"Anti woke" celebrity homosexual journalist Dan Wootton EXPOSED as catfishing creep

He was an old boyfriend who was watching Dan’s cat while he was gone. He just happened to be snoop behind Dan’s washer and broke the lock off a hidden compartment. LOL.

“Snooping.” ^

Womp womp. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

Fucking fascist grifter cunt.

Oh wow. Apparently he's an out gay. I read his Wikipedia page. Very unpleasant person. Lots of drama.

How stupid are these people?

I'll be honest - I've catfished a few people in the past.

One guy had arranged to meet me twice and cancelled at the last minute, and then just DNAd. So I set up an account to meet him and then just blanked him when the time came.

And one guy without a face I tried to start a conversation with left a really unpleasant reply telling me he'd never be interested in "someone like me" so I catfished him to see who he was and found out it was a friend of a friend.

And I've been catfished over the years. But being offered 30k? How utterly bizarre.

I just hope this picks up a bit more traction, to think it 1000times worse than what Huw did, they should of released it without the name at first to get us all thinking who it could be.

We need justice for hot Andrew Brady

Thank you, OP. I just went through a withdrawal and associated epileptic convulsions over my total freakout at the BBC/Huw thread when Wooten was a demonstrable criminal over and over again, investigated over 18 months on three calendar years was not even remotely accused.

Concerned European, have you arrived at this front of hatred, yet, with your balm?

Concerned European will argue that the people involved are all adults and need to take responsibility for their own actions.

[quote]holdall

How have I never come across this word before in all my life? I'm having the strangest sensation right now, like the whole world has been gaslighting me for decades.

A holdall is like a Birkin for men

[quote]I'll be honest - I've catfished a few people in the past.

Man, I get catfished all the time on Scruff and it’s always so obvious. Young guy way out of my league, a profile with absolutely no info that still has the little leaf on it that tells you the account is brand new, they hide their distance, and claim to be an all American guy but have an extremely poor grasp of the English language.

And they all ask exactly the same questions. Have you met anyone on this app? I don’t like to chat here, send me your phone number and we can talk on WhatsApp (or telegram, or sometimes an app I’ve never heard of but is probably designed to steal my identity and drain my bank account).

So I’ll fuck back with them. One guy kept asking for my number so we could talk on WhatsApp, and I replied “what app?“ and then they said “WhatsApp. You need to download it from the App Store” and I said “oh, I can’t go to the store today, my car is in the shop” and he comes back with “no, it’s an app that you need to download” so I reply “oh I don’t have a way to download apps”.

I’ve had lots of conversations like that And they’re relentless. They’ll come back with “no, it’s in the App Store on your phone” and then by that point I’ll tell them “oh, I don’t have a phone”

They’ll usually just leave me alone or block me by then.

I say, if you’re going to get catfished at least waste their time and have fun doing it.

I do it with ohonr scammers as well, but I know the two things they are trying to get me to say out loud so they can record it are my name and the word “yes”. So no matter how many times they ask me to please confirm by saying yes, I’ll just keep saying “that’s correct“ and “you got it”. It’s funny because they’ll get so frustrated they’ll start cursing at you.

Sorry for wasting your time, scammer.

ohonr=phone

I love you, R12!!

Private Eye have been reporting on Wootton sexually harassing staff at the Sun and then TalkTV for years. Popbitch too actually named him in a recent mailout for the same thing.

The co-conspirator bit is extremely interesting.

Dan Wootten has the most punchable face in British journalism and I hope he gets what's coming, but what's with all these mean little queens doing all sorts of nasty shit in the British press? There's Dan, Niles, that guy who got caught wanking under his school desk and several others. Seems the Brits have cornered the market on mean, vindictive Gay men to do all their nasty reporting. All are frustrated little men with no lives of their own

[quote]I love you, [R12]!!

