" to "shock-jock sensationalist Faragism" though

I guess from that my post wasn't clear, because I wasn't making any direct connection between those two things. I was replying to a suggestion that GBNews proved there is no market for a sensible right-of-centre news channel: The point I was trying to make was we never found out whether there would have been a market for that because right from the moment of launch GBR failed on two (separate) things: Awful technical standards and - more importantly - the fact they weren't really offering news at all - they were just doing talk-show style comments on the news. As a result, anyone wanting sensible right-of-centre news would have quickly switched off (as I did).

 

[Typhoon]

I guess from that my post wasn't clear, because I wasn't making any direct connection between those two things. I was replying to a suggestion that GBNews proved there is no market for a sensible right-of-centre news channel: The point I was trying to make was we never found out whether there would have been a market for that because right from the moment of launch GBR failed on two (separate) things: Awful technical standards and - more importantly - the fact they weren't really offering news at all - they were just doing talk-show style comments on the news. As a result, anyone wanting sensible right-of-centre news would have quickly switched off (as I did).

Not just right of centre. I thought it might be an alternative where I could watch news which is more UK-centric; I think I can filter out any bias in reporting but I really want to know what is going on outside my own little corner of England. There were all these regional reporters who I have barely seen, except in a marginal way, whenever I have tuned in.

This morning I heard part of an interesting and informative interview with Lord West by two presenters (haven't got a clue who they were but they had the sense to keep their questioning to a minimum). I tuned in shortly before writing this and it was Farage and a Conservative MP (Dehenna Davison) presenting with guests (Arlene Foster and two others) and it seemed just to be opinion. Firstly the schedule doesn't give Farage as the presenter - if I had known I wouldn't have bothered. Secondly, 'Anything but a traditional politics show ...', I beg to differ. If the rest was like the bit I saw it was every bit like one, the reason I don't watch them. There was something on the screen about allowing imperial measurements. That is going to encourage me to tune in. Really?

Amusingly Andrew Neill was once called a leftie by one of Trump's zealots in an interview a few years ago.

I can understand that. Neil will challenge whoever he is interviewing, no matter how much he agrees or disagrees with the views of the interviewee. And will pick at any perceived weakness in their arguments. One reason why I like him as an interviewer, so it takes time to work out what his actual opinions are. The average Trumpist would make up their mind in twenty seconds.

 

[jfollows]

Secondly, 'Anything but a traditional politics show ...', I beg to differ. If the rest was like the bit I saw it was every bit like one, the reason I don't watch them. There was something on the screen about allowing imperial measurements. That is going to encourage me to tune in. Really?

I think you're right; this channel was sold on the basis that it was something different but it isn't. Nobody in TV-land knows how to do something different, it's all the same people and they've all been doing the same thing for years. The main difference is that GB News is the same old thing done especially incompetently.

I refuse to watch programmes named after a presenter ("The Andrew Marr Show") when the programme is still called this when the named presenter is on holiday. Whether or not I like the named presenter, this is just some kind of TV-trick the broadcasters like to play on us, along with "live" which often just means "live when it was recorded two weeks ago" etc.

They really all live in their own bubble, but it works because the people they work with (especially the politicians) also live in the same bubble.

 

[Typhoon]

I think you're right; this channel was sold on the basis that it was something different but it isn't. Nobody in TV-land knows how to do something different, it's all the same people and they've all been doing the same thing for years. The main difference is that GB News is the same old thing done especially incompetently.

I may be wrong but they seem to go out of their way to stick to the same format, no innovation (except for Farage and guest drinking a pint, I suppose). Currently they have Alastair Stewart on Carbon Dioxide, that's been around for days, there was something about it on 'Broadcasting House'(R4), which at least tries to introduce quirky elements to break up the serious. If its imperial units, why not get old shopkeepers to show kids how old fashioned scales with weights work, get them to weigh things, ask them questions about how they feel about it, about the weights; get the shopkeepers to tell stories about what it was like when most items were weighed. Maybe find shopkeepers who still use them, or the scales with the pan and the arm that swings across but you need to read the price by going down the arm. Easily use up 20 minutes and oldies who have tuned in will stay tuned simply because they remember it. Then the presenter could take over and interview some advocate who thinks its a whizzo idea to confuse people by having two systems. At least it would break up the presenters-on-sofa, presenters-at-desk, presenters-on-sofa, presenters-at-desk monotony.

Stewart is now presenting 'A summary of the top stories from Westminster this week'. So nothing original and for half way through Sunday afternoon, nothing new. The worry is that it will just become background TV, rather like ITV in the morning, where, at least you can tell one programme from another. I think I'd rather watch a repeat of 'Last of the Summer Wine' (at least I could join in with the catch phrases).

 

[brad465]

I can understand that. Neil will challenge whoever he is interviewing, no matter how much he agrees or disagrees with the views of the interviewee. And will pick at any perceived weakness in their arguments. One reason why I like him as an interviewer, so it takes time to work out what his actual opinions are. The average Trumpist would make up their mind in twenty seconds.

Yes I wouldn't be surprised if many of those applauding him now for his work setting up GB News were disgusted at his attempts to get Boris Johnson to be interviewed by him in the election campaign.

 

[Typhoon]

Yes I wouldn't be surprised if many of those applauding him now for his work setting up GB News were disgusted at his attempts to get Boris Johnson to be interviewed by him in the election campaign.

He'd have torn Johnson to shreds and both of them knew it!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I may be wrong but they seem to go out of their way to stick to the same format, no innovation (except for Farage and guest drinking a pint, I suppose).

Out of interest, do you have any idea what kinds of innovation you'd like to see (other than the interesting one-off example you give of demonstrating imperial measurements)?

 

[brad465]

He'd have torn Johnson to shreds and both of them knew it!

He kind of did in the monologue he did aimed at Johnson at the end of his interviewing of Farage (i.e. when Johnson was the only party leader left who hadn't been interviewed).

Out of interest, do you have any idea what kinds of innovation you'd like to see (other than the interesting one-off example you give of demonstrating imperial measurements)?

I know you haven't asked me this directly, but I'd quite like to see media in general getting back to what it should be doing in holding truth to power, i.e. substance, not spectacle. Unfortunately much of the mainstream media has become the latter, and also doesn't ask tough questions of the Government for fear they won't get called back and thus not get their time in the spotlight. What they should be doing is asking tough questions, and if any mainstream outlets are boycotted by the Government, all other mainstream outlets should boycott Government press conferences/briefings until the Government realises it's not getting anything popular it wants to do across. This may seem unrealistic but there was a No.10 briefing early on in this Parliament where they did pretty much do that. None of this is particularly innovative, but it will make the country and our press behaviour better in the long run.

 

[birchesgreen]

Basing GBN outside of London may have helped. They are against the metro elite apparently and same old media bubble, with their nice Paddington offices.

 

[Typhoon]

Out of interest, do you have any idea what kinds of innovation you'd like to see (other than the interesting one-off example you give of demonstrating imperial measurements)

Something that breaks up the sofa/ desk and presenter. Something practical.
Last night I heard that energy prices are expected to go up again on 1st April by about £280. Either before or after a discussion, take a set of rooms (real or mock up), have an energy expert go round making the small changes that might make some difference to the energy that the house uses. Little changes that we can all do, don't tell us, we won't take any notice, show us! Get someone who is going to complain that a lot of the gadgets are a waste of money and energy. If it is real rooms, talk to those that live there and ask them whether they will take any notice of the expert.
On a different thread (Cabinet Reshuffle?), there was a discussion about the (the late) Dorman Long Tower, get a reporter to talk to locals about it, expand it into good/ bad industrial architecture. Follow up every day for a week the best/ worst industrial architecture from each region with reporters at the site talking to locals. There are plenty of controversial experts to have around.

You won't get much better before I've had a cup of tea.

Anything to break up the groundhog day that appears to be GB news. (I've tried to see what is on now, a really uninformative weather forecast and we moved on to vaccine passports, last weeks news, and the ex-CEO of Pizza Express then Prince Andrew and some other face. Other channels are no more interesting but energy prices are more yesterday than last week).

I know practical things cost money but it is just dull at the moment (now vaccines for children with chatter from the sofa but breaking up). As @birchesgreen says basing it out of London might have helped but even going outside London on a regular basis might help, I've been watching on and off for half an hour. There has been a report from somewhere in the pouring rain (I guess New York or Washington) on Johnson's arrival in the US, that is it. GB News seems to pay scant attention to GB.

 

[birchesgreen]

Yes no one seems to want to report actual "GB news" outside of Westminster and local programme ghettos. It's easier for me to find out what might be happening in Arizona than say Aylesbury.