You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
£30 million loss in year 1 of operating.
That made me smile.
Losing money, tiny audience, presenters who are mainly money grabbing has beens.
Arf Arf.
"Go woke, go broke," as GB News are so fond of saying...
Does Piers Morgan still work there? If so, for how much longer?
Good to see he’s maintaining his glorious losing streak.
I have no witty rhymes to offer when it comes to GB News, but I look forward to its demise. Every time I hear of someone new signing on, I hope that the channel goes under and they can't find any further employment.
I can't believe we have come to the moment where the liberal consensus is being wrecked by such barbarians.
although average daily viewing is only 41 seconds.
🤣🤣
I’ve heard it said that GBnews isn’t in business to make a profit. It’s backers are happy for it to be spreading their message on TV and through clips on social media.
Theres another - Talk.TV. affiliated to the daily mail, and probably the same reasons apply. Out to push their right wing hate messages in particulate refugees.
Im sure the nazi party would have had the same thing if this was their time.
CZ - morgan is with Talk TV.
ac282 - if they don't turn a profit in years 2 and/or 3 they'll be finished.
I’ve heard it said that
GBnews[insert newspaper here] isn’t in business to make a profit. It’s backers are happy for it to be spreading their message.
Ftfy
£30 million loss in year 1 of operating.
That made me smile.
The backers will not be bothered, disruption is their aim and the owners Legatum will treat it as a business tax loss.
I have no witty rhymes to offer when it comes to GB News, but I look forward to its demise. Every time I hear of someone new signing on, I hope that the channel goes under and they can’t find any further employment.
It's not good for the CV... "worked for a dodgy company as I'm a money grabbing grifter, but alas, the grift is done and now I need to make myself someone elses problem"...employ me?
I can’t believe we have come to the moment where the liberal consensus is being wrecked by such barbarians.
I'm not sure it is... see also Fox news in the USA...it's only relevant if you belive it is!
I can’t believe we have come to the moment where the liberal consensus is being wrecked by such barbarians.
I’m not sure it is… see also Fox news in the USA…it’s only relevant if you belive it is!
Alas, the ex mother in law has it on constantly in her kitchen as she's a vapid relic and honestly believes "those" migrants are stealing her NHS. My 4 young daughters will spend time in that kitchen this year and there's nothing I can do about it.
Theres another – Talk.TV. affiliated to the daily mail
Nope its part of News UK eg the sun and times.
Hence why Oakeshott gave hancocks messages to the telegraph there were some eyebrows since she is a presenter on talk tv. Several of the new uks newspaper people were apparently a tad miffed.
Could be sad if it goes under as it forms a corral for radical right wing nutters and exposes some I thought were normal such as Neil Oliver.
I watched it for 10 minutes once and then hid it on my EPG.
My 4 young daughters will spend time in that kitchen this year and there’s nothing I can do about it.
Teach them critical thinking and how to weigh up facts V's opinion.
My 4 young daughters will spend time in that kitchen this year and there’s nothing I can do about it.
Send them over with brown baby dolls. Nan's head will implode.
It’s easy to see the demographic of the audience. On the rare occasion I satiated my curiosity by having a peek, all the adverts were ‘are you over 50? Thought about your funeral? And those chairs that are easier to get in and out of!
Never watched GB News
I wonder how much the BBC would be losing? If it actually had to survive on its own revenue … But then we all have no choice but to pay for them
I think the BBC could easily attract a lot more advertisers than GB News, I don't think there is much doubt about that, don't you mrmoofo?
But would you want them to? Is the question which should be asked.
Make sure the dolls are non-binary for the full effect.
all the adverts were ‘are you over 50? Thought about your funeral? And those chairs that are easier to get in and out of!
Sound a lot like the Tour devFrance ITV4 coverage but maybe with a bit less Donkey sanctuary
I wonder how much the BBC would be losing? If it actually had to survive on its own revenue …
Probably less than you think, i suspect they'd fairly quickly move budget from stuff they *have* to produce, to start making profitable stuff that they sell globally. So you'd lose a lot of current affairs and news stuff and gain more Dr Who, Blackadder and Mr Bean. With the reach and potential content they have they *could* be a serious competitor to some of the smaller streaming services fairly quickly.
Which would be a shame, because despite what a lot of frothing loonies say, much like wikipedia, much of the BBCs news and current affairs output is *moderately* well balanced and a good start for more detailed research if you feel like it.
And that'd be the first thing to go.
Oh, also it'd be a subscription/advertisment model within a month.
Doesn't GBN's advertising suffer because every time someone advertises on there they get bombarded by letters/social media via Stop Funding Hate asking if this is really what their brand values want to align with?
I read somewhere that GBN don't much care how few people watch as it's more about generating clips for SoMe. I guess they're trying to be Fox News, the difference being that culture war bullshit actually works in America in a way it doesn't seem to here, for whatever reason.
So you’d lose a lot of current affairs and news stuff and gain more Dr Who, Blackadder and Mr Bean.
