OFCOM-MANDO RAID: GB News BLOWS GASKET as Judge SLAMS Broadcast Watchdog!
Shockwaves Rattle Broadcasting World as High Court Drops a Legal Bombshell in Battle Between GB News and OFCOM.
In an explosive showdown between media mavericks and Britain’s broadcasting overlords, that puts the regulatory watchdog OFCOM firmly in the doghouse and it’s already sending shock tremors across the UK’s newsrooms.
The fiery legal battle dubbed by furious GB News fans erupted after broke impartiality rules because the controversial ex-minister dared to read the news. Yes, you read that right: .
“This is censorship disguised as regulation!”
The courtroom clash centered around two GB News broadcasts from May and June 2023. In both, (decked out in his signature pinstripe defiance) read brief updates on breaking news, once about Donald Trump’s civil case in the US, and once during live coverage of the tragic Nottingham attacks.
OFCOM went full red-alert. Their ruling claimed that because Rees-Mogg a sitting MP at the time read these snippets during a show, which, they argued, is a no-go zone for politicians. Their logic? even for 53 seconds.
But in a judgment that’s been called by insiders, wasn’t buying it.
“OFCOM’s analysis… does violence to the wording of the Code,” she wrote, eviscerating the watchdog's attempt to retroactively twist broadcasting rules to suit its case.
The judge ruled that programmer, and thus didn’t fall under the strict ban on politicians reading the news.
In one dramatic stroke, the High Court not only shredded OFCOM’s interpretation of its own Code but by effectively rewriting rules without proper consultation.
“This isn’t just a victory for GB News, It’s a message: Regulators don’t get to make it up as they go along.”
Behind the scenes, tensions were boiling. A senior GB News insider speaking on condition of anonymity didn’t mince their words.
“We’re not just going to roll over while un-elected bureaucrats muzzle our voices. This was a stitch-up from day one. Rees-Mogg didn’t express opinion, he read facts from a teleprompter. If that’s bias now, journalism’s dead.”
Even political commentators from rival outlets were stunned.
“It’s a deeply troubling precedent that OFCOM even tried this,” said a former BBC journalist. “Are we now saying politicians can’t inform the public on breaking stories unless they’re wearing a rosette?”
The ruling wasn’t just a win for GB News, it struck at the very heart of the UK’s media freedom landscape.
The judge cited the , reminding OFCOM that . And unless those restrictions are “prescribed by law,” they don’t hold water.
“They tried to build a wall around the news, and it just collapsed like a house of cards,”
OFCOM, visibly rattled, tried to play it cool, but insiders say One anonymous OFCOM staffer was overheard describing the ruling as “a legal trainwreck” that could “change everything.”
The case now raises big questions about especially when newer channels blend news, commentary, and live discussion. Critics say OFCOM is clinging to a 20th-century rulebook in a 21st-century media war.
“They’ve lost the trust of broadcasters and possibly the public,” warned media analyst. “People see this as an ideological crackdown, not neutral regulation.”
At the centre of the firestorm, Rees-Mogg himself remained characteristically unbothered.
“The British public are perfectly capable of distinguishing between news and narrative,” he quipped. “Unlike OFCOM, they don’t assume idiocy in their fellow citizens.”
But it’s not just about politicians. , fearful that reading a breaking alert could trigger another regulatory ambush.
“You’d think we were launching missiles, not reading headlines,” fumed one GB News producer. “This has chilled creativity across the board.”
- OFCOM received about the broadcasts but failed to show any evidence of in the content itself.
- In one clip, Rees-Mogg . That's it. Less time than it takes to read this paragraph.
This ruling has in British media. , regulators are licking their wounds, and free speech campaigners are calling for .
“The watchdog just got muzzled”
GB News, meanwhile, is relishing its victory but preparing for more scrutiny. Sources close to the network say they’re considering .
This isn’t just about one show, one presenter, or one moment. It’s about who gets to speak, who gets to report, and .
In the words of one furious viewer on X:
“If OFCOM thinks it can silence dissent with bureaucracy, they’ve just had their day in court — and lost.”
The fight for Britain’s media future just turned .
