£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.