Just being picky here, but Blackadder and Mr Bean? Last made as anything other than the occasional special in 1989 and 1995 respectively. There must be better contemporary suggestions that would make the BBC money.
Every time I hear of someone new signing on, I hope that the channel goes under and they can’t find any further employment.
most of them seem to have columns in the Daily Wail.
I wouldnt take too much notice of their Uk accounts. The loss might well only exist on paper for tax purposes with the profits squirrelled off to the owners tax haven of choice. They dont want to have to help fund the country they claim to care so much about
Just being picky here, but Blackadder and Mr Bean? Last made as anything other than the occasional special in 1989 and 1995 respectively. There must be better contemporary suggestions that would make the BBC money.
I was taking the piss.
What I don't understand is why it is ok for Tories to moonlight as paid shills and have shows on GB News (Lee Anderson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Esther McVey and Philip Davies) and spout their shite (as long as it doesn't breach Ofcom impartiality rules lol), while they are being paid to be MPs and represent their constituents, but it's not ok for Gary Lineker to use his private twitter account to highlight the similarities between Cruella Braverman's language and that of 1930s Germany.
Oh, sorry, I do get it, right-wing free speech demanding snowflakes hate it when anyone else exercises their right to free speech.
We all heard or read the bollocks - or PR, dependant on perspective - from both GB News and Talk TV before they launched.
Providing a voice to those who don't have one, being disruptors and so on.
Neither have a viewing audience worthy of that description; average viewing times are measured in seconds; no evidence that any of tbeir social media clips are having any effect - they haven't moved the dial on any issue as far as I know.
Disruptors? No sign of that either.
It's possible that the continued decline in UK educational standards will deliver an audience to them by way of a cohort unable to apply critical thinking, with limited attention span and no interest in or knowledge of what really impacts on their lives.
There is already a proportion of tbe population which could be described in those terms.
Maybe GBN and Talk TV are playing a long game.
I'm more likely to agree with Linekar than Rees-Mogg, but the simple difference is that MPs are not supposed to be impartial or have only one job, and the only people that can sack them are voters. It would be silly to say that MPs were not allowed to make political statements - and it's also reasonable for the BBC to constrain their presenters about what they can say when it could reasonably be seen as a BBC opinion.
Outside employment of MPs is a real problem otoh
Just being picky here, but Blackadder and Mr Bean? Last made as anything other than the occasional special in 1989 and 1995 respectively. There must be better contemporary suggestions that would make the BBC money.
I was taking the piss.
Sorry, I missed that! 😀
I have no witty rhymes to offer when it comes to GB News,
GB News, bunch of ****a.
My rhyming skills have gone out of the window, but I think you'll appreciate the effort.
But then we all have no choice but to pay for them
But we don’t have to pay. I know a load of people who don’t.
Doesn't the licence fee fund more than just the BBC? i.e. the terrestrial TV infrastructure too? So whatever you watch live (including GBN) it's partially 'cos of the licence fee?
“ What I don’t understand is why it is ok for Tories to moonlight as paid shills and have shows on GB News”
How is that different to David Lammy who is a presenter on LBC? Or the many Labour MPs who are guest presenters on LBC or have paid podcasts on the Global (radio station that owns LBC) platform?
Actually - there is one difference. David Lammy spoke at length about why MPs shouldn’t be allowed to have second jobs.
Not that his personal values stop him trousering £20-30k a year from his own second jobs mind - or claiming parliamentary expenses for a second home close to parliament when his main home was less than 7 miles away.
I dont' even know how to watch Gbeebies, it's not available by pirate or on BBC?
Probably for the best.
They don't give it a shit that it's losing money. It's serving it's purpose. It's sad and embarrassing that people believe what's said on there.
David Lammy spoke at length about why MPs shouldn’t be allowed to have second jobs.
Have you got a link to backup that claim? I can't find anything. Where did he speak at length about why MPs shouldn’t be allowed to have second jobs?
I would be very interested in what David Lammy precisely said.
@ernielynch said:
I think the BBC could easily attract a lot more advertisers than GB News
What's your point? (other than being a right wing troll)?
cheddar - what's your point?
Please articulate it clearly.
How is that different to David Lammy who is a presenter on LBC? Or the many Labour MPs who are guest presenters on LBC or have paid podcasts on the Global (radio station that owns LBC) platform?
Maybe read and understand the actual question rather than selectively quoting!
What I don’t understand is why it is ok for Tories to moonlight as paid shills and have shows on GB News (Lee Anderson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Esther McVey and Philip Davies) and spout their shite (as long as it doesn’t breach Ofcom impartiality rules lol), while they are being paid to be MPs and represent their constituents, but it’s not ok for Gary Lineker to use his private twitter account to highlight the similarities between Cruella Braverman’s language and that of 1930s Germany.
