GB News - Printable Version

+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: GB News (/showthread.php?tid=29)

---

RE: GB News - chinamug - 14-03-2023

(13-03-2023, 11:10 PM)matthieu1221 Wrote:  

(13-03-2023, 10:25 PM)JMT1985 Wrote:  Wow, I just decided to pop back to GB News and Talk TV tonight to watch 5 to 10 minutes each from 9pm. GB News was appalling and Talk TV was actually fairly decent.

GB News had Dan Wootton back from his holiday, and he got into a slanging match with Benjamin Butterworth about the Lineker story, and of course being GB News, totally unbalanced, as there was Carol Malone and another right winger either side of Benjamin, both agreeing with Dan, as they shouted down Benjamin when he tried to make a point, with Dan entering into a rant how the BBC should be de funded.

Talk TV actually looked sane. The Talk show, with the four panel members talked without shouting over each other. They covered the Lineker story, but in a much balanced way. I never ever thought I would say that a Murdoch owned station would have a show which was balanced.

One rates well, one doesn't.

Problem is, people don't equate TalkTV with balanced. And then again, even if they did, would they even switch away from whatever they are watching now?

GB News has tapped into a very FOX News-esque viewerbase. Why change anything if it's rather successful? For every viewer they gain by being a little more balanced, they might lose a viewer who likes it as it currently is. There's 0 incentive for them to be a little more balanced.

Neither rate well in real terms. IF GBNews was a real commercial broadcaster it would have closed ages ago with practically no viewers and ads selling for about 15 pounds a time (and I'm probably being generous there) The same of course could be said for Talk TV but as they have a bigger organisation behind them there might be some reason for the station to stay on the air.

---

RE: GB News - London Lite - 14-03-2023

(14-03-2023, 12:42 AM)chinamug Wrote:  Neither rate well in real terms. IF GBNews was a real commercial broadcaster it would have closed ages ago with practically no viewers and ads selling for about 15 pounds a time (and I'm probably being generous there) The same of course could be said for Talk TV but as they have a bigger organisation behind them there might be some reason for the station to stay on the air.

The main difference between the two channels is that GBN is ideologically driven and TalkTV is about being revenue earning for News UK.

---

RE: GB News - chinamug - 14-03-2023

(14-03-2023, 12:52 AM)London Lite Wrote:  

(14-03-2023, 12:42 AM)chinamug Wrote:  Neither rate well in real terms. IF GBNews was a real commercial broadcaster it would have closed ages ago with practically no viewers and ads selling for about 15 pounds a time (and I'm probably being generous there) The same of course could be said for Talk TV but as they have a bigger organisation behind them there might be some reason for the station to stay on the air.

The main difference between the two channels is that GBN is ideologically driven and TalkTV is about being revenue earning for News UK.

I agree with you about GBN but I don't know if TalkTV is even supposed to be revenue-earning. They've often run loss leaders in various areas of the Media for years if needs be. It could also just be a spoiler tactic until GB News owners get tired of their toy. Surely they have to show results when throwing away 30 million a year. I could understand people with a certain viewpoint losing that much money if results were achieved but it's had no real impact as such and it's viewership (for the amount of homes that can receive it) is downright embarrassing.

If you wanted to influence a nation or drive a national conversation in a different direction you could do a lot better and more with 30 million.

---

RE: GB News - Stockland Hillman - 14-03-2023

(13-03-2023, 11:40 PM)Kojak Wrote:  

(13-03-2023, 11:21 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:   This separation that some people have that there's a fox news esque viewer base that is somehow different to the rest of society is nonsense. 

It does exist, though. It is much, much smaller than some people (even on here) seem to think - but it does exist. You only have to look at the people on Twitter with #GBNews and #BackBoris in their names to see that. And certain parts of Reddit, too. But that's all I'll say politics-wise.

(13-03-2023, 11:21 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  You only need to look at the morons and extremists targeting Fiona Bruce for doing her job as instructed by producers and required by fairness provisions of the Broadcast Code and BBC equivalent,  to understand that Left and right have a base of unhinged people who only tolerate views and expression through there lens

You are correct about there being a subset of people on both the left and the right who seek out echo chambers and reinforcement of their views - goodness knows, I have seen plenty of it on both sides. But I can understand the stick Fiona Bruce is getting this week (NOT the abuse, obviously!). It's pretty poor of her to essentially excuse Stanley Johnson's domestic abuse by saying "well, he only did it once!" I know she needs to be balanced, but she's not going about it in anywhere near the right way by saying things like that.

