Has GB News effectively become Reform TV? That’s the accusation suggested to me by the person who helped set the channel up, Andrew Neil, and it seems borne out by research. If true, then the next question is: what on earth have those paid to regulate the broadcasters been up to? Has Ofcom been asleep at the wheel?
Or perhaps you’ve been watching Dirty Business, Channel 4’s startling docudrama about the murky English water industry? If so, you’ll probably have been raging at the apparent feebleness of Ofwat and the Environment Agency, which have wrung their hands as privatised water companies have paid out £76bn in dividends while accruing around £56bn in debts. And while systemically discharging torrents of untreated sewage into our rivers and seas.
There are few things more important in life than clean water and clean information. We could add a few things like an honest legal system, breathable air, fair elections and so forth. But clean water and information are crucially important to our lives. And it does look as though the organisations charged with overseeing them have turned a blind eye.
GB News has been much on my mind because I’ve been marshalling a mass watch-in. On behalf of the New World magazine I assembled a team of 20 experienced journalists to watch multiple hours of GB News output to see if it’s complying with the laws and codes supposed to protect broadcasting in the UK.
We choose 15 hours of primetime output, with each programme rated by two reviewers. You can find their assessments here. They suggested that there were numerous breaches of impartiality; a widespread disregard for accuracy; a predominant framing of news in ways that overlap with Reform’s political agenda; a systemic use of Reform politicians, candidates and supporters; and an overwhelmingly right-wing bias in choice of guests and issues.
Andrew Neil says he was assured by the main investors that they had no intention of turning GB News into the British equivalent of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News—ie a politically partisan blend of news and propaganda. “It turned out, of course, to be an entirely false prospectus,” he told me. “Actually, they really did want a kind of Fox News. They were above all rabid Brexiteers, and that still motivated them. They worshipped the ground that Nigel Farage walked on.”
Ofcom seems miffed when people complain they’ve allowed this to happen. Andrew Neil is not really surprised. He just doesn’t think they’re very good. In fact, he goes further and argues that, since the Thatcher privatisation programme of the 1980s, Britain has struggled with regulation generally. “That's not just true of Ofcom,” he told me. “It's true of [energy regulator] Ofgem. It's true of [water regulator] Ofwat. Ofcom is part of that inadequate ability to regulate that now dominates British public life.”
Ofcom has found GB News to be in breach of its Broadcasting Code many times. In 2024, it imposed a £100,000 fine on GB News for breaking impartiality rules over a programme hosted by Rishi Sunak. However, in 2025 GB News successfully challenged Ofcom in the High Court over programmes hosted by Jacob Rees-Mogg. Following its defeat, Ofcom dropped an investigation into GB News's use of Nigel Farage and it withdrew three previous rulings over GB News’s use of other politicians. But none of this seems to have had much effect on GB News’s overall idea of what constitutes impartiality or accuracy.
Now let’s turn our thoughts to another regulator, the Electoral Commission, which is supposed to ensure that Britain has free and fair democratic systems. It, too, has had its critics for being generally toothless—particularly over modern political finance, digital campaigning and foreign influence.
In fact, the Electoral Commission agrees with some of these criticisms. Its chair, John Pullinger, told MPs last year that “the legal framework in which we’re operating is out of date, overcomplicated and inconsistent, so that creates a big series of challenges for us.”
I wonder if they are looking at what GB News is up to? Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that what Andrew Neil says is correct: that the channel has essentially become “Reform TV.” That means that, for the first time in this country, one political party benefits from the extraordinary advantage of having its agenda (and politicians and supporters) amplified round the clock 365 days a year.
Nor is it any longer just a minority channel. As its editorial director Michael Booker boasted this week: “GB News landed like an asteroid, flattening the old media landscape, laying waste to its rivals, and establishing itself in a short space of time to become Britain’s number one news channel.” Anyone who thought otherwise was a “pompous old has-been” or a “scaly old reptile.” (Mr Booker learned his craft on Richard Desmond’s Daily Star.)
Now, we have been used to watching the likes of Victor Orbán or Silvio Berlusconi capture and build their own propaganda systems. In Hungary, pro-government business people played their role in creating what’s been described as “a propaganda system with barely any financial limits.”
There is no direct read-across to GB News. Its two main backers are the Dubai-based Legatum Group and the British hedge fund manager Sir Paul Marshall. Between them, they have lost well north of £100m so far in subsidising the creation of this media asteroid.
Sir Paul speaks eloquently about trying to fill a gap in the media ecosystem. But there is no denying that his and Legatum’s munificence has been a godsend to a party currently riding high in the polls. You could almost say Reform UK has landed like an asteroid, flattening the old political landscape. The amount of boosterish airtime given to its leaders, obsessions and policies by its sister asteroid has been literally priceless.
Between them Sir Paul and Legatum effectively cross-subsidise Reform’s leader, Nigel Farage, by employing him. In his first 18 months as an MP Farage trousered £585k from the platform which their enterprise, GB News, has given him. And not only Farage, but Reform MP Lee Anderson, parliamentary candidate Matt Goodwin, Richard Tice and rising Reform star Darren Grimes.
Conversely, those who sever their ties with Reform may find their GB News appearances dry up. Ben Habib used to feature up to three times a week when he was co-deputy leader of Reform UK. He says he hasn’t been asked on since he left. “Circumstantially,” he tells me, “the moment I launched my own party I was removed from GB News.”
Similarly, Rupert Lowe tells me he was a regular on GB News until he split and started his own party, Restore Britain. Now the invitations have stopped. Maybe it’s all a coincidence. After all, star GB News presenter Laurence Fox managed to double up as leader of the fringe Reclaim party, funded by another multi-millionaire.
Given that Ofcom has proved a bit dopey, can we hope that the Electoral Commission is keeping an eye on all of this? The rules, as John Pullinger, told MPs, are weak and out of date. The tightest regulations only kick in in the year immediately before a general election. The Starmer government is scrambling to close the loopholes that have historically allowed foreign money to enter the British political system. Stable doors are being slammed shut.
Clean water, clean information and clean elections. Dare we dream?
