This seems to be an absolute PR disaster and one entirely of their own making. Absolutely no doubt now, if their ever was, they see those who oppose anti-racism as their target audience and that they're desperate to cling on to them at any cost. I suspect more advertisers will be weighing up their relationship with GB News.
FrancisC post_id=28180 time=1626435840 user_id=1108 Wrote:Difficult to express how thoroughly enjoyable it is to watch all this :lol:
This does kind of play into the claims which were dismissed on here earlier in the week.
If guardian tv was launched and had the same issues no doubt order order etc would be on it like flies… but the point is that guardian tv and their followers claim to be different.
Can we please just admit that some people would happy to see this channel crash and burn? (Which is happening anyway)
As a “fan” of the idea of such a channel, I am disappointed and think the channel doesn’t really deserve to be running given how badly those that planned it left it in such a state from start. In the first week I had hope something more would come forward, it didn’t.
James Martin post_id=28185 time= user_id=872 Wrote:Inspector Sands post_id=28182 time= user_id=1003 Wrote:https://twitter.com/davechannel/status/1...18272?s=19
Well, it bloody would at 3am wouldn't it?
I think they're trying to say a filler programme at 3am on Dave got higher ratings than some of GB News' output during the day that has scored zero at some points, including Simon McCoy's 5pm programme.
Interesting to see they've now semi-cancelled Guto Harri, presumably later to be fully cancelled, given their supposed support of freedom of speech. I wonder if any other news readers who made their positions on cancel culture and freedom of speech clear when joining GB News will speak out in support, it would certainly be hypocritical for them not to.
The 'GBeebies' term does look increasingly accurate for the station, particularly after their bewildering tweets last night. Some seriously inexperienced people appear to be in quite senior positions of power at the moment.
James Martin post_id=28185 time= user_id=872 Wrote:Inspector Sands post_id=28182 time= user_id=1003 Wrote:https://twitter.com/davechannel/status/1...18272?s=19
Well, it bloody would at 3am wouldn't it?
"GBeebies" well that's mature....
As opposed to you, who is whining about people slagging off GB News...
I do think
a lot of the discourse around GB News has been pretty pathetic, on both sides - on one hand you have people whose views align with those of GB News, and so rush to its defence for every little thing; on the other, there are those whose views are opposite to the ethos (if you can call it that) of GBN, and so are desperate for it to fail. At the end of the day, it is just (at least ostensibly) a news channel - and not a very good one at that. I will admit that I was leery about GBN from the start, largely based on some of the people they had hired - and it seems that I was largely proven to be correct. However, I think obsessing over it like many people have is neither productive nor healthy.
I'm sure most of the people who think the GBeebies name is childish have themselves used similar terms for the media outlets they don't like.
If it is to survive, it really should be a back to basics approach and in the absence of any proper news gathering they really should go for the Talk Radio model.
A news summary every 30 mins, 1 main presenter at a desk, a couple of studio guests per hour to discuss the issues of the day, throw in a few viewer calls. Call it GB Views.
No local reporters, I don't see how they are contributing that much to this service. A really back to basics, opinion based / talk format, that is pacey and relevant with up to date news and opinions. Much better than this all day magazine style format.
AllWillBeWell post_id=28193 time= user_id=773 Wrote:FrancisC post_id=28180 time=1626435840 user_id=1108 Wrote:Difficult to express how thoroughly enjoyable it is to watch all this :lol:
This does kind of play into the claims which were dismissed on here earlier in the week.
If guardian tv was launched and had the same issues no doubt order order etc would be on it like flies… but the point is that guardian tv and their followers claim to be different.
Can we please just admit that some people would happy to see this channel crash and burn? (Which is happening anyway)
As a “fan” of the idea of such a channel, I am disappointed and think the channel doesn’t really deserve to be running given how badly those that planned it left it in such a state from start. In the first week I had hope something more would come forward, it didn’t.
I think with a lot of people (I can of course only speak for myself but that is how I feel), it is the sheer arrogance displayed by the people involved in the channel over the last few months and in the run up to the launch which means this disaster is enjoyable to watch.
If you shout from the rooftops that the BBC, Sky etc. are ignoring the silent majority, are woke and are generally unacceptable and you then fall flat on your face when your revolutionary product has arrived…. then I guess that had consequences.
AllWillBeWell post_id=28193 time= user_id=773 Wrote:FrancisC post_id=28180 time=1626435840 user_id=1108 Wrote:Difficult to express how thoroughly enjoyable it is to watch all this :lol:
This does kind of play into the claims which were dismissed on here earlier in the week.