So theyve lost the cokehead side-kick to the sidekick of Morse
The creepy dickpic blackmail Meghan obsessed bully
And the definitely not a weirdo cosplay vicar
Ill bet former BBC archaeology, now lizard conspiracy expert guys is also worried
theyre really cleaning house!
They must be really worried that OFCOM has finally woken up.
Trouble is, is there anyone on their presenter roster who isn't a complete ****?
the creepy "sex before marriage is a sin" cleric is suspended now/
A roster of roasters.
Amol Rajan gave the GB News boss a good going over on the Today programme this morning. Well worth a listen, was around 7.45am.
Ill bet former BBC archaeology, now lizard conspiracy expert guys is also worried
He and the remaining presenters are in a real bind now.
They either keep their mouths shut to keep their jobs (in which case they will be labelled sellouts by the "free speech" true believer viewers of GBN... Or... They go on X or whatever and choose this to be the hill their grift dies on. Rather wonderful really.
In addition, a lot of GBN viewers will now be calling GBN itself "woke" and other words to this effect.
Again, bloody wonderful!😁
That's the trouble with throwing your lot in with zealots; eventually you will not be sufficiently 'pure' for them and they 100% will turn on you, urged on by the next load of grifters looking to take your place.
as for why this is happening now
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1707798868107165861?t=WnJ6ZqCdub062qf_SUtUTA&s=19
theres a lot to tidy up, dont tell me that Wootton, Fox & the creepy cosplay vicar arent sexual assault scandals waiting to happen/be exposed
They either keep their mouths shut to keep their jobs (in which case they will be labelled sellouts by the “free speech” true believer viewers of GBN
Yep conviction to the cause vs pay cheque dilemma 🙂
The irony of the free speech channel is that you need £60 million to er do the free speech lark into peoples homes.
My only concern is that they accidentally stumble on the right presenters/mix of lies and make it successful.
Interesting take from Benefits, the Sunderlan hardcore band. Watch to the end, recommend without a mouthful of coffee unless your keyboard needs a wash.
https://twitter.com/Benefitstheband/status/1708498337278616034
GB News has gone woke
Fox and the Vicar of Weirdness have just been officially sacked. Confirmed on the Beeb. Interesting that Wootton hasn't...
.
Fox has been arrested this morning too:
The Metropolitan Police later said: "On Wednesday 4 October, officers arrested a 45-year-old man on suspicion of conspiring to commit criminal damage to Ulez cameras and encouraging or assisting offences to be committed.
"He was arrested in Stockwell and has been taken to a South London police station where he remains in custody."
CZ – morgan is with Talk TV.<br /><br />
Oh, sorry, I pay so little attention to any tv outside of my particular interests, I thought they were the same thing. Well, yes, I know they’re the same garbage, with a different logo, but you know what I mean, I hope. Thing is with Morgan, he’s such a loser he’s never in one place long enough to remember where he’s supposed to be. I do recall seeing advertising posters along the side of London buses, with Morgan’s odious mug staring out of them, and I think I developed an automatic blindspot and have no clear recollection of what the advertising was selling.
I could do the same with Fox, but now the vile little shit’s on national news! 🤬😡😖
Cannot stand Morgan. Odious is just about the nicest term anyone could coin as a descriptive.
They can't throw each other under the bus fast enough. Long video with much to comment on but the comments do it well. My favourite has to be that the anti-woke crusader (check out the helmet and flag on the table behind him!) is moaning that since he was sacked by GBNews the wellbeing officer hasn't tried to contact him and ask how he is. Beyond parody.
https://twitter.com/GBNewsSpin/status/1709605217967153181
creepy cosplay vicar
Creepy yes, cosplay no - he's no less of a vicar than anyone else. He's ordained into a church that has churches n stuff. I mean I don't really want to come across as defending him, but he's no less legitimate than the next vicar.
He’s not ordained into an established church, which is what most people think of as vicars.
It's an established church, albeit a small one (2,300 members, according to wiki). And he is ordained. The only reason he wouldn't be called a vicar is because he doesn't have a parish. Deacon/cleric would be the title, I guess.
Whether we think the dog-collar and smock are always on simply for performative reasons is another matter.
I believe you can get ordained into his church by sending six packet tops and a stamped addressed envelope for the certificate.
No idea about that vicar but does he play the church / god angle on his views or does he spout lies (oh the irony) about more general stuff whilst dressed up as a vicar? Is it his stage outfit or does he wear it down the pub or bingo?
Please look up the definition of an “established church” because his church most definitely is not.
He’s not ordained into an established church, which is what most people think of as vicars.
All churches are just made up to promote the morality, politics and power of those who incarnated them. I don't think the size or date of inception is really the determining factor as to whether one vicar is more or less legit than another. Just keen to see the debate doesn't fall to what amounts to just name calling in the end.
Well, only the CofE is an 'Established Church' - ie the 'official' church of state defined in law , but are we saying that all the other ones, like the Catholics, don't get to have ordained priests?
On the range between Matthew 18:20, and the CofE, where does your definition fall?