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

Most don't even know what "woke" is, I agree.

• But they know what women's rights are.
• They know what Brexit is.
• They definitely understand the effects of mass immigration.
• They know what political correctness is.

Whilst the slightly academic and middle class term, "woke", is not fully understood - the sub-topics that it covers or relates to is very much understood by the ordinary worker on the street.

But when you lump all the statistics from YouGov together, only a weak 12% fully identify with the extremist verb, "to be woke".

I've explained this before.

12% of the UK population self-identify as "woke".

But the majority of the population knows exactly where they stand re: mass immigration, law and order, PC culture, women's rights etc.

The term "woke" is only useful for those who understand it.

What matters is the broad range of topics that ordinary working people understand (see list above) - in language and terms they do use.

So yes, the market is enormous. If you feel that GB News should have higher viewing figures, then that's a question of the quality of GB News programming and not the existence of the market itself.

The guest name has not yet been released, but judging from his latest tweets, we can expect that the migrant crisis across the English Channel will feature heavily tonight, along with the COP26 summit.

Again, not a racist - the economist, Vicky Pryce will be appearing on Talking Pints.

Do criminals deserve to be penalised twice - once in jail, and second, for the rest of their life?

Gino D'Acampo, the ITV chef, was once a burglar who served time. He's now one of the favourite celebrities in the United Kingdom.

Her past shouldn't be forgotten, but let's not get too haughty about how we treat certain people when they leave the confines of prison.

Pryce and the Liberal Democrat MEP husband were wrong, but this isn't mass murder we're talking about.

I just don't consider them "horrible people", that's why.

Come on, all of us can bring up the same names - Hitler, Stalin etc.

One of the things I've noticed re: Left versus Right; is that adherents to the Right see people as complex and multifaceted, with many different layers - some good points and some bad points. In the whole, a robust assessment that doesn't hinge on any one factor.

Whereas with creatures of the Left, it comes down to the almost kneejerk demand to find the tiniest, microscopic misdemeanour or quasi-controversial statement, and BANG! - that's it, we've found the gold dust; now eliminate that "person" from the annals of history (known in 2021 as "cancelling").

In the round, I see these guests at GB News as complex and often flawed - as most people are. You and others seem desperate to find the flaws, to assume the worst possible motive, then to attach one of the famous -ism or -phobia labels, and then to conclude by banishing these political opponents as pariahs that do not deserve an iota of attention.

That issue was discussed 150 pages ago or so, it serves no purpose to resurrect the dispute here.

I've made the point that guests on GB News should not be cancelled for making a politically incorrect statement, quasi-controversial statement, or who may have had a flawed past but who have done their best to make things up in the meantime.

You appear to see these guests as permanently evil, unworthy of existence.

That's the difference; and I've outlined the explanation for that in my previous post.

Channel 4?

CNN?