If guardian tv was launched and had the same issues no doubt order order etc would be on it like flies… but the point is that guardian tv and their followers claim to be different.
Can we please just admit that some people would happy to see this channel crash and burn? (Which is happening anyway)
As a “fan” of the idea of such a channel, I am disappointed and think the channel doesn’t really deserve to be running given how badly those that planned it left it in such a state from start.
But is that the case? I don't the majority of people, whether on social media or not, that want to see the channel 'crash and burn', have in fact ever picked up a copy of the Guardian? And likely take issue with a lot of the paper's columnists?
The channel could have been great - it could have been excellent in fact. Providing coverage that the likes of the Guardian or Telegraph or national network BBC and ITV news don't. But that's not what's happened, is it?
It recruited a team of journalists across the country, who if given the correct resources would be able to bring news from the Midlands, North West and North East to national prominence.
Though the channel has from the start not done this at all - instead preferring to opt to go full in on so called 'culture wars' and 'anti-woke'.
There was never any real prospect of them 'giving a voice' to anyone who felt like they didn't have one - it's very apparent that GB News never actually cared for them in the first place.
I think we all know Guardian TV would be praised to high heaven and Tonight Live with Owen Jones would be carried shoulder high round here and on Twitter the way Boom Radio is on DS Radio Forum.
Anyone on Twitter who tried to get it cancelled, or called out antisemitic comments, would get the levels of hate speech certain footballers have been on the end of.
Ultimately this is simply fueling the cold civil war that's been going on for 5 or 6 years now.
Leaving politics aside (as we've been asked, repeatedly), the GB News debacle might actually help the BBC's cause because it proves that a news service needs a lot of investment in order to be watchable.
Adsales101 post_id=28200 time=1626438477 user_id=1759 Wrote:AllWillBeWell post_id=28193 time= user_id=773 Wrote:FrancisC post_id=28180 time=1626435840 user_id=1108 Wrote:Difficult to express how thoroughly enjoyable it is to watch all this :lol:
This does kind of play into the claims which were dismissed on here earlier in the week.
If guardian tv was launched and had the same issues no doubt order order etc would be on it like flies… but the point is that guardian tv and their followers claim to be different.
Can we please just admit that some people would happy to see this channel crash and burn? (Which is happening anyway)
As a “fan” of the idea of such a channel, I am disappointed and think the channel doesn’t really deserve to be running given how badly those that planned it left it in such a state from start. In the first week I had hope something more would come forward, it didn’t.
I think with a lot of people (I can of course only speak for myself but that is how I feel), it is the sheer arrogance displayed by the people involved in the channel over the last few months and in the run up to the launch which means this disaster is enjoyable to watch.
If you shout from the rooftops that the BBC, Sky etc. are ignoring the silent majority, are woke and are generally unacceptable and you then fall flat on your face when your revolutionary product has arrived…. then I guess that had consequences.
Yes I think all the talk from those setting up the channel gave the impression it was going to be a proper outfit. Even when they said it would not be rolling news, but there would be news at least.
I think the channel is just a bit rubbish, rather than its failure being linked to its objectives, it failed because it was rubbish, not because there wasn't an appetite for such a channel, done properly.
FrancisC post_id=28202 time= user_id=1108 Wrote:AllWillBeWell post_id=28193 time= user_id=773 Wrote:FrancisC post_id=28180 time=1626435840 user_id=1108 Wrote:Difficult to express how thoroughly enjoyable it is to watch all this :lol:
This does kind of play into the claims which were dismissed on here earlier in the week.
If guardian tv was launched and had the same issues no doubt order order etc would be on it like flies… but the point is that guardian tv and their followers claim to be different.
Can we please just admit that some people would happy to see this channel crash and burn? (Which is happening anyway)
As a “fan” of the idea of such a channel, I am disappointed and think the channel doesn’t really deserve to be running given how badly those that planned it left it in such a state from start.
But is that the case? I don't the majority of people, whether on social media or not, that want to see the channel 'crash and burn', have in fact ever picked up a copy of the Guardian? And likely take issue with a lot of the paper's columnists?
The channel could have been great - it could have been excellent in fact. Providing coverage that the likes of the Guardian or Telegraph or national network BBC and ITV news don't. But that's not what's happened, is it?
It recruited a team of journalists across the country, who if given the correct resources would be able to bring news from the Midlands, North West and North East to national prominence.
Though the channel has from the start not done this at all - instead preferring to opt to go full in on so called 'culture wars' and 'anti-woke'.
There was never any real prospect of them 'giving a voice' to anyone who felt like they didn't have one - it's very apparent that GB News never actually cared for them in the first place.
