GB news

[Stive Pesley]

3 minutes ago, Archied said:

Not sure whether you mean undivided society is achieved by only allowing and or viewing one official source? BBC? 

Why does society have to be defined its sources of news?

I remember 35 years ago being sat in a classroom with a teacher showing us different newspapers reporting the same story with their own elements of bias. So it's nothing new, and it will never go away - but it (the media) didn't divide society back then like it does now. You just knew that the tabloids were sensationalist, The Telegraph was Tory and The Guardian was Labour - and you just go on with your life

There are people now - friends of mine - who just spend their life online getting whipped into a frenzy of hatred for what they perceive of as the "other side". I really worry about them

[Stive Pesley]

9 minutes ago, maxjam said:

 ultimately imo good arguments will rise to the top and the rest will fall by the wayside. 

That's pie in the sky though - those who have the power/funds will use the media to manipulate whatever they want to rise to the top

GB News launch has been bankrolled by hedge funds, investment groups and the $30 billion US Discovery media company

Are you really naive enough to think that they are all just interested in "free speech" or "the other side of the argument"?

You can't slate the BBC, or Sky or Tech companies for pushing an agenda whilst supporting GB News - that's not how it works. They are 2 sides of the same shitty coin

[maxjam]

3 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

GB News launch has been bankrolled by hedge funds, investment groups and the $30 billion US Discovery media company

I think if they can make money from it they won't care whether its free speech making them the money or whatever.

4 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Are you really naive enough to think that they are all just interested in "free speech" or "the other side of the argument"?

You can't slate the BBC, or Sky or Tech companies for pushing an agenda whilst supporting GB News - that's not how it works. They are 2 sides of the same shitty coin

Not naive no, but willing to give them the chance to see if they do offer balanced debate and allow people to argue uncomfortable opinions without immediately castigating them.  Time will tell if they pull it off or become the UK equivalent of Fox News. 

I'm not going to prejudge them however or sit making lists of advertisers I now ahve to boycott. 

[Ambitious]

I obviously won't be watching as it's against everything I believe in, but can understand why this has been created. 

There will be a lot of people behind the scenes making a lot of money out of this and it's easy to pander to a group of people who believe the rest of the media is against them. It's easy to make content as you just end up arguing against every other news outlet. 

I thought rolling out the guy that pestered Caroline Flack in the press, enough that it actually led to her suicide wasn't a good look. I say that, but I suppose that's the type of opinions they're going for - it's controversial and makes for soundbites. 

[uttoxram75]

GB news main backers are Sir Paul Marshall, a hedge fund manager with a personal net worth of £630m and Christopher Chandler a New Zealander who heads a multi-billion dollar investment fund and has a net worth of $1.7b.

Its a fair bet that it will not be a particularly anti-establishment organisation.

[Stive Pesley]

10 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Time will tell if they pull it off

My prediction: They will not pull it off

I don't know what you're seeing that makes you think they have any interest in "balanced debate". Look at the list of presenters. It's being set up to manufacture outrage from the off. You make it sound like they really do have some altruistic agenda to make the country a better place ?

Interesting that they chose the name "GB" News too - that's immediately divisive to the people of Northern Ireland - plus will be interesting to see what stance they take over Scottish independence

[Archied]

7 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

My prediction: They will not pull it off

I don't know what you're seeing that makes you think they have any interest in "balanced debate". Look at the list of presenters. It's being set up to manufacture outrage from the off. You make it sound like they really do have some altruistic agenda to make the country a better place ?

Interesting that they chose the name "GB" News too - that's immediately divisive to the people of Northern Ireland - plus will be interesting to see what stance they take over Scottish independence

Don’t know what your seeing that makes you think they won’t , anymore so than beeb or others ,, if it turns out that it’s value is giving a platform to the views the mainstream won’t allow, debate then that in itself provides a better balance on what people can access? Or should people stick to doctor Hillary jones banging on about keeping this lockdown stuff going and going whilst his bank balance is growing at a rate not dreamt of pre covid ,,, ???‍♂️?

[maxjam]

17 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

My prediction: They will not pull it off

I don't know what you're seeing that makes you think they have any interest in "balanced debate". Look at the list of presenters. It's being set up to manufacture outrage from the off. You make it sound like they really do have some altruistic agenda to make the country a better place ?

 

Personally I think there are a lot (and I mean a lot!) of people in this country who feel as though they don't have a voice and are being fed a constant diet of things they may or may not agree with. 

As mentioned in previous posts, if GB News can remain impartial and give airtime to the sides of the argument that the BBC and Sky ignore they potentially have a very large audience - that unlike the twitter narrative of being 'hard right' could more likely be the center left working class voter that feel abandoned by Labour. 

Not so much altruistic, more spotting an untapped market.

[Stive Pesley]

45 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Personally I think there are a lot (and I mean a lot!) of people in this country who feel as though they don't have a voice and are being fed a constant diet of things they may or may not agree with

It's more than a lot - it's everybody. I'm supposedly a "woke leftie" - You don't think I feel like I don't have a voice and I'm having to battle my way through a constant stream of stuff in the media I don't agree with?

No matter what your personal politics are - you're in that boat

I don't know why you can't just be honest and say that the reason you like the idea of GB News is because it's going to annoy the people you really can't stand. That's a perfectly valid reason - just be honest about it

 

49 minutes ago, maxjam said:

As mentioned in previous posts, if GB News can remain impartial and give airtime to the sides of the argument that the BBC and Sky ignore

It's like you've never watched Question Time

 

[maxjam]

Just now, Stive Pesley said:

I don't know why you can't just be honest and say that the reason you like the idea of GB News is because it's going to annoy the people you really can't stand. That's a perfectly valid reason - just be honest about it

I'll be honest and say it will be nice to discuss - or at least see a discussion about things that are either ignored by Sky and the BBC or rammed ad nauseam down your throat by them.  

If that annoys people that only watch GB News to make lists of advertisers they need to boycott or demand you get cancelled for having a different opinion to them, then thats just a happy consequence ?

 

6 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

It's like you've never watched Question Time

https://iea.org.uk/media/iea-analysis-shows-systemic-bias-against-leave-supporters-on-flagship-bbc-political-programmes/

 

To be fair I watch a lot less political commentary/news than my posts suggest.  I used to be one of the apolitical masses only really becoming interested in current affairs as a result of encroaching censorship and bias.  I would happily never get involved in any political debate again if I felt that free speech was being upheld. 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

Saw a clip of Neil's opening speech. He said they wouldn't be wasting time on trivial matters such as what 'spoilt, entitled' (or something along those lines) uni students choose to hang on their walls.

Give it a few weeks and I'll bet all that phoney culture war stuff is what they'll be spending most of their time on.

[Leeds Ram]

Andrew Neil is the best political interviewer in the country by a mile so in theory it should be a good alternative for news. The bbc did over a long period of time sideline him; they took him off daily politics, cancelled his extremely popular 'this week' show that drew in over a million viewers a week despite being on at 11.30pm and replaced it with a single banal interviewing show per week. It was extremely stupid of them and it's hard to find a reason beyond they didn't much care for the bloke. 

I watched a few of the opening segments and was quite disappointed it wasn't closer to what spectator tv are currently offering. There is definitely a space available for non-traditional media news that offers more of a balance and tackles different subjects but am not sure this will work unless they switch it up. I imagine Neil will be hard at work tightening the content up quickly and making it stronger and ultimately more appealing. 

[Rev]

For those struggling to picture Andrew Neil, here's a photographic reminder.

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

15 minutes ago, Rev said:

For those struggling to picture Andrew Neil, here's a photographic reminder.

Is that his mum?

[ariotofmyown]

26 minutes ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

Is that his mum?

Think she works in Prezzo.

[AndyinLiverpool]

53 minutes ago, Rev said:

For those struggling to picture Andrew Neil, here's a photographic reminder.

Is that Pamela Bordes? Or a completely different escort?

[Van der MoodHoover]

8 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Saw a clip of Neil's opening speech. He said they wouldn't be wasting time on trivial matters such as what 'spoilt, entitled' (or something along those lines) uni students choose to hang on their walls.

Give it a few weeks and I'll bet all that phoney culture war stuff is what they'll be spending most of their time on.

Well I only had 2 posters on my wall. A soft focus Debbie Harry and that tennis player scratching her bum. 

So I suppose on that score old "Brillo Pad"  Neill has a point. 

He's really a ghastly old turd most of the time tho. 

[uttoxram75]

1 hour ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

A soft focus Debbie Harry and that tennis player scratching her bum. 

Gentlemen of a certain age should retire to a point of rest at this point.......?

[i-Ram]

12 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

There are people now - friends of mine - who just spend their life online getting whipped into a frenzy of hatred for what they perceive of as the "other side". I really worry about them

Me too. I pray that they have other friends.

[Carl Sagan]

Some ad hominem stuff on here. Currently all the UK broadcast news media speaks with a single voice. It's relentlessly negative and it also hectors a lot of people, telling them what they should think rather than reporting news.

The GB News stuff I've seen so far looks different and that has to be a good thing. There are lots of voices from left and right, and they debate but it's civil. In some ways like The Pledge on Sky News. 

Andrew Neil launched Sky News and is genuinely regarded as the most impressive political interviewer the BBC had for many years. People like Alastair Stewart are traditional, proper news people. The ratings for the first night were far in excess of either BBC News or Sky News which was a very impressive debut, despite the obvious technical difficulties. But those technical issues are easily fixed. I sometimes get asked onto Russia Today to do interviews, but might well try pitching myself as a space/future expert for GB News!