en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GB_News
Much as I would love to see a new broom sweep through the UK presentation of news, I suspect that this is going to be leaning towards the awful side.
|
If you need to know what it will be like, check out Sky News Australia on you tube.
You'll be horrified.
|
|
Sounds like LBC on telly :S
|
|
The comparison to Fox was enough for me.
|
|
I usually watch Sky News at 8am daily, but have decided to find alternatives from this morning. And despite the pessimism above, I will be giving GB News a fair trial.
|
|
I'll watch it and give it a chance before I'd make a decision. Like most news channels there's probably something worth watch and some not.
|
Well I watched* one of the Andrew Neil to camera pieces, read a couple of the articles on their site and watched the Sunday morning news show.
It was a bit of a mix of sky news, itv news and good morning from what I've seen and read. I liked the regional mix of stories.
There's nothing so far, that I can see, that suggests it's toxic/hate filled etc as suggested by those that want it off the air or boycotted. Although it seems there's some sort of idea to boycott those companies that boycott gb news, how successful or not I don't know.
Anyway on first viewing, I'll start to use it as a place to get a mix of news and views.
*after I'd returned the free view.
|
>> I usually watch Sky News at 8am daily,
Sky news Australia, has no relationsship in an editorial manner to UK Sky news. Check out the Aussie version on your tube.
|
>>Check out the Aussie version on your tube.
I'll give that treat a miss, but thanks anyway.
|
|
It will be worth it alone for the man that the BBC, for reasons only known to itself, cast aside - the one and only Andrew Neil.
|
>> It will be worth it alone for the man that the BBC, for reasons only
>> known to itself, cast aside - the one and only Andrew Neil.
It was rumoured that his defenestration from the BBC was a political cost of his goading Boris Johnson during the 2019 GE.
|
>> >> It will be worth it alone for the man that the BBC, for reasons
>> only
>> >> known to itself, cast aside - the one and only Andrew Neil.
Well at least I'll know where he will be so I can avoid seeing him.
|
>>Well at least I'll know where he will be so I can avoid seeing him. >>
Well not everyone has the time to work out who is the most decisive, straight to the point and effective interviewer of those who wish to rule over us....:-)
|
|
Maybe not everyone is so easily fooled......
|
"I suspect that this is going to be leaning towards the awful side."
To judge from last night, it is.
E.g. Presenter Dan Wootton claimed UK health officials were trying to "create an ultra-cautious biosecurity state like China".
Conspiracy theories, anyone?
Last edited by: James Loveless on Mon 14 Jun 21 at 07:27
|
I think it was a master class in "how not to launch a new TV channel".
Have plenty of technical mistakes - lip synch wrong, mics not working ( actually the mic not working was Neil Oliver, who along with Chris packham I would cheerfully swing for, so that was a relief).
Make sure the stuff you do put out is very boring. Shame, because normally I can watch Andrew Neil.
|
>> Conspiracy theories, anyone?
Up to a point. In a way the biggest compliment you can pay BBC News is that it is boring much of the time. The way to sex up news is basically to lie.
That said, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find there is a lobby within the NHS for tight disease control measures to keep the population safe, particularly as it would also save money in the NHS and allow it to treat all our other ailments. But the responsibility for those decisions does not rest with the NHS.
Much as I despise the government of the day, government must be the ultimate decision maker in respect of COVID policy. Undoubtedly all of the relevant technical skills and knowledge reside elsewhere but the final judgements that balance control of the disease with the lives people want to lead cannot be made by (for example) the NHS.
The priorities of the NHS, its CEO, the Chief Medical Officers et al are all around disease control and treatment, but that is not all we exist for. If I’m lucky I will have another decade or so of active life and I don’t want to spend it under control measures that limit opportunities for social interaction, travel and ’living’.
We don't need technically clever or even learned politicians. Intelligent obviously, but we need the ones with good judgement, and good hearts focused on the commonweal. Measure our elected representatives on all sides of the house on those dimensions and IMO many fall very short.
What we need re COVID is to find the right equilibrium, supported by vaccines and sensible infection control in places like hospitals and care homes, in which it is realistic for people to make their own decisions about how much they are prepared to sacrifice to dodge COVID. Thus far that equilibrium has not been easy to find, and we have oscillated between lockdown and varying degrees of freedom. That should get easier to manage as population immunity rises.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 15 Jun 21 at 02:47
|
|
All the advertisers are appalled by the editorial content and tone and are pulling out in droves
|
|
I saw it referred to elsewhere as Gammon British News.
|
The phone ins have been heavily trolled with the well known callers Mike H.... and Mike Ox.....
If you don't get it, do not google!
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Wed 16 Jun 21 at 11:28
|
>> The phone ins have been heavily trolled with the well known callers Mike H.... and
>> Mike Ox.....
Mrs B and I have both known people with the surname Hunt and forename Michael.
Oxlong, Oxshort, Oxshott et al could be an rich seam of jokes to mine.
|
Different tale according to this:
tinyurl.com/y3w2yprz
|
>> Different tale according to this:
>>
>> tinyurl.com/y3w2yprz
Just been debating this on another site with somebody I strongly suspect is our old sparring partner Iffy, though he now uses a different handle.
If the advertisers decide that a station pitched at anti Woke Gammons has an audience unlikely to be persuaded towards their flatpacks, 'cider' or skin cream then there's NO obligation to spend money with it. To suggest otherwise, ie that they should just pay up irrespective sounds like a levy. Or even a Licence Fee.
Why, in Daily Mail land are left wing groups always 'sinister'.
I also suspect the Mail would be on a different page if Tory MPs etc advocated advertisers boycotting Channel 4 News due to it's supposed pinko lefty lean.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 16 Jun 21 at 15:29
|
A conspiracy theory about how the sinister left wing and big business are ganging up against a POS News channel??
Say it ain't so!!! Or totally predictable.
[yawn]
|
From the Daily Mail (oh yes!) article referenced, the following: "...big businesses cancelling advertising on GB News after bowing to 'bullying' from 'sinister' left-wing pressure groups."
I can't find any back-up for that statement and I'm inclined to believe the good old DM is peddling good old right-wing conspiracy theories.
|
>> Different tale according to this:
>>
>> tinyurl.com/y3w2yprz
>>
No it's the same tale, just the GB news peeps whinging about it
|
Why is it that it is the Right Wing media which is always whining that everybody is mean to them?
Isn't being right wing fundamentally about being mean to everybody you don't like or accept?
|
Well, there goes any credibility that GBNews night ever have hoped to have.
"Piers Morgan attacks Ikea for pulling advertising from news channel"
www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-57483907
|
Wetherspoons TV it has been dubbed.
Saw two morons fail to use an autocue - moron 2 was repeating what moron 1 had just said.
|
|
Just switched to Octopus, I was relieved to find they'd pulled out. Not watched it yet though, I may dip in for a look
|
GB News - Zero
