UK Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries has insisted the negative reaction to the planned privatisation of Channel 4 has been "overblown, lazy and snobbish".
In her column for the Daily Mail, she encouraged people to ignore the "lazy, overwrought and ill-informed rhetoric from the Leftie luvvie lynch mob" as she argued her case for selling-off the broadcaster.
Meanwhile, she accused some of those opposing of "descending into full-on abusive hysteria" and said the "overblown" reaction came from "the same people who snobbishly decried my appointment".
And while insisting she liked the channel, she said it "did always not help itself with its news anchor shouting 'f*** the Tories', or broadcasting an alternative Queen's speech by Iranian dictator Ahmadinejad or a deep fake of Her Majesty".
The UK Government – which owns the broadcaster – intends to take it out of public ownership claiming this is holding it back from competing with streaming services like Netflix.
Dorries has said selling it to a private owner would give it "the tools and freedom to flourish and thrive as a public service broadcaster long into the future".
But she faced an onslaught from the public, cultural icons, former Channel 4 employees, production companies and politicians who argued the move was non-sensical.
Kirstie Allsop, who presents Location, Location, Location, said it was "a load of absolute twaddle", while former editor-at-large Dorothy Byrne said Channel 4 was not there to compete with Netflix or Amazon.
Meanwhile, Alan Clements, managing director of Two Rivers Media in Glasgow, branded it "cultural vandalism" and insisted production companies could fold if Channel 4 was sold.
But Dorries has sought to silence her critics, arguing Margaret Thatcher said the channel should be privatised back in 1988 after establishing it six years earlier.
READ MORE: Broxburn butcher hosts far-right podcast
She said in her column: "It would be irresponsible for any government to sit back and allow the status quo to continue.
"So last week I made the decision that it is time to unleash the broadcaster's full potential and open Channel 4 up to private ownership and investment while protecting its crucial public service broadcasting remit.
"Sadly, the reaction was as predictable as it was inflammatory.
"Few opponents want to engage with the issue of guaranteeing Channel 4's long-term future. They're happier sneering, accusing me of not being 'smart enough' to understand Channel 4 or descending into full-on abusive hysteria.
"Let's dump the lazy, overwrought and ill-informed rhetoric from the Leftie luvvie lynch mob and take a cool look at the facts.
"Our independent production companies are flourishing, with only 7% of the industry's revenue coming from Channel 4.
"Channel 4 is a distinct cultural asset which has created some of the best programmes we have ever been lucky enough to watch. But its salad days are in the past.
"It is fundamentally Conservative to want Channel 4 to grow so it can invest in better technology, content, and people and have an even bigger impact on our creative economy than it already has.
"That's what I want to get on with – and the overblown reaction from the same people who snobbishly decried my appointment the moment I walked through my department's doors won't stop me."
Many people, including Clements, have speculated the decision may be ideological given the channel and its staff have been openly critical of the Tories over the years.
In 2019 during a leadership debate on climate change, the broadcaster opted to replace an absent Boris Johnson with a melting ice sculpture.
A couple of years earlier, journalist Jon Snow was accused of shouting "f*** the Tories" while dancing with students at Glastonbury.
And at the MacTaggart Lecture in 2019 during Edinburgh's TV festival, Byrne called Johnson "a known liar".
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel