Tongue in cheek, obvs, but it’s easy to forget that GB News hemorrhages cash and can only function because a bunch of foreign billionaires provide it with an unlimited cash stream, a form of financing that only right-wing extremists can call upon, sadly. Does make me wonder, though, why Ofcom doesn’t have rules about channels being viable, lest they become puppets of their paymasters…
GB news violates Ofcom on a daily basis, but they just don’t bother to enforce their own rules.
For example they’re not really supposed to be calling themselves a news organization unless they conform to editorial standards. Yet they call themselves a news channel all the time and Ofcom just sit there.
If I were Labour I’d be hauling them in front of a select committee. The bias and ridiculous double standards are blatant.
oh shame you’re not serious, was just going to mention to watch out you don’t get audience captured like the green party and end up being watermelon tv
Tongue in cheek, obvs, but it’s easy to forget that GB News hemorrhages cash and can only function because a bunch of foreign billionaires provide it with an unlimited cash stream, a form of financing that only right-wing extremists can call upon, sadly. Does make me wonder, though, why Ofcom doesn’t have rules about channels being viable, lest they become puppets of their paymasters…
GB news violates Ofcom on a daily basis, but they just don’t bother to enforce their own rules.
For example they’re not really supposed to be calling themselves a news organization unless they conform to editorial standards. Yet they call themselves a news channel all the time and Ofcom just sit there.
If I were Labour I’d be hauling them in front of a select committee. The bias and ridiculous double standards are blatant.
oh shame you’re not serious, was just going to mention to watch out you don’t get audience captured like the green party and end up being watermelon tv