AN interview between two Tory MPs on GB News did not break broadcasting rules, according to Ofcom.
The UK’s media regulator was asked to investigate whether an interview with Suella Braverman conducted by Lee Anderson on his GB News show was in breach of impartiality rules.
However, despite receiving numerous complaints from the public Ofcom ruled that it did not break broadcasting rules because it was classified as a “current affairs programme”.
Ofcom states that it is permissible for politicians to present current affairs programmes as long as they are not standing for election and “due impartiality is preserved”.
A spokesperson said: “Having assessed the nature and format of the programme – which included the combination of a pre-recorded interview, in-depth studio analysis and panel discussion – we were satisfied it was a current affairs programme.
“The programme included an appropriately wide range of significant views on immigration and border control, which were given due weight.”
READ MORE: Brexit must be 'front and centre' of SNP independence case, says ex-MP
However, GB News was found to have broken impartiality rules during a different interview with Reform Party leader Richard Tice.
During an interview with Tice conducted by former Brexit Party MEP Martin Daubney the pair discussed immigration policy.
Both were highly critical of the UK Government’s approach to immigration, with Daubney claiming “we no longer know who walks among us” and calling for a state of emergency to be declared.
Tice agreed that there was a “national security threat” and said it needed to be made clear “that zero are allowed to settle here”.
Ofcom found that the discussion failed to preserve due impartiality, largely because the host and interviewee’s opinions were so similar.
The regulator said: “In accordance with the right to freedom of expression, broadcasters have editorial freedom and can offer audiences innovative forms of discussion and debate.
"However, in light of the likely similarity of the views of the participants in this programme on the major matter being discussed, the licensee should have taken additional steps to ensure that due impartiality was preserved.
“In particular, Mr Tice was allowed to present Reform UK's policies on a matter of major political controversy and major matter relating to current public policy without significant challenge from Mr Daubney.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer labelled 'shameful' following mosque visit
“We also took into account that Mr Daubney and Mr Tice presented similar views on the matters being discussed.
“We expect GB News to take careful account of this decision in its compliance of future programming."
GB News accepted fault and said that relevant staff will “receive further training focused on the issues raised by this broadcast”.
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