Aw, thank you. And you haven’t even heard about the time a “professional massage therapist” messaged me with a price list for a massage and hand job, what it would cost to let me fuck him, and a price for spending the entire night.

I kept repeating everything he said back and acting like I was the hooker and telling him that he needed to pay me more.

He was so confused and it ended with him saying I didn’t have to pay him, but would I be his boyfriend? He even said “I’ll spend my hooker money on you and buy you things and dinner.”

I told him I would think about it.

I went to University with Dan.

^ I lived about a mile from John Wayne Gacy . Not something to be proud of

Also, just a reminder that Wootton's boss, Rebekah Brooks, is a homophobic cunt, and even her then-husband thought so

[quote]Brooks was asked by the Leveson inquiry counsel, Robert Jay QC, on Friday whether she could recall saying to Bryant: "Ah, Mr Bryant. It's dark, isn't it? Shouldn't you be out on Clapham Common by now?"

[quote]Brooks was asked by Jay whether she could remember what her then husband, the actor Ross Kemp, said to her after her alleged comment. Bryant claims that Kemp told Brooks: "Shut up, you homophobic cow".

[quote]What are the top 3 news channels? BBC, Sky and ???

Unfortunately, GB News would be third

There are so many gays on GB News.

[quote]Unfortunately, GB News would be third

The article states GB News is fourth most watched news channel

Is anyone else a little concerned that the only sex pests being exposed lately are gay?

[quote]There's Dan, Niles, that guy who got caught wanking under his school desk and several others. Seems the Brits have cornered the market on mean, vindictive Gay men to do all their nasty reporting. All are frustrated little men with no lives of their own

Who is Niles?

Darren Grimes I actually feel a *bit* sorry for. the "wanking under the desk" was a made up claim by someone directing homophobic abuse at him and it stuck. The way he was treated and targeted personally after the EU referendum was horrendous (I say that as a Remainer) and he has been radicalised by that and the grift of being a controversialist commentator.

[quote]Is anyone else a little concerned that the only sex pests being exposed lately are gay?

Don't worry, the BBC's investigations into Tim Westwood are ongoing. And the Benjamin Mendy rape trial concluded last week.

Mason Greenwood is still in the news, as is Thomas Partay.

R20, I don't doubt Brooks is awful but Chris Bryant has a habit of dramatically exaggerating claims which was easily disproved.

This is what Popbitch recently wrote about Dan Wootton:

[quote]"It's a shame [The Sun] put themselves in this position because if all they wanted was a story about a news broadcaster who has made life uncomfortable for colleagues by sending them "inappropriate messages", they have a really juicy one much closer to home. It will involve asking some difficult questions, but they have an excellent starting lead. 
 They should still have all of Dan Wootton's old HR files stashed away somewhere – so maybe they could start there? There's bullying allegations, NDAs - even a few pay-offs they could get the guys in finance to dredge back up. While they're doing that, they could look into why Wootton kept getting promoted while some of those who lodged complaints got sidelined. Former colleagues seem perfectly willing to chat – but hey. We shouldn't be doing their job for them. Just start pulling at the thread. See what you find..."

The mainstream media are very bad at reporting on bad behaviour by other people in the media.

Columnist and journalists slag each off all the time when it comes to their articles and views but not their personal lives.

Nick Cohen was a known sex pest at The Guardian and generated no coverage despite articles in "new" media like The New European, and it's Byline who have done the Wootton story.

Cohen resigned in January but the sex pest accusations were only covered in mainstream media when the New York Times ran the story about his behaviour, leading to "Guardian cover up" stories.

@r25 "Who is Niles? "

Margret Thatcher's Tea Boy...

Private Eye article which seems to be partly about Wootton (saying the same things as Popbitch).

Miss Gardiner does a strong line in Joe Biden hatred for the Telegraph.

Don't forget Hardeep Singh Kohli.

Wow, r30, his eyes, mouth and nose are so close together, which makes his forehead look huge!

[quote] The way he was treated and targeted personally after the EU referendum was horrendous (I say that as a Remainer) and he has been radicalised by that and the grift of being a controversialist commentator.

Oh please, he was a vile little cunt before Brexit

[quote] I don't doubt Brooks is awful but Chris Bryant has a habit of dramatically exaggerating claims which was easily disproved.

What a shame for you, then, that the remark was overheard and reported on by several journalists.

r23 You're quite right, I somehow mixed up Wootton for the crafty wanker (who himself has been harassing staff at TalkTV).

Funnily enough, the third most popular news channel is Sky Sports News.

And let's not forget Richard Eden aka "Maureen"

[quote]ohonr=phone

Ohonr is the new BEARKING!

It always seemed like the pushing of Dan W by right wing media was suppose to be some kind of counter to Owen Jones.

I think all roads lead to Jason Knauf, Prince William's big, dumb, Gay, Texas hillbilly who keeps his close circle of Gay reporters on a short leash by tossing them juicy pieces of royal meat

[quote]It always seemed like the pushing of Dan W by right wing media was suppose to be some kind of counter to Owen Jones.

One of the worst aspects of "news" over the last 10 years is inviting pundits on to discuss topical issues because they have a social media following. It's one of the cheapest forms of TV you can make.

Jeremy Vine on C5 now runs form 9.15 to 1.40, with different hosts and panellists discussing any old shite that's in the papers or on Twitter. Good Morning Britain has 3 hours to fill. They both do very badly in the ratings compared with the BBC.

Producers want their clips to go viral so invite people with large social media followings who can talk with confidence despite having limited knowledge. People are encouraged to take polarised views because that makes good TV. India Willoughby went from a hard right disrupter calling for refugees to be drowned to now complaining that Labour is too right wing under Keir Starmer.

There was a ridiculous discussion recently about whether Bridget Jones is bad role model for women.

It's what Piers Morgan's new show aims for - the video with Douglas Murray and some wannabe twink discussing Sam Smith which ended with Murray shouting "would you shag it??" is the best example of this.

A plague on all their houses.

Besides having a thoroughly punchable face Wootton’s NZ accent is excruciatingly irritating. Deport the motherfucker back to the colonies. And shame on Lorraine Kelly for putting him on her show for all these years.

[QUOTE]Besides having a thoroughly punchable face Wootton’s NZ accent is excruciatingly irritating. Deport the motherfucker back to the colonies. And shame on Lorraine Kelly for putting him on her show for all these years.

The IRONY that he was complaining about migration on his show last night. Dan, there are good migrants and bad migrants. You're one of the shitty ones who contribute nothing positive to the UK. How about you fuck off back to where you came from - just like you want the others to. Hypocrite.

I see that the predictable people are supporting Wootton.

"@NileGardiner

Great to see @danwootton back on @GBNEWS tonight. The Left clearly hate the success of his show and the tremendous impact that GB News is having in the UK media market."

No, honestly, I can't get over that Wootton was complaining about economic migrants when he's 100% one himself.

I'm pretty sure that he's a psychopath. That video of him stealing someone's flowers was pretty telling as well.

[quote]That video of him stealing someone's flowers was pretty telling as well

Ugh, come on, you're not that stupid are you? Also, fuck you for making me defend him, even slightly.

[quote]Ugh, come on, you're not that stupid are you? Also, fuck you for making me defend him, even slightly.

Sure, explain what was OK about that?

[quote]Prince William's big, dumb, Gay, Texas hillbilly

You forgot HAWT.

^ Sure if you like big dumb Texas rednecks who suck dick...

Wait, I kind of like those 😛

r47 The fact that it didn't happen

Is the video of Dan Wootton rehearsing placing flowers at Buckingham Palace that someone reversed and jokingly claimed that he was stealing them?

You're all WOKE!

[quote]Sure if you like big dumb Texas rednecks who suck dick...

DAT'S DA SUCK JOB!

