GB News collaboration with the Trump organisation- Do you think it undermines British democracy with mis information?

I don’t watch GB News, I feel (in my opinion) it’s biased.

I do know that there are some very good journalists involved in this production, some of whom do often give differing opinions and other view points, but, for me, GB links with Reform and people like Farage and Widdecombe, are a step to far for me.

Yes, there should be an investigation into any channel alleging showing “world exclusives” with powerful (even if bonkers) world leaders such as Trump.

Most “normal” humans do seem to feel that much of what Trump spouts is either lies or highly exaggerated nonsense.

If there is 'nothing to see', then yes, investigate, and fact check all that was said.

I cannot see why it should makeany difference at all.

It is a right wing, untrustworthy organisation. Nothing will change.

Would watch the programme where they present the 'fact checking' on what Trump said to them.

Maremia

Would watch the programme where they present the 'fact checking' on what Trump said to them.

Ooh me too 😂😂

The thing is, that the BBC and Sky News amongst others show interviews and speeches where Trump says misleading, inaccurate and downright lies and nonsense don’t they?
Everything Trump says or at least 90% of it is clearly very odd to say the least.
So we either don’t ever show his speeches or interviews or we do and make up our own minds about them.
I don’t know who Bev Turner is but she sounds deranged if she thinks the US is safer than here.
The trouble is with what Trump often says is that there’s a grain of truth wrapped up in a load of old cobblers.
Sharia Law is real and is consulted by some in the UK, and people do get stabbed every day and there are areas where the police would rather not go.
It’s up to the regulator to decide on if there’s a case to answer.

I have watched some GB news but found it too biased. I would welcome the investigation, Ofcom needs to do what it's set up to do.

The thing is, that the BBC and Sky News amongst others show interviews and speeches where Trump says misleading, inaccurate and downright lies and nonsense don’t they?
Everything Trump says or at least 90% of it is clearly very odd to say the least.

Absolutely.
Or else the BBC edits it to make the context different from what it actually was.

Those who believe Trump will believe him anyway.
Those who don't won't.

I doubt anyone would change their minds about him on the basis of this.
How many viewers did it have?

Ofcom is just drawing more attention to it, it might have faded into obscurity without this.

One can only hope that all of Trump's lies will 'fade into obscurity' soon.

I don't think watch GB news and this blatant anti British interview should be investigated.

Or else the BBC edits it to make the context different from what it actually was.

Are you claiming that the BBC does this regularly, Allira?

Can you give some examples?

Exaggerated and minority views predominate not much that interests me, not that the mainstream dailies are much better a lot of scurrilous rubbish there too.

Form your own opinion on Trumps pronouncements they will probably change next week

^The thing is, that the BBC and Sky News amongst others show interviews and speeches where Trump says misleading, inaccurate and downright lies and nonsense don’t they?
Everything Trump says or at least 90% of it is clearly very odd to say the least^.
So we either don’t ever show his speeches or interviews or we do and make up our own minds about them.

It's all unadulterated nonsense; you feel as if you've entered a parallel universe.
There's no need to edit it.

MaizieD

^Or else the BBC edits it to make the context different from what it actually was.^

Are you claiming that the BBC does this regularly, Allira?

Can you give some examples?

Well there was a very recent case where it happened wasn’t there?
There could be more than never come to light.

Oreo

MaizieD

Or else the BBC edits it to make the context different from what it actually was.

Are you claiming that the BBC does this regularly, Allira?

Can you give some examples?

Well there was a very recent case where it happened wasn’t there?
There could be more than never come to light.

One case out if the thousands, if not millions, of hours of documentaries the BBC has shown over the years it has been in existence? But more may never have come to light?

By your reasoning any TV channel could be subject to the same accusation.

Yes, quite right but the BBC is always held up as some kind of moral arbiter.

I occasionally watch GB news for a few minutes just to see how bad it is.
Today when reporting on the incident in Switzerland they were already claiming that even if it was found not to be a jihad related incident it would turn out to be so as most violent acts across the world are in some way related to jihad, even if ot can't be proven.
I heard as much as I wanted to and switched over to something else.
What a load of baloney and how anyone could take it seriously is beyond me.

The trouble is how many do take GB news seriously?

Oh, I love these 'occasionally listen to it to see how bad it is.'

Rather like 'let's run that film again before we ban it.'

Sharia law cannot overrule British law. It is advisory, and can be used to adjudicate in things like divorce, but only if all parties consent to abide by it. It is no different from asking a rabbi or priest for advice or to suggest a penance after confession. The idea that we are on the cusp of having sentences of stoning or amputations is inflammatory nonsense.

AGAA4

I don't think watch GB news and this blatant anti British interview should be investigated.

Agree.

Toadying up to Trump when he insults our way of life and lies through his teeth is disgusting. What on earth are GB news up to?

MaizieD

Oreo

MaizieD

Or else the BBC edits it to make the context different from what it actually was.

Are you claiming that the BBC does this regularly, Allira?

Can you give some examples?

Well there was a very recent case where it happened wasn’t there?
There could be more than never come to light.

One case out if the thousands, if not millions, of hours of documentaries the BBC has shown over the years it has been in existence? But more may never have come to light?

By your reasoning any TV channel could be subject to the same accusation.

I agree with Maizie. Citing “a very recent case” without explaining what happened or showing that it’s typical doesn’t really support the claim. Even if one example exists, that wouldn’t demonstrate a regular practice. Suggesting that there might be other cases that haven’t come to light is speculation, not evidence. If the claim is that the BBC does this routinely, it needs multiple clear, documented examples.

This is suspicion-based reasoning: a vague or single example is treated as proof of a general pattern, and the absence of evidence is used to suggest hidden wrongdoing. That’s risky because it makes claims impossible to test and replaces evidence with speculation.

The GB News example shows the difference between evidence-based criticism and suspicion-based reasoning. In this case, there are identifiable statements, a broadcast record, and a regulator assessing whether journalistic standards were met.

That’s very different from claiming that an organisation like the BBC routinely edits context without offering specific examples and then suggesting the real evidence is hidden. One is accountable to evidence; the other relies on suspicion

Such a hoo hah about the BBC and Trump, and yet GB News can get away with airing downright lies. Hopefully, most people who tune in watch it out of interest rather than commitment. But there must be some people who believe all the lies.