You can understand the stick Fiona Bruce is getting? You're kidding right?

This is exactly what I'm talking about, its so insidious people don't realise what's happened. Please please don't follow that route in your life, you seem like a sound person.

NO she didn't "stick up" for anyone as social media morons and extremists have told you.  She READ OUT a pre agreed part of a script producers INSTRUCTED her to read if the topic came up (would have been part of pre show discussion with panel and production, so would have a idea where it may go)

That's a LEGAL requirement to obay the fairness provisions of Broadcast codes that make up Ofcom and BBC service licences. Where a person/topic isn't there to defend themselves or put a view.  It's not about defamation (as some smart ass twiter people point out isn't a factor) it's the applicable codes. 

Nothing 'poor' not 'excusing ' anyone. Fiona was no more intellectually or  emotionally engaged with those words than a train station announcer. 

Not my opinion, not a debate,  those are the actual facts anyone who's ever been involved with live radio or TV would know as indisputable. It's the live/as live version of content warnings, apologies for language or flashing images

Hopefully you can see how these social media extremist have twisted a basic requirement of TV production to  target an individual who they felt deviated slightly from words they find acceptable.  It's crazy, it's designed to play on feelings about a subject and the use that emotional response as a weapon.

On a micro level, you read the Bruce comments and thought what you've been told she did, she actually did. You've been groomed, successfully it seems as you repeated the lie as fact (unknowingly)

Now even though it has faults, GB News is targeted the same way.

---

RE: GB News - London Lite - 14-03-2023

Since when did so called "social media extremist conversion" become part of a debate about the editorial output of GBN and Question Time? It's something you'd see on erm.... GB News!

Stockland reminds me of a poster on Digital Spy who won't see any fault with another media organisation even when it's abundantly clear that GBN has their issues. The same for the BBC in recent days.

---

RE: GB News - Stockland Hillman - 14-03-2023

(14-03-2023, 01:59 AM)London Lite Wrote:  Since when did so called "social media extremist conversion" become part of a debate about the editorial output of GBN and Question Time?  It's something you'd see on erm.... GB News!

Stockland reminds me of a poster on Digital Spy who won't see any fault with another media organisation even when it's abundantly clear that GBN has their issues.  The same for the BBC in recent days.

What did I write that was untrue?  And its relevant in the context of the discussion.

It's legitimate to talk about reactions to media content, and educate people on actual facts; highlighting risks and how manipulation works in the environment broadcasters operate in nowadays.

And even in your two paragraphs, you say something demonstrably untrue - just in today's post in this thread I was explicit in the finding fault with GB News debate on Drag show issue.   

Please stick to the truth. PS don't post.on DS, and don't personally target me again.

---

RE: GB News - Kojak - 14-03-2023

(14-03-2023, 01:12 AM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  You can understand the stick Fiona Bruce is getting? You're kidding right?

This is exactly what I'm talking about, its so insidious people don't realise what's happened. Please please don't follow that route in your life, you seem like a sound person.

NO she didn't "stick up" for anyone as social media morons and extremists have told you.  She READ OUT a pre agreed part of a script producers INSTRUCTED her to read if the topic came up (would have been part of pre show discussion with panel and production, so would have a idea where it may go)

That's a LEGAL requirement to obay the fairness provisions of Broadcast codes that make up Ofcom and BBC service licences. Where a person/topic isn't there to defend themselves or put a view.  It's not about defamation (as some smart ass twiter people point out isn't a factor) it's the applicable codes. 

Nothing 'poor' not 'excusing ' anyone. Fiona was no more intellectually or  emotionally engaged with those words than a train station announcer. 

Not my opinion, not a debate,  those are the actual facts anyone who's ever been involved with live radio or TV would know as indisputable. It's the live/as live version of content warnings, apologies for language  or flashing images

Hopefully you can see how these social media extremist have twisted a basic requirement of TV production to  target an individual who they felt deviated slightly from words they find acceptable.  It's crazy, it's designed to play on feelings about a subject and the use that emotional response as a weapon.

