GB News' Rapid Growth and Audience Appeal

[Social Media]

 

GB News has quickly become a prominent player in the UK media landscape, experiencing rapid audience growth and offering an alternative voice to the traditional broadcasters like the BBC. This emergence has sparked significant backlash from established media figures, most notably Andrew Neil, a seasoned journalist who played a key role in the channel's inception. Andrew Neil, who was instrumental in launching GB News, recently appeared on the BBC's "Today" program, where he criticized the channel he helped create. In a revealing interview, Neil's disdain for GB News was palpable as he dismissed its growing influence and audience reach. The casual and friendly atmosphere of the BBC studio, where the hosts referred to him by his first name, highlighted the cozy relationship between the traditional media and its stalwarts.

 

Neil's main contention was not with GB News' growing viewership but with its programming style, particularly the involvement of serving Tory MPs as hosts. He argued that this practice broke with British broadcasting traditions of maintaining "impartiality." However, the notion of media impartiality is often seen as a façade, with many accusing the BBC and other mainstream media of having their own biases and preferences. Despite the criticism, GB News has been thriving. According to the UK Press Gazette, the channel saw a 167% increase in its audience compared to February 2023, with 9 million people tuning in. This remarkable growth indicates a significant shift in the media consumption habits of the British public, suggesting a demand for alternative viewpoints and a break from the traditional media narratives.

 

GB News has positioned itself as a disruptor in the UK media scene, attracting viewers with its unorthodox approach. Shows fronted by politically engaged figures like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage have resonated with a segment of the audience that feels underserved by other broadcasters. Rees-Mogg, in particular, has been praised for his intelligent and historically informed approach to political interrogation.

 

 

The recent investigation by Ofcom, the UK's media regulator, into a GB News program where Prime Minister Rishi Sunak took unchallenged questions from the public has raised the stakes. Ofcom stated that this represented a "serious and repeated breach" of broadcasting rules, prompting considerations of a statutory sanction. While the potential outcomes range from fines to more severe measures, such as revoking the channel's broadcasting license, it is unlikely that Ofcom would take such drastic steps, especially with an upcoming general election.

 

 

Shutting down GB News over regulatory breaches would not only look bad for Ofcom but also for British democracy, potentially stifling free speech and media diversity. The channel's experiment with politically charged and engaging content has been a breath of fresh air for many viewers, contrasting sharply with what some perceive as the blandness and consensus-driven nature of other news outlets. The concept of media impartiality is at the heart of the debate surrounding GB News. Critics argue that the traditional media, including the BBC, often claim impartiality while harboring their own biases. GB News has challenged this by openly presenting viewpoints that question mainstream orthodoxies, such as the UK's Net Zero policies and climate change debates.

 

 

While some see this as a necessary challenge to the status quo, others, like Andrew Neil, view it as a deviation from journalistic standards. Neil's critique, however, seems tinged with personal animosity, possibly stemming from his tumultuous departure from the channel. His preference for models like Sky News, which he helped establish, reflects his comfort with traditional media structures that GB News disrupts.

 

GB News is not without its flaws. Critics point to its occasionally "shouty" and sometimes ignorant coverage. However, its role in diversifying the media landscape and fostering robust debate on contentious issues is undeniable. As GB News continues to grow and challenge the old media consensus, it remains to be seen how regulators like Ofcom will navigate the delicate balance between enforcing standards and preserving media plurality.

 

For those who value free speech and a diversity of viewpoints, the hope is that GB News will be allowed to thrive and evolve. Its success signifies a broader shift in media consumption, where audiences seek more than just the polished, often sanitized narratives provided by traditional broadcasters. In this evolving media environment, GB News' role as a disruptor is both necessary and indicative of a changing public appetite for news and commentary.

 

Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-05-24

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

Neil's main contention was not with GB News' growing viewership but with its programming style, particularly the involvement of serving Tory MPs as hosts. He argued that this practice broke with British broadcasting traditions of maintaining "impartiality."

