February 2024
« Jan    

Why is GB News such a disappointment?

Friday/weekend blog

Flatulent, cowardly, anodyne and boring?

This blog may upset some readers.

I had high hopes for GB News. Being a big fan of Sky News Australia and the U.S. Fox News, I had expected the new GB News channel to be kick-ass, anti-woke, challenging and controversial.

In my humble opinion, it has turned out to be flatulent, cowardly, anodyne and boring – just another collection of North London self-admiring luvvies who would be equally at home on the woke BBC or UK-loathing C4 News:

Has GB News never heard of the Internet? Don’t they know about people like Paul Joseph Watson who have the cojones to be controversial? Or Guido Fawkes (Paul Staines)? Or there are Julia Hartley-Brewer and Mike Graham from Talk Radio? Or intellectual giants like Douglas Murray who dare challenge the woke mainstream media narrative? Why employ a bunch of (IMHO) mediocre, opinion-free North London nonentities when there is so much talent available?

And why promise us you’re going to be anti-woke, when it was all a lie?

People don’t like being lied to. And when you lie to your potential audience, they switch over to someone else.

Farage flounders and flops?

When I heard that Farage would be joining GB News, I decided to give the channel another chance.

At first I wasn’t disappointed as Farage put the boot in on our utterly useless and pointless waste of skin Home Secretary Priti Patel over her failure to stop the cross-channel migrant invasion. And my spirits lifted when Farage accused Patel, her Border Farce and even the supposed charity, the RNLI, of providing a free ferry service for thousands of Third-world parasites from the French beaches to the UK.

But yesterday evening (Thursday) I had smoke coming out of my ears when Farage did a piece on climate change. I have sent three copies of my book – THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS – to GB News, one of them to Farage. I have also emailed a producer there proposing that GB News interview me should they ever want to do a piece on climate change.

So, who does Farage interview yesterday evening? Someone like myself who has written a book demolishing the catastrophic man-made climate change nonsense? Or Tony Heller from Real Climate Science? Or Anthony Watts from Watts Up With That? Or someone else who can eviscerate the whole man-made climate change scam? Nope, Farage’s main guest was a climate change believer from some climate change organisation. WTF is the use of that?

Even worse, Farage started his main question with something grovelling like “I know that most scientists agree that human activities are responsible for the changing climate….” At this point my jaw hit the floor and I stormed out of the room in fury. Why?

  • Firstly, you should never start an interview question by essentially submitting to the interviewee’s point of view because that shows the interviewee that you are weak and that they can walk all over you. Instead you should challenge them from a position of strength
  • Secondly, because in the letter I sent with a copy of my book to Farage, I wrote that if he didn’t read my book, he should at least read Chapter 9 where I take a wrecking ball to the claim that “97% of scientists agree that humans are responsible for climate change”. FFS, Farage! What were you thinking?
GB News – a sad case of NIH syndrome?

The people behind GB News are (I assume) not stupid. While planning and launching their news channel they must have looked around the world for what works and what doesn’t. If they had done that, they would have seen that the anti-woke formats of Sky News Australia and Fox News USA are commercially successful because they serve an  audience that is fed up of the woke, progressive, liberal, West-hating, diversity-loving, BLM-adoring establishment media. So it would not have been too complicated to learn from Sky News Australia and Fox News.

Unfortunately the geniuses at GB News seem to have been infected by a severe case of NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome. This has led them to believe they are much smarter than Sky News Australia and Fox News and therefore have nothing to learn from the existing commercially-successful anti-woke news channels. So instead of exciting, challenging people like Hannity or Tucker Carlson (Fox News) or Andrew Bolt or Rowan Dean’s Ice Age Watch (Sky News Australia) we have hour after hour of a couple of nonentities sitting on a couch in what looks like someone’s garage or garden shed spouting woke inanities.

How could GB News be so cowardly? How could they get it so wrong?

Al Jazeera, here I come

As for me, I like to watch a serious news programme at around 6 in the evening. While searching for GB News at 236 on my TV, I came across Al Jazeera at 235. Al Jazeera really isn’t too bad. They do a good round-up of world news and are no worse than the BBC. Moreover, RT News at 234 can sometimes be quite amusing and informative.

So, I’m giving up on the (IMHO) pointless GB News and moving over to Al Jazeera and RT News.

Come on GB News – you were meant to be anti-woke and different from the mainstream BBC, ITV and C4 News.

But like a eunuch trying to seduce a busty blonde, you promised a lot but you didn’t deliver.

15 comments to Why is GB News such a disappointment?

  • twi5ted

    I watched that and Sir Nigel only wanted to discuss the hidden costs within our energy bills. I agree he was far too generous with the Grantham chap but Sir Nigel is not a detail person so best left to Andrew Neil to dissect the argument but at least both sides are being aired.