On a micro level, you read the Bruce comments and thought what you've been told she did, she actually did. You've been groomed, successfully it seems as you repeated the lie as fact (unknowingly)

Now even though it has faults, GB News is targeted the same way.

You were right. Mea culpa. I hadn't actually watched the clip - just read the comments. As it turns out it is indeed much less insidious than certain people on twitter would have you believe. I still think the statement maybe could have been worded better, but that's all academic now.

There are also untrue stories going round Twitter like wildfire about Fiona's husband (Nigel Sharrocks) running a company (Carat Global) that did advertisements for the Conservative government, and an executive of Carat's parent company made donations to Michael Gove's constituency. It is true that Mr Sharrocks was a director of Carat Global, but he resigned in 2012 - so hardly relevant to today's situation. You're right - there is a lot of tin-foil hat nonsense going around, all based on emotions rather than any sort of verifiable facts (as shown by my 'expert' debunking! - I am just a guy on the Internet, so if I can do it then there is no excuse for anyone else).

---

RE: GB News - bilky asko - 14-03-2023

(13-03-2023, 09:35 PM)Jon Wrote:  

(13-03-2023, 07:49 PM)London Lite Wrote:  It's the most accepting place in the country for LGBTQ and there will be a significant part of the population offended by what is considered a right-wing opinion channel once again being rude about people who don't share GBN's cisgender binary opinion of people.

Yes, I agree with that. That’s why Brighton was used in the bad joke. There will still be plenty of people who are less liberally minded on such matters there though.

As I say I think it was intended to be joke about virtue signalling which was bad and misunderstanding what the concept of virtue signalling is. Making it unintentionally come over as homophobic.

I think the unintentional part was the slipping of the mask...

---

RE: GB News - Jon - 14-03-2023

One thing that will be interesting is, assuming they get complaints if Ofcom are interested in rebuking GB News for this. I seem to remember Nigel Farage making comments about a bisexual superman. Why Farage was bothered about something from the arts not aimed at him, I’ve no idea. It wasn’t even the Clark Kent superman character either. But I don’t think there was any comeback from that. It’s almost like there is a reluctance for Ofcom to intervene when it comes to GB News. Even the recent time they were found in breach of rules Ofcom’s statement felt like a massive defence of GB News wider output and also to appease those who want no regulation.

“This is the first breach of our broadcasting rules recorded against GB News since it launched in June 2021. Complaints received about the channel to date total 3,432, representing 3% of all broadcast complaints made to us during this period. Of these 1,665 related to the Covid-19 pandemic.”

---

RE: GB News - Stockland Hillman - 14-03-2023

(14-03-2023, 02:25 PM)Jon Wrote:  One thing that will be interesting is, assuming they get complaints if Ofcom are interested in rebuking GB News for this. I seem to remember Nigel Farage making comments about a bisexual superman. Why Farage was bothered about something from the arts not aimed at him, I’ve no idea. It wasn’t even the Clark Kent superman character either.  But I don’t think there was any comeback from that. It’s almost like there is a reluctance for Ofcom to intervene when it comes to GB News. Even the recent time they were found in breach of rules Ofcom’s statement felt like a massive defence of GB News wider output and also to appease those who want no regulation.

“This is the first breach of our broadcasting rules recorded against GB News since it launched in June 2021. Complaints received about the channel to date total 3,432, representing 3% of all broadcast complaints made to us during this period. Of these 1,665 related to the Covid-19 pandemic.”

 Ofcom regulation is a quasi judicial process.  It's based on defined and published rules,  and published guidelines on how those rules apply; and how competing interests are judged

It's not an emotional process with things like 'being interested in' doing something  or 'reluctance' or 'defence' its a fairly straightforward flow chart of tests to see what requires intervention , then more tests against higher level laws such as the european human rights act.

Ofom have to consider - at all times- the highest legal test that applies to it:

Article 11 - Freedom of expression and information
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.

The bar to interface in a broadcast is very high.

So the question: does a 'joke' about being at home with pride flags and wokery in Brighton meet a serious harm or offence test, then apply the freedom of expression test after that decision,  and balance a low level regulatory code (that's not explicitly been passed in parliament, only the requirement to have a code was) with highest leval legal requirement on freedom of expression.

Ita not favoritism,  political favour or anything else. It's simply the law (that was written and agreed by a Labour government)

---