I was just using the Guardian as am example on the opposite end of the spectrum and what would happen if it started a channel, not to say any Guardian reader would be against GBN. Persoanlly I read the Guardian just as I read the Daily Mail, the sun, the telegraph, Daily mirror, the independent. It is better to take everyones view in and then make your own mind up.
That is what I hoped GB News would be. A kind of Sky News 2005 which was a bit more right wing. I would have always watched Sky and BBC at times, even if GBN was great. I think perhaps GB News was trying to do some kind of similar thing, but it doesn't work, especially when there is no news operation or anything else to bulk it up.
The channel was not great, it is terrible, sadly I have to say that.
Yes the staff have done the best with what they were given, it is the top that is responsible.
I actually think as I said the other day, they perhaps tried too hard not to look like Fox News UK, by stuffing in things which just mixed up the signals the channel was sending out.
I must agree that those that set up GB News I think were just trying to make a bit of money by spending cheap and making from advertising, I don't think they were sincere. Otherwise they would have poured more money in and done everything properly, this is a quarter half attempt at a news channel, not even half-hearted!
The BBC article also links to a page on their website, which is probably the closest public thing we'll get to an Editorial Guidelines style document.
https://www.gbnews.uk/our-editorial-charter
Some interesting statements in there.
AllWillBeWell post_id=28208 time= user_id=773 Wrote:FrancisC post_id=28202 time= user_id=1108 Wrote:AllWillBeWell post_id=28193 time= user_id=773 Wrote:This does kind of play into the claims which were dismissed on here earlier in the week.
If guardian tv was launched and had the same issues no doubt order order etc would be on it like flies… but the point is that guardian tv and their followers claim to be different.
Can we please just admit that some people would happy to see this channel crash and burn? (Which is happening anyway)
As a “fan” of the idea of such a channel, I am disappointed and think the channel doesn’t really deserve to be running given how badly those that planned it left it in such a state from start.
But is that the case? I don't the majority of people, whether on social media or not, that want to see the channel 'crash and burn', have in fact ever picked up a copy of the Guardian? And likely take issue with a lot of the paper's columnists?
The channel could have been great - it could have been excellent in fact. Providing coverage that the likes of the Guardian or Telegraph or national network BBC and ITV news don't. But that's not what's happened, is it?
It recruited a team of journalists across the country, who if given the correct resources would be able to bring news from the Midlands, North West and North East to national prominence.
Though the channel has from the start not done this at all - instead preferring to opt to go full in on so called 'culture wars' and 'anti-woke'.
There was never any real prospect of them 'giving a voice' to anyone who felt like they didn't have one - it's very apparent that GB News never actually cared for them in the first place.
I was just using the Guardian as am example on the opposite end of the spectrum and what would happen if it started a channel, not to say any Guardian reader would be against GBN. Persoanlly I read the Guardian just as I read the Daily Mail, the sun, the telegraph, Daily mirror, the independent. It is better to take everyones view in and then make your own mind up.
That is what I hoped GB News would be. A kind of Sky News 2005 which was a bit more right wing. I would have always watched Sky and BBC at times, even if GBN was great. I think perhaps GB News was trying to do some kind of similar thing, but it doesn't work, especially when there is no news operation or anything else to bulk it up.
The channel was not great, it is terrible, sadly I have to say that.
Yes the staff have done the best with what they were given, it is the top that is responsible.
I actually think as I said the other day, they perhaps tried too hard not to look like Fox News UK, by stuffing in things which just mixed up the signals the channel was sending out.
I must agree that those that set up GB News I think were just trying to make a bit of money by spending cheap and making from advertising, I don't think they were sincere. Otherwise they would have poured more money in and done everything properly, this is a quarter half attempt at a news channel, not even half-hearted!
I mean I will concede a lot of them are out of their depth. "Dewbs" in particular isn't cut out for this sort of gig. I'm sure she's lovely but you need a) a thick skin and b) to be at the top of your game to do a generally unscripted 2 hour current affairs show. She's neither of those.
Dan Wootton I do like but as I say he would be better on a Friday night in the post-pub slot, try and bring back the Central Weekend type format, get a bit of a row going that sort of stuff.
Kirsty Gallagher is good, faint echoes of TV-AM 1983 sexual chemistry maybe?
Losing Andrew Neil and now Alisatir Stewart won't help. Simon McCoy and Colin Brazier probably the only two real heavyweights there.
![[Image: flat,128x128,075,f-pad,128x128,f8f8f8.jpg]](https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.1742386486.6909/flat,128x128,075,f-pad,128x128,f8f8f8.jpg)