Sunak telling Robin White that biological sex is important live on GB news

[fromorbit]

'Particularly when it comes to questions around women's safety and health, biological sex is important.' Parents need to be involved in schools.

Rishi Sunak is asked 'why should LGBT people vote Conservative?'
GB News forum footage here:
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1757143443111841900

So Ofcom are investigating. It will be interesting to see how members of the audience came to be on this 'Peoples Forum' in Durham.

BBC News - Ofcom to investigate GB News show featuring Rishi Sunak
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68336048

We really are writing Orwell’s novels for him atm

Great for women. Not

Why weren't the BBC investigated over the association of the words 'JKRowling' and 'anti-trans'?

Last year the BBC was forced to apologise twice in a month (Feb) for not challenging guests on the radio for doing this.

This show had a trans campaigner on with the prime minister who was able to ask anything they liked in practice. The PM didn't say anything anti-trans. He stated the importance of gay rights in balance to the question about what was he going to do for the LGBT community, when pushed further he talked about children and women. Its almost as if they didn't like the answer that was given.

It would arguably currently be UNBALANCED in this political climate to FAIL to mention gay rights, women's rights and potential harms to children. Yet the premises of the complaint seems to be all about trans rights and not being able to mention other issues. How is that more politically unbiased????

Go figure.

Oh come on. This is about the fact GB News is basically a Conservative mouthpiece, against UK rules, not the fact they challenged RMW.

I think its completely ridiculous that our elected ministers have taken to going on GBeebies, piers Morgan YouTube etc to try to get round impartiality rules. Shows either they are running scared of having their ideas challenged, or they know they are lying and mainstream channels wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/ofcom-launches-investigation-into-pms-appearance-on-gb-news-13075472

So the PM isn't allowed to appear on GB News?

Given that the Reform Party (WHO ARE NOT THE CONSERVATIVES) polled third in one of the recent by elections I don't see what the problem is.

The Conservatives are in direct competition with the Reform Party. There's no guarentee that the Conservatives will get 'the right wing vote' right now.

I do think GB News is more right wing (and sometimes DOES have a questionable level of journalism) but I don't think its the Conservative Party mouth piece. Indeed, they often have people who are more to the right of the Cons on the channel.

I don't really see how its really much different to Channel 4 which has a reputation for being very Left Wing.

If Sunak ONLY appeared on GB News or GB News ONLY had right wing people or representation on it, THAT would be more problematic. But neither is true.

Many people won't appear on GB News because they look down on it, but thats remains their choice and that doesn't help expand political representation of ideas on the channel either.

Look I don't particularly like GB News, and I think there have been a number of problems with the channel.

BUT

This particular section isn't one that I think has the level of problems that people are trying to make out.

Surely he can go on GB News as much as Starmer can write in The Guardian or anyone in the DM

I don’t get the basis for banning politicians from outlets

I for one am grateful that the pretence has been dropped, and we've got to the heart of the matter, the ultimate nugget of truth: Wrong Media/Unapproved Words/Bad Person/Evil Soul.

Well no he can't unfortunately. There are rules about impartiality and what politicians are allowed to do on TV. Also Ofcom regulates TV and radio, IPSO regulates the press.

5.9: Presenters and reporters (with the exception of news presenters and reporters in news programmes), presenters of “personal view” or “authored” programmes or items, and chairs of discussion programmes may express their own views on matters of political or industrial controversy or matters relating to current public policy. However, alternative viewpoints must be adequately represented either in the programme, or in a series of programmes taken as a whole. Additionally, presenters must not use the advantage of regular appearances to promote their views in a way that compromises the requirement for due impartiality. Presenter phone-ins must encourage and must not exclude alternative views.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/section-five-due-impartiality-accuracy

It had an alternative view

RMW

If you are looking at one tiny element. The Ofcom investigation is because the whole programme was about Sunaks viewpoints, and the whole series is JRM, therefore alternative viewpoints weren't given

There is also this:
5.13: Broadcasters should not give undue prominence to the views and opinions of particular persons or bodies on matters of political or industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy in all the programmes included in any service (listed above) taken as a whole.

Anyway I'm not an expert so let's see what ofcom say.

Channel 4 don't run talk programmes featuring only politicians from the Labour Party and their opinions. That would be the equivalent.

It's not about right v left wing, it's about the plurality of views, which is not found on GB News.

Well that's interesting. We can now keep that in mind when the BBC don't report on things.

That’s a comprehension fail there. Try again.

Sorry, I don't get it. You are going to need to explain it again

It’s not that people who don’t follow the pronouncements of GB News are as left wing as Lenin. My point was that anything that doesn’t come from a left wing source (which I hyperbolically described as as far left as Lenin) is automatically bad.

Tufton St is the real estate equivalent of the Daily Mail.

That's what I thought you meant.
I am not anti Tufton Street because they are right wing. I am anti them because they aren't transparent and seem to have inordinate influence in how the country is run.

Who do Labour use in the same way?

If that’s what you thought I meant why did you pretend I meant something different?

Tufton St is a street. It has buildings on it. Why are you anthropomorphising a piece of land?

I don't know ES, why don't you tell me? I don't think there are any similar set ups.

Because you made a comment about my lack of reading comprehension so I thought I'd better check That's not "pretending" anything

How can I tell you, if I knew I wouldn’t ask

I'm not. It's short hand for a network of think tanks that influence the government. Because of the allegations about left wing press I've spent some time finding a hopefully more acceptable source for you
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/james-obrien-presses-big-brother-watch-funding/

Well maybe there aren't any? Not all the parties are funded the same way are they. Labour obviously have an income stream through trade unions, although that one is a bit more transparent

Absolutely. Always separate the LGB from the T. It is essential.

Stop the conversation and ask if it is LGB or T being referred to.