Good evening and welcome to this week's Media Watch where a months-long drama involving GB News has finally come to a conclusion ... for now anyway.
Remember you can get the newsletter for free every week in your inbox by clicking the banner above.
GB News saga ends in fine
You’ll have read a few times in this newsletter about Ofcom’s investigation into GB News after the airing of a programme where then-prime minister Rishi Sunak answered questions from a studio audience and presenter.
READ MORE: Ed Balls 'sits out' interview with Yvette Cooper on Good Morning Britain
The probe into the programme entitled People’s Forum: The Prime Minister – which aired in February – has now ended in a £100,000 fine for the channel for “breaking impartiality rules”.
The regulator said Sunak had a “mostly uncontested” platform to promote “the policies and performance of his government” in a period preceding the General Election.
Ofcom deemed this to be in breach of Rules 5.11 and 5.12 of the Broadcasting Code and, along with the fine, has directed GB News to broadcast a statement on its findings, on a date and in a form to be decided by the regulator.
However, the episode may not be over, as GB News is challenging the decision and Ofcom will not enforce the sanction until those proceedings are closed.
GB News chief executive Angelos Frangopoulos said the sanctions are “unnecessary, unfair and unlawful” and a “direct attack on free speech and journalism”.
In February, Ofcom said that it received 547 complaints about the hour-long programme and that it found that the programme had not “challenged (Sunak) or otherwise referred to significant alternative views”, and that GB News should have “taken additional steps” to ensure impartiality.
Isabel takes an Oakeshott at benefit claimants
From GB News to TalkTV and a certain Isabel Oakeshott (below) who claimed on the channel that benefit claimants are “parasites”.
The former Sunday Times political editor said the people who benefit from Rachel Reeves’s Budget announced last week are the “people who do the least, so basically benefits claimants”.
Benefit payments are to go up by 1.7% in April and there will be greater protections for Universal Credit claimants impacted by deductions due to debt.
But the Budget announcement also included an apparent confirmation that the Government will continue with reforms to the work capability assessment set out by the Conservatives, restricting eligibility so hundreds of thousands of people with health conditions will miss out on support in the coming years.
READ MORE: See full list of celebrities standing against Rosebank oil field
Reeves also pledged to crackdown on welfare fraud, including through “access to bank accounts”.
But for Oakeshott, it seemed this was simply not enough of a “crackdown” as she went on a undignified rant about disabled people taking “everything the state can offer”.
On TalkTV, she said: “How many young people are supposedly too sick to work and being supported by the state?
“These figures are absolutely off the chart, and they are completely unjustified.
“By not announcing such a crackdown, Rachel Reeves basically turned this into a Budget of removing resources from those who work in order to keep on sustaining those who, frankly, can't be bothered to get out of bed and get themselves out, whether it's to an office or to any kind of job, and prefer to just sit on the sofa and order their Deliveroo and drive their Motability free vehicle and take everything that the state can offer.
“Basically these people are, frankly, parasites.”
Oakeshott was condemned by disability equality charity Scope, which said the comments were “utterly disgraceful” and her views belonged “in the past”.
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