New Alternative News Channel "GB News" chaired by Andrew Neil launching - read OP before posting

suicide_circus

pjohnson wrote: »

Those crying about sponsors listening to customers and deciding not to advertise on GBNews.

Crying..lol yeah i'm weeping hysterically here.

Tacitus Kilgore

eskimohunt wrote: »

What part of the word segment don't you understand?

Do they have a pro-woke segment too then? :pac:

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Eskimo.

What does one random decision in some random university in a city hundreds of miles away with their random students Union have to do with you and yours and why are you so upset about it?

Honestly ... Why.

We were told by another poster that Wokeism was a meaningless term used to dismiss Leftists.

That's not true.

And I cited one of thousands of possible examples.

I'm not even upset about the example. I feel sorry for the students.

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

Crying..lol yeah i'm weeping hysterically here.

You're seeming pretty annoyed, Silent corner has gone as far as saying it should be made illegal to organise a boycott, would you agree that to do so would be antidemocratic?

Tacitus Kilgore

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Do they have a pro-woke segment too then? :pac:

Consult the BBC, Channel 4, or ITV for that.

I'll probably get hammered for interrupting the perpetual lovers quarrel that happens constantly on political threads like this in CA but I have been paying attention to the whole GB news saga and it's laughable how worked up you all are about this. I had a look through the last 20 or so pages of this thread over the past day after watching some GB news to see what people were thinking. The only conclusion I can draw from both is that boards is far more entertaining than GB news and about as informative too.

GB news is basically tabloid print on a TV screen, maybe with the exception of Andrew Neil who is always quality. Regardless of the political slant of a news station, the fact that some here see it as "alt/far right" is nonsense because the actual far right don't hide their views like an easter egg hunt. They are quite open about it and if GB news is far right then they are being extremely shy about it to the point of being ineffective if that's what they were going for.

On the other hand, the people on this thread posting about how this is a much needed counter balance to the liberal media dominance in the UK must have their heads in the sand or are being purposely obtuse to the reality of the British media landscape for the sake of playing the victim. I suspect the latter being the case judging by the posting history of some users. Rupert Murdoch and Lord Rothermere both have a monopoly in all but name on British media consumption. NEWS UK and The Daily Mail Group account for just under 3/4's of all newspapers sold in the UK daily. The only left wing papers sold in the UK (The Guardian and The Mirror) are owned by Reach PLC and struggle to break a fifth of the daily newspapers sold. That's before we even get into Radio and TV.

GB news is just a fresh attempt to grab the "edgy" market share of the trendy political pop culture movement. The last time this happened was with the launch of Channel 4 when Thatcher was PM. It worked well for Channel 4 only because Thatcher was essentially revered on both ITV and the BBC and their was no real "alternative" channel to capture the disenfranchised youth.

This is what GB news are trying to be. More right wing than SKY news, which isn't too hard considering how much they pivoted to the centre after the Murdoch sale. But honestly I don't see this lasting too long, atleast not with the current format. They already have a competitor with more name brand recognition and a vast amount of digital content to compete with. Watching it over the past few days it's very obvious that they aren't as different as they make themselves out to be in the marketing for the launch of the channel. There's nothing there to hang your hat on long term.

I suspect it might not be GB News in the next decade if it survives but it's own entertainment channel. Kind of like what the BBC do on weekdays. 4-6 hours of news and debate during the day and home produced tv shows during prime time with the occasional game show thrown in. Looking at the company that owns GB News they are not ideologues of political campaigning but just opportunists who follow the money. They own decent percentages of ITV Virgin Media and Lionsgate. With the way some of you are going on you would swear they were owned by the same ideologue weirdos who run OAN in the US. The second they drop below 40-50k viewers on prime slots they will shut up shop or sell the brand off for whatever they can get out of it. They are not going to hang around and lose money to "own the libs". You're all way to emotional about this. Anyways, essay over. Just thought I'd make my very rare posting in CA and decent size until the next whopper of a "triggering" happens.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Consult the BBC, Channel 4, or ITV for that.

Eh, the BBC were shown to have been fed positive stories that amounted to propaganda from Dominic Cummings so they're not half as woke as you think they are..

Tacitus Kilgore

eskimohunt wrote: »

Consult the BBC, Channel 4, or ITV for that.

So it is anti woke then?


Make up your mind...

Tacitus Kilgore

Deleted User wrote: »

Eh, the BBC were revenue to have been fed positive stories that amounted to propaganda from Dominic Cummings so they're not half as woke as you think they are..

Imagine being so far right that you think BBC news is woke/left...

silverharp

listermint wrote: »

What does Bill Maher in the US have to do with Irish people who are centre or center left ?


Genuinely ?

just an example of someone who came to mind, maybe I cant think of an Irish example, ie a progressive who has a brain

hirondelle

eskimohunt wrote: »

What part of the word segment don't you understand?

Because they are flagging it in advance to get people such as yourself frothing at the mouth about wokeism. Should I withdraw the point because they aren't advertising themselves as a "24 hour non-stop anti-woke channel"?

You are familiar with the phrase "manufactured outrage" are you not? Having a segment proves the point that their business is to elicit emotional responses, not presenting news.

Previous claims on this thread about this station providing balance against the left wing msm are so wide of the mark- it serves to reinforce a particular bias- something that CNN at it's worst is also guilty of (as an example from the "other side").

suicide_circus

Deleted User wrote: »

You're seeming pretty annoyed, Silent corner has gone as far as saying it should be made illegal to organise a boycott, would you agree that to do so would be antidemocratic?

Not annoyed, amused

MisterAnarchy

silverharp wrote: »

just an example of someone who came to mind, maybe I cant think of an Irish example, ie a progressive who has a brain

Tubridy perhaps ?:p

joe40

Silentcorner wrote: »

We all remember the narrative, we don't need concrete evidence of such....you are just asking for something that is impossible to provide, you know this, but it's your attempt to undermine the poster....when the poster provides you with an example you dismiss it.

It's a cheap shot.

If you are looking for proof of how Brexiteers were presented you need look no further than this thread....there are still people who believe that the Brits who voted to leave were either conned into it or they are racist xenophobes...

I suspect it is one of the reasons that this new channel was conceived...never before in my lifetime have the political and media class been so out of tune with ordinary people.

This is the narrative that really irks me. I'm an ordinary person. The likes of GB news or Fox news or the Sun etc do not represent me, and for definite the millionaires behind these media outlets are not the "ordinary people" whatever that is supposed to mean.

ancapailldorcha

joe40 wrote: »

Absolutely. I watched question time quite a lot during the brexit debates and there was always a wide range of opinions. Some nights There were hardly any on the panel I agreed with. (not necessarily a bad thing it was a UK programme) There was plenty of balance.

The big drivers of news and opinion in the UK over the years have been the tabloid press and the lies they have told over the years especially EU related are scandalous. Gutter journalism for the most part.

I found it quite varied in the lead up to the referendum as well. I was watching it weekly at the time. I've since stopped watching it as it doesn't interest me as much any more.

silverharp

joe40 wrote: »

This is the narrative that really irks me. I'm an ordinary person. The likes of GB news or Fox news or the Sun etc do not represent me, and for definite the millionaires behind these media outlets are not the "ordinary people" whatever that is supposed to mean.

youre not :pac:, you post on politics on an internet board, the vast majority of people dont

ancapailldorcha

silverharp wrote: »

youre not :pac:, you post on politics on an internet board, the vast majority of people dont

That's just a no true Scotsman argument.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We were told by another poster that Wokeism was a meaningless term used to dismiss Leftists.

That's not true.

And I cited one of thousands of possible examples.

I'm not even upset about the example. I feel sorry for the students.

Why , why do you feel sorry for the students though? We've plenty of students in this country that get extensions for all sorts of reasons none of which impact you or the students around them.


So why? Why this topic ? Why these students . It's meaningless culture war with zero impact on your life. The topic shouldn't even make news.

silverharp

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's just a no true Scotsman argument.

all i would say is that if ones only source of information coming into the house was RTE then that person would have a very curated view of the outside world. which is fine, it doesnt change the price of chips as such

banie01

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Eh, the BBC were shown to have been fed positive stories that amounted to propaganda from Dominic Cummings so they're not half as woke as you think they are..

Laura Kuensberg is a propaganda mouthpiece rather than a competent political reporter.
Emily Matliss who is a very competent reporter, was given a night off for stating the blatantly obvious regarding Cummings and Barnard Castle...

The BBC is very much not the friend of the lefties that some here think it is.

Quin_Dub

Sudden Valley wrote: »

I do recall that a few right wing talking heads in the US try every once in a while to organise boycotts of what they claim are woke movies/tv shows. I think they attribute the poor performance of the star wars Solo movie to rhis. I think boycotts happen on both sides of the politicial spectrum.

There was also the one where they all posted Video clips of them smashing their own Keurig Coffee machines after Kuerig had pulled it's advertising from Carlson shortly before he went on one of his famous "Long planned holidays that we never mentioned until his said something awful".

Yeah.. buying a coffee machine and then smashing it to show your anger with the company that already have your money - Awesome boycott there..

Butson

Excellent interview here. 30 mins long, no badgering, letting the guest answer. Sunak is impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yk7PY07BNg

It this right wing content? Whatever right wing means in 2021.

listermint

silverharp wrote: »

all i would say is that if ones only source of information coming into the house was RTE then that person would have a very curated view of the outside world. which is fine, it doesnt change the price of chips as such

You might be talking about 1 percent of the population.

Also the same can be said for quite literally consumption of any material though.....

listermint

Butson wrote: »

Excellent interview here. 30 mins long, no badgering, letting the guest answer. Sunak is impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yk7PY07BNg

It this right wing content? Whatever right wing means in 2021.

No it maybe called free advertising though.

ancapailldorcha

silverharp wrote: »

all i would say is that if ones only source of information coming into the house was RTE then that person would have a very curated view of the outside world. which is fine, it doesnt change the price of chips as such

Given the usual whining about RTE I see here, it seems they're doing alright. I can't watch it here so I ultimately don't know but this is the last place in the world I'd expect a balanced opinion on it.

joe40

joe40 wrote: »

This is the narrative that really irks me. I'm an ordinary person. The likes of GB news or Fox news or the Sun etc do not represent me, and for definite the millionaires behind these media outlets are not the "ordinary people" whatever that is supposed to mean.

As an ordinary person do you have any issues with having to pay taxes to pay off the billions of debt taken on by the Irish Government in order to pay off the bondholders, under big pressure from the Troika boys.

Irish people should be the most anti-EU people of all after what happened over those years. The bail-out that was foisted on us in 2010 that we never requested. The propping up of corporate bondholders. I wonder how much of our attitudes towards the EU are shaped by the UK. As in, whatever they do, we must do the opposite because we are not like them and don't want to be compared to them.

Butson

listermint wrote: »

No it maybe called free advertising though.

Free advertising for who?

This is literally a thread about GB news. I posted a youtube link to GB news.

Tacitus Kilgore

Deleted User wrote: »

As an ordinary person do you have any issues with having to pay taxes to pay off the billions of debt taken on by the Irish Government in order to pay off the bondholders, under big pressure from the Troika boys.

Irish people should be the most anti-EU people of all after what happened over those years. The bail-out that was foisted on us in 2010 that we never requested. The propping up of corporate bondholders. I wonder how much of our attitudes towards the EU are shaped by the UK. As in, whatever they do, we must do the opposite because we are not like them and don't want to be compared to them.

Ya know a lot of that bondholder money was to and for the UK yeah? The only ones who wouldn't discount, or let it be paid off early. The only one's who have tried to destabilise the north over the past 5 years.

I think most normal thinking people know where our bread is buttered, and I don't include Herman Kelly & Gemma O'd in that category.

Muahahaha

I see the Brexit cheerleading has begun in earnest already. Andrew Neil is disingenuously misleading his viewers into thinking that a UK Australia trade deal is already done- it is nothing of the sort and all they are at is the memorandum of understanding stage. Yet he is declaring victory and everything is sunny despite this trade deal being worth a palty 0.02% of GDP. He also manages to throw the legitimate concerns of farmers competing with cheap hormone fed Australian beef, sure what do they matter when Brits can get cheaper Australian wine :rolleyes:

https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1404886429864398848

Quin_Dub

listermint wrote: »

The NFL would never have been boycott. That's hilarious.


It's all about the numbers. If you can't get support then your so called boycott fails.

suicide_circus wrote: »

So...might is right?

A bit simplistic , but essentially yes.

Nobody that makes more money than they lose for their employer is ever going to be cancelled.

The process goes something like this :-

• Somebody says/does something controversial
• People complain about it
• Complaints build momentum
• Employer does the maths on if the noise from the Controversy is a net negative impact to their business - a combination of the financial and reputational impact.
• If it's a Net negative , then the "somebody" is made to apologise , row back and maybe even leave.
• If it's not , they keep their job and the company publicly supports them

That's it , nothing more nothing less and that's how it's always been.