Ofcom’s vendetta against GB News

‘I want you to look into my eyes, Rishi Sunak, and look at the pain, trauma and regret’, said one of the first questioners on GB News’ live People’s Forum programme earlier this year, as he stared down the then UK prime minister. The man, visibly upset and disillusioned, was furious that the government had abandoned him and others like him who have suffered from severe side-effects from the Covid-19 vaccine. ‘When are you going to start to do the right thing?’, the man demanded of Sunak. To his credit, Sunak didn’t dodge, dismiss or patronise him. But it was clear the prime minister wasn’t in for an easy ride.

Over the course of the People’s Forum programme, one audience member after another took aim at Sunak over a variety of issues such as immigration, housing, the struggling arts sector and the failure of the Rwanda scheme. They pressed him to answer why so little had been done since the Conservatives’ landslide election win in 2019. At one point, a visibly uncomfortable Sunak lamented that no one was asking him questions about the economy – his supposed strong suit. By the end, it should have been obvious to everyone that he had been put through the wringer. Even Politics Joe, certainly no friend of GB News, called it a ‘rinsing’.

Given all this, why did Ofcom decide last week to fine GB News £100,000 for ‘breaking due impartiality rules’ over this programme? According to the supposedly neutral broadcast regulator, GB News gave Sunak a ‘mostly uncontested platform to promote the policies and performance of his government’. Really? GB News has responded by calling the sanctions ‘unnecessary, unfair and unlawful’ and has understandably chosen to challenge the decision.

It is glaringly obvious that Ofcom has a particular axe to grind with GB News. Ofcom’s constant investigations into the channel, while ignoring similar if not worse infractions by other channels, suggest a near-obsessive focus on the right-leaning broadcaster. Where was Ofcom when Ed Balls sat across from his wife, home secretary Yvette Cooper, on ITV’s Good Morning Britain and lobbed her softball questions about the riots and disorder this summer? Where was the impartiality watchdog when LBC’s James O’Brien labelled the libertarian Institute of Economic Affairs a ‘hard-right lobby group’ without offering a right of reply? And where to begin with the BBC’s clear biases, especially on the Israel-Palestine conflict? Of course, in all these cases, Ofcom was nowhere to be found.

Ofcom, the very body that claims to uphold media impartiality, is glaringly one-sided in how it enforces its rules. This shouldn’t come as a surprise. According to broadcaster Carole Malone, 10 out of 14 members on Ofcom’s content board are ex-BBC employees. It’s no wonder they don’t hold their former employer, or other aligned outlets, to the same standards.

Besides, let’s face it, the rules Ofcom is supposed to enforce are outdated. Broadcasting standards that were set decades ago, long before the rise of streaming services, social media and independent outlets, simply don’t hold up in the 21st century. These rules were written in an era when a handful of networks dictated public discourse. Today, information flows freely across platforms and the public can seek out opinions and debates across a wide array of channels.

Worse still, Ofcom’s power has ballooned under recent legislation, particularly the last government’s Online Safety Act 2023. This granted Ofcom new authority over not just traditional broadcasting, but also social-media companies and online streaming services. This means activists can flood Ofcom with complaints to get content, individuals and platforms that they do not approve of shut down or fined.

Ofcom is charged with regulating one of the most sensitive and crucial elements of our democracy – free and open debate. Yet it is growing more powerful, less accountable and more political by the day. It’s about time someone started watching the watchdog.

William Yarwood is the media campaign manager at the TaxPayers’ Alliance.