Love wonton noodles!

[quote]Besides having a thoroughly punchable face Wootton’s NZ accent is excruciatingly irritating. Deport the motherfucker back to the colonies. And shame on Lorraine Kelly for putting him on her show for all these years.

The actress Lorraine Kelly plays a very good role as Lorraine Kelly the tv presenter who loves having a vicious repulsive snake on her show to criticise famous people.

[quote]The actress Lorraine Kelly plays a very good role as Lorraine Kelly the tv presenter

Especially for tax purposes

Couldn't happen to a better person

The Guardian have now picked up the story.

[quote]The Guardian has over the last three years talked to multiple individuals working in the media who say they have been approached online by a person using the name Martin Branning.

[quote]The individuals, usually with links to the Sun, described being offered tens of thousands of pounds by Branning, usually in return for performing sexual acts on camera. The messages appeared to be personalised and were targeted at individuals, usually straight men, including employees of News UK.

Again, a behaviour people have known about for years.

The EastEnders-inspired pseudonym is too funny.

Wow, this guy is sleaze personified

More to come from the sounds of it

[quote]I have been looking into Martin Branning for several years. If you would like to join the people already sharing fresh information with me then my DMs are open

The Sun has some legal advice for catfish

[quote]Currently there is no specific law that deems the act of catfishing illegal.

[quote]Internet law specialists Cohen Davis solicitors explained that with the exception of harassment, “there are no criminal laws against impersonation on social media”.

[quote]However, although fake online profiles on social media and dating apps are not illegal themselves, 'there are other activities that engage catfishing or fake online accounts that may turn the otherwise lawful activity into activity which is unlawful', the firm added.

[quote]If a catfish illegally obtains money then they could be found guilty of fraud.

[quote]Similarly, a catfish could also be charged with a number of non-consensual sex related criminal offences if romance fraud has resulted sexual contact.

[quote]In this case, any consent given by the victim would be rendered void.

Martin Branning made me do it!

Headline news on ITV tonight!

He's only gone and done a monologue!

This is another hit job brought to the media by the scum south parkles. They have been goin after the truth tellers big time. Just look at the we hate the monarchy thread the last week. The s parkles are the most disgusting pigmaillons

I found the monologue very insincere. He comes across like someone who brings the drama and has finally been called out on it. Obviously we don’t have proof of anything yet but this stinks and there can’t be that many people out there who hate him enough for all this to be made up. There must be some truth to all this.

And the audacity of him to refer to social media being a cesspit when he built his ‘career’ swimming in the cesspit.

R66 is Dan

Dan does strike me as a possible datalounger

Shame about the teeth, the hair, the whole thing not coming together...and that's before we get to the arsehole part. He's probably such a cunt because he'd be a bore to everyone otherwise.

Shelley Hack was, in fact, a good actress.

Interesting that Tom Harwood seems to be Mr Clean in all this. Guess the fact he's a chastity sub helps.

So economic migrant Dan Wootton is now whining about a 'smear campaign' when that's ALL he's done his whole career!

Harwood is so obviously manufactured.

I can't stand Wootton and really don't care what happens to him BUT people coming forward on SM (people who have been revealed to have provable sketchy pasts e.g. criminal conventions) years after Wootton became a known name within the UK media does send off my BS detector.

R67 He seemed very uncomfortable in that monologue which to me suggests that perhaps there is something to the recent catfishing allegations made by Byline. I mean I'm sure Wootton is a terrible person in real life, but is he really that stupid? I guess time will tell.

r76 trying desperately to ignore the reports in Private Eye, Popbitch, and the multiple victims Byline Times spoke to

R77 Ah yes, Private Eye and Popbitch being the pinnacle of journalistic enterprise.

Popbitch has been right about many things. And they have to run stories past lawyers. This one they outright named Wootton so they must be very, very confident that their story is "substantially true".

[QUOTE]people who have been revealed to have provable sketchy pasts