    I have GB News on all day now as i work from home with sound off. There are some i will turn the sound on for: Sir Nigel, Andrew Neil, David Buik (does business piece with Liam Halligan in afternoon), Andrew Doyle, Neil Oliver and Inaya Folarin Iman. Otherwise i dip in when i fancy a rest or something catches my eye.

    I used to do that with Sky but after the take over the wokeness and ads for disabled donkeys and poor little black children with flies in their faces made me stop. I switched to BBC but the wokeness just ridiculous and its not until GB News that you realise how one sided their output is.

    I see Sir Nigel has been beating all other news outlets in the ratings. If Andrew Neil comes back this will be a formidable combination – the Rishi Sunak interview with Portillo and Halligan was a sign of things to come i feel.

  • Loppoman

    I will be disappointed with GBNews if they don’t give you an interview. You did right sending them copies of your book and, if they are what they claim to be, should be calling for your comments. Otherwise, they’re a waste of air time, including Farage.
    They’re better than the BBC (not hard) but their target should be to equal the output of TalkRadio.

  • A Thorpe

    It needed saying about GB News. It was different but it is now boring and almost unwatchable because of all the clowning about, and they still have sound problems. I like Douglas Murray but he now only seems to be speaking on internet videos, such as the New Culture Forum, but he is basically repeating the same view. These videos achieve nothing. They are a far too long discussion between people agreeing with each other. We need debates between people with opposing views but that is not happening anywhere. If we did they would be like the political debates at election times and just end up as a shouting match and so resolving nothing.

    If you or Tony Heller were invited to discuss your views, it needs an interviewer who could challenge what you say. But for balance it needs both sides to put their view and it would just end up with a debate that most people would lose interest in, especially if it involved any complex science. I recently saw a video clip of a news interview involving Gavin Schmidt of NASA and I think it was Roy Spencer. Schmidt refused to be interviewed together. Why would the climate alarmists agree to be challenged when they have the upper hand and every government seems to be supporting them? They don’t need to do anything because the momentum and public opinion is on their side.

    Your book and Tony Heller’s recent work looks at relatively recent past weather events to show that there is nothing unusual about the weather in recent years and you keep away from the science. But people have bought into carbon dioxide being a dangerous gas and they have been shown clouds of it coming out of chimneys and cooling towers. They have been shown magic tricks on TV masquerading as science experiments to prove it traps heat. 97% of scientists agree that this is true.

    What we have is a part of NASA, GISS, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies promoting climate alarmism and poor science, with a big influence on the IPCC, and all people hear is the NASA name. Then we have the huge impact that David Attenborough and Greta have, together with the Hollywood celebrities. Mention Tony Heller and few will have heard of him. You don’t stand a chance of influence anybody, sorry to say this.

    I have had debates with my work colleges when we meet up. They are mostly electrical engineers. Many are not interested in a discussion. Others do not understand the laws of thermodynamics and think that heat transfer is a net effect. This is because they know that radiation can travel in any direction. They will not accept that radiation is not heat, it is electromagnetic energy and it only transfers heat when it moves between hot to cold. When well educated people believe something that is fundamentally wrong, what chance is there of changing minds brainwashed by the education system and the media?

    Only two issues will change this. Firstly, a dramatic change in the weather to a cold period. I don’t put much chance in this happening. We did have the Little Ice Age, but I have never seen any view on how quickly it happened. The other is that the zero carbon policies will have an unacceptable impact on costs, the economy and electricity reliability and it will bring chaos.

    Stupidity rules the human race.

  • tomsk

    Well, its better than the alternatives as it does go some places they fear to tread but on the whole its not what I expected, its under Ofcom. The King of Scotland on Saturday evenings is pretty decent as is Dewbs, even Wootons show is watchable and Woke Watch, Andrew Neil also but the rest is pretty dull and boring.

  • david brown

    Re so called man mad climate change the BBC has covertly instructed producers that it should be regarded as proven fact. Its an article of secular western faith like Evolution, which must not be questioned.
    Only one TV documentary challenging the claim that its proven science has ever been screened in the UK and never repeated.
    The Great Global Warming Swindle . You can find a poor video source copy on youtube. I suggest people download it in case the climate Emergency people get it removed. On the lying false pretext that its dangerous fake news.

  • Brenda Blessed

    Nietzsche was spot on when he said that all ideologies are feminism. That is, are made up of people who have to lie and falsify because they haven’t got the strength of character to live with natural necessities.

    None of them can stand up to any kind of dissent or criticism because they are so weak-minded. They use sophistry, equality and pathos to win weak-minded supporters.

    I have not seen GB News dare to have a single highly-qualified dissenting voice, of which there are many, on about the vaccine issue. On that subject it is a strict supporter of the official lines. Is in full accordance with the rest of the mainstream media.

    Invalid PCR and lateral flow tests equals false case data equals fake pandemic equals “vaccines” that have other intentions for the world’s entire population. Not rocket science, is it?

  • david brown

    Sky Australia and Fox News US are much more free in what they can broadcast. All TV broadcast in the UK is subject to regulator Ofcom. A TV channel might have problems challenging a narrative supported by all the main political parties.
    As to your views on coronavirus I think they are wrong You seem to be claiming it does not exist as do David Ike and Piers Corbyn, brother of former Labour party leader.
    My view is of course it exists but it has resulted in both stupid responses from some and by others cynical exploitation for political agendas.

  • david brown


  • Brenda Blessed

    I didn’t say that the virus doesn’t exist. I don’t know if it does or doesn’t exist. What I do know is that I wouldn’t trust any of that establishment lot as far as I could blow them with a blown kiss.

    But if the virus exists, why use the bits of the antibodies in the so-called tests that the human immune system produces against it if it has itself been isolated in a pure form? Apparently, the US CDC has been asked if it has samples of the virus in a purified form and it has said that it doesn’t.

    I said what can be said about it – that both tests – PCR and lateral flow tests – are invalid and therefore the cases data that is claimed that the tests produce are invalid.

    In any case, why vaccinate the entire world’s population and keep doing so at enormous expense against something that 99.96% of our population – and probably every other population – have an immune response that deals with it and every other coronavirus, such as the common cold?

  • david brown

    GBNEWS -has a very interesting item -watch on youtube
    Jennifer Arcuri slams the PM –
    She knew Boris intimately what she says is very interesting yet it seems the mainstream media are not interested as it does not fit the lie narrative about the lockdowns. With the destruction of liberty and the economy.

  • A Thorpe

    I found the Farage interviews and agree they were very poor. Having said he didn’t want to get into the CO2 issue and only wanted to discuss the costs of the policies, he allowed the first chap to talk about CO2 and didn’t really challenge him on the evidence. Benny from the GWPF was better but even he did glossed over the policy issues. Farage doesn’t want to deal with the fake science because he doesn’t understand it and that is the driver of the ridiculous energy policies. The science must come first. The GWPF is no different. The clue is in their name, they are only concerned with policy, not science.

    Where is all the electricity going to come from if we don’r use fossil energy, where is the storage going to come from the cover the periods when there is no renewable energy and what about the cost of recabling all the streets to allow recharging of electric cars? Nobody discussed that.

    What it lacked were graphs from your book which Farage should have had to challenge views on past temperature and the information on land use for renewable and other policy implications from your book.

    But lets not forget, Farage is first and foremost a politician.

  • Marc Ager

    This is a good blog that I found because someone recommended the owner’s book called “There is No Climate Change” in the comments of a climate-change article on the Mail Online.

    The only aspect of the lockdowns and vaccinations that GB News challenges is the wearing of masks. The rest is pure mainstream-media propaganda, in my opinion.

    The mainstream media constantly labels the anti-vaxxers as nutters and conspiracy theorists, but it never has any of them on in debates or as interviewees. Obviously because it fears that what they have to say makes more sense than the official lines. GB News is also guilty of avoiding them like the plague. For the sane and able nutters are easy to discredit even to other nutters most of the time. But not to that shower. And what a shower!

    There are many highly qualified medical and scientific people who are anti-vaxxers, most of whom are in favour of vaccinations but are anti the Covid vaccinations, which are all unlicensed and only approved for emergency use and do not provide any legal liability for death and injury. Hardly surprising since in the USA alone there are currently 400,000+ reported injuries of varying seriousness and 12,000 deaths associated with the vaccinations. Many more will not have been reported.

  • “The Mail on Sunday today publishes a ‘correction’ of something I [Peter Hitchens] wrote in my column about facemasks.”

    Hitchens reported that a major Danish study has found that the use of facemasks is “useless”. Apparently, the results of the study had to be watered down significantly before it could be published in Denmark.

    Hitchens: “For there is a fascinating paradox here. My November 22 article, and a news item by my colleague Stephen Adams in The Mail on Sunday of the same day, were as far as I know the only reports in UK national newspapers or broadcasters of the outcome of this extremely important study.”

    What is another paradox is the fact that unless you are a psychopath who can’t distinguish between the truth and lies, a lie-detector test can determine if you are lying or telling the truth because your nervous system is hard wired to give a measurable reaction if you tell lies.

    Yet sooner or later everything becomes evil, which is the state arrived at by cultivating dishonesty and the lie. We are all too obviously going into that evil state right now at the instigation of the psychopathic, narcissistic, nihilistic “People of the Lie”.

    If the herd had any intelligence, it could shrug the parasites off with ease without being bitten to death, but that seldom happens. Maybe that is why great evil happens in much the same way as forest fires happen to clear out the dead wood.

    PETER HITCHENS: Which is worse? Having an opinion or failing to tell readers the facts? –

  • A Thorpe

    Lord Lawson has written to the Prime Minister about the unacceptable costs of zero carbon policies. Here is a link to the Press Release, his letter, and a paper on the issue.

    Will it have any impact?

  • eddie

    As soon as I saw the line up for GB news it ws obvious it would amount to nothing .
    With all the diversity on there it was never going to do or say anything controversial.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>