 

He actually said this with a straight face while on a BBC programme? 😃

 

GBNews have been a welcome addition to the rampant Woke, left wing propaganda of the BBC, Channel 4 etc. Are they right of centre? Yeah probably but it provides balance in an almost completely left wing MSM in Britain.

 

It's no surprise they are doing so well when conservative viewers have been forced to watch the leftist drivel that the BBC has been putting out for so long, while strongarming citizens with threats to pay for the million+ pound salaries of the likes of 'that Hamas thing' Gary Lineker and the 'minor attracted' adulterer Hugh Edwards. 

[herfiehandbag]

The BBC and to a lesser extent Channel 4 are publicly funded. Therefore they should be politically impartial.

 

GB News is not, so why should it be constrained in the same way? Newspapers are free to take a particular political stance, and to employ politicians to write for them.

 

If people don't like Tory politicians broadcasting or writing, then don't watch GB News or buy the Daily Telegraph. You can watch Andrew Neil being oh so cozy with his mates in the BBC instead!

Edited May 24 by herfiehandbag

[Chomper Higgot]

28 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

He actually said this with a straight face while on a BBC programme? 😃

 

GBNews have been a welcome addition to the rampant Woke, left wing propaganda of the BBC, Channel 4 etc. Are they right of centre? Yeah probably but it provides balance in an almost completely left wing MSM in Britain.

 

It's no surprise they are doing so well when conservative viewers have been forced to watch the leftist drivel that the BBC has been putting out for so long, while strongarming citizens with threats to pay for the million+ pound salaries of the likes of 'that Hamas thing' Gary Lineker and the 'minor attracted' adulterer Hugh Edwards. 

GB News is loosing money handover fist.

 

This ‘puff piece’ is clearly an attempt to argue against penalties being levied by Ofcom.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

The BBC and to a lesser extent Channel 4 are publicly funded. Therefore they should be politically impartial.

 

GB News is not, so why should it be constrained in the same way? Newspapers are free to take a particular political stance, and to employ politicians to write for them.

 

If people don't like Tory politicians broadcasting or writing, then don't watch GB News or buy the Daily Telegraph. You can watch Andrew Neil being oh so cozy with his mates in the BBC instead!

Channel 4 is not publicly funded.

 

https://www.channel4.com/corporate/about-4/operating-responsibly/freedom-information/frequently-asked-questions

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

GB News is loosing money handover fist.

 

This ‘puff piece’ is clearly an attempt to argue against penalties being levied by Ofcom.

 

 

 

I couldn't give a monkeys how much money they are making/losing. GB News doesn't have the luxury of extorting the public for cash under the threat of bailiffs turning up at the front door to take their property. Then using that platform to lecture the public on Woke nonsense, climate alarmism, the Hamas 'freedom fighters' etc. 

 

Unlike the BBC.  

[coolcarer]

7 hours ago, Social Media said:

167% increase in its audience compared to February 2023,

An obvious market for it. The more choice to give differing and diverse views the better

[Chomper Higgot]

25 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

An obvious market for it. The more choice to give differing and diverse views the better

Oddly we are not told his many viewers or anything about ‘engagement time’.

 

Perhaps it’s a case of 167% of ‘Sweet FA’.

[coolcarer]

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oddly we are not told his many viewers or anything about ‘engagement time’.

 

Perhaps it’s a case of 167% of ‘Sweet FA’.

You could always go to the Press Gazette and see for yourself instead of wishing that it was "sweet FA"

 

 

https://pressgazette.co.uk/media-audience-and-business-data/media_metrics/most-popular-websites-news-uk-monthly-2/

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

You could always go to the Press Gazette and see for yourself instead of wishing that it was "sweet FA"

 

 

https://pressgazette.co.uk/media-audience-and-business-data/media_metrics/most-popular-websites-news-uk-monthly-2/

Or I could look here for a report based on independent research:

 

https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/who-watches-gb-news/#:~:text=It has seen off its,figures from the year before.

[coolcarer]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Or I could look here for a report based on independent research:

 

https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/who-watches-gb-news/#:~:text=It has seen off its,figures from the year before.

Well you could but the OP refers to the PressGazette. Did you even bother to read the figures on there? Is your link any more independent  than that?

 

does your link show sweet fa? 

[Chomper Higgot]

50 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Well you could but the OP refers to the PressGazette. Did you even bother to read the figures on there? Is your link any more independent  than that?

 

does your link show sweet fa? 

I obviously read the OP, hence my remarks on the use of a % rather than viewer numbers.

 

The link I posted has this to say about viewer numbers:

 

 

in recent filings to companies house [GB News] revealed it was reaching an average of 2.7 million viewers per month in the year ending May 2023, up 17.8% on the figures from the year before.

Which probably goes a long way to explain why GB News is loosing money hand over fist.

[roquefort]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

in recent filings to companies house [GB News] revealed it was reaching an average of 2.7 million viewers per month in the year ending May 2023, up 17.8% on the figures from the year before.

Which probably goes a long way to explain why GB News is loosing money hand over fist.

If you're going to post nonsense at least make sure it's up to date. 'year ending May 2023' LOL. A year is a long time in politics.

[roquefort]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

GB News is loosing money handover fist.

 

You have access to their current management accounts? Please share.

 

If they are losing money it's because the Centre for Disinformation, a government funded quango, is blacklisting them from all mainstream advertising.... because 'misinformation'. As recently exposed by Unherd who were given the same treatment.

[Chomper Higgot]

47 minutes ago, roquefort said:

If you're going to post nonsense at least make sure it's up to date. 'year ending May 2023' LOL. A year is a long time in politics.

So here’s a couple of things you might want to chew on.

 

The link I have posted refers to the viewer numbers that GB News filed with Companies House in May 2023.

 

The number they gave was 2.7 million.

 

The OP claimed a growth of 167% based on a 2024 article which also states 7.7 million viewers - these numbers are as claimed by GB News ( but not the  formal and legally regulated reports to Companies House).

 

So 2023 2.7million x 167% = 4.506 Million well short of the claimed 7.7 million.

 

I wonder, it now being May 2024, will GB News be updating their report to Companies House?!

 

[Chomper Higgot]

55 minutes ago, roquefort said:

You have access to their current management accounts? Please share.

 

If they are losing money it's because the Centre for Disinformation, a government funded quango, is blacklisting them from all mainstream advertising.... because 'misinformation'. As recently exposed by Unherd who were given the same treatment.

plenty of the reporting on the facts without the conspiracy nonsense you are wedded to: 

 

https://www.ft.com/content/42e2dee8-e5f7-4ae0-be4f-248bb9403387

 

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/broadcast/gb-news-results-2023-losses/

 

 

[coolcarer]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I obviously read the OP, hence my remarks on the use of a % rather than viewer numbers.

 

The link I posted has this to say about viewer numbers:

 

 

 

in recent filings to companies house [GB News] revealed it was reaching an average of 2.7 million viewers per month in the year ending May 2023, up 17.8% on the figures from the year before.

Which probably goes a long way to explain why GB News is loosing money hand over fist.

I did not say had you read the OP. I provided a link for you to the figures contained in the PressGazette. The percentages from the OP have all the figures there. Like I said. “Did you even bother to read the figures”

 

Pretty obvious you did not. You also missed the rest of my questions. Congratulations on the avoidance of all three questions.

 

3 hours ago, coolcarer said:

Well you could but the OP refers to the PressGazette. Did you even bother to read the figures on there? Is your link any more independent  than that?

 

does your link show sweet fa? 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

I did not say had you read the OP. I provided a link for you to the figures contained in the PressGazette. The percentages from the OP have all the figures there. Like I said. “Did you even bother to read the figures”

 

Pretty obvious you did not. You also missed the rest of my questions. Congratulations on the avoidance of all three questions.

 

 

I obviously did read the OP and I have provided regulated reports submitted by GB News to Companies House that blows a hole in the PressGazette numbers (that are unregulated and simply claimed by GB News).

 

 

[roquefort]

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

plenty of the reporting on the facts without the conspiracy nonsense you are wedded to: 

 

https://www.ft.com/content/42e2dee8-e5f7-4ae0-be4f-248bb9403387

 

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/broadcast/gb-news-results-2023-losses/

 

 

'The facts' (from your link):

 

GB News has been the subject of a partial advertiser boycott since it launched in August 2021. In September former Sky News editor John Ryley called for that boycott to end, saying it was "an insult to the British people" and that it “represents a threat to free speech".

 

Suggest you take your blinkers off before reading this one: https://unherd.com/2024/04/inside-the-disinformation-industry/

 

[coolcarer]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I obviously did read the OP and I have provided regulated reports submitted by GB News to Companies House that blows a hole in the PressGazette numbers (that are unregulated and simply claimed by GB News).

 

 

More nonsense from you

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oddly we are not told his many viewers or anything about ‘engagement time’.

 

Perhaps it’s a case of 167% of ‘Sweet FA’.

Year-on-year, relative newcomer GB News, which launched a dotcom url last year, saw the fastest growth in the top 50. Audience to the newsbrand was up 167% compared to February 2023 at 9 million people. It was followed by Gloucestershire Live (up 130% year-on-year) and People (2.9 million, up 59%).

[Chomper Higgot]

13 minutes ago, roquefort said:

'The facts' (from your link):

 

GB News has been the subject of a partial advertiser boycott since it launched in August 2021. In September former Sky News editor John Ryley called for that boycott to end, saying it was "an insult to the British people" and that it “represents a threat to free speech".

 

Suggest you take your blinkers off before reading this one: https://unherd.com/2024/04/inside-the-disinformation-industry/

 

Advertisers don’t want to be associated with rightwing biased rant channel.

 

More evidence of why GB News is losing money hand over fist.

[herfiehandbag]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Channel 4 is not publicly funded.

 

https://www.channel4.com/corporate/about-4/operating-responsibly/freedom-information/frequently-asked-questions

I have read the link you have provided, and fair enough, it receives no public funding.

 

It is however a publicly owned corporation, broadcast under a public service remit, so I suggest that my point about it being unbiased is still relevant - of course there is some debate as to whether or not it lives up to that remit, but that is for another time. 

 

[herfiehandbag]

8 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Think it's time for your meds rubber Jonny.

Goodness, a bit early in the debate for that sort of abuse I suggest...

[roquefort]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Advertisers don’t want to be associated with rightwing biased rant channel.

 

More evidence of why GB News is losing money hand over fist.

Keep repeating your mantra, it doesn't fool anybody. You'll be telling us next the BBC and Channel 4 are perfectly impartial.

 

I notice you haven't read the second link, which explains WHY media that don't follow the officially approved narrative are being starved of advertising.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, roquefort said:

Keep repeating your mantra, it doesn't fool anybody. You'll be telling us next the BBC and Channel 4 are perfectly impartial.

 

I notice you haven't read the second link, which explains WHY media that don't follow the officially approved narrative are being starved of advertising.

Or we can go to a source that discusses that specific issue:

 

https://the-media-leader.com/twitter-on-tv-the-real-reasons-why-advertisers-avoid-gb-news/#:~:text=Advertisers are not inherently political,employ Conservative MPs as presenters%3F

[RobU]

12 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Channel 4 is not publicly funded.

 

https://www.channel4.com/corporate/about-4/operating-responsibly/freedom-information/frequently-asked-questions

Correct

However

Channel Four Television Corporation was set up by an Act of Parliament. It is a publicly owned not-for-profit corporation and does not have any shareholders.

 

In other words it is wholly owned by the UK Government and is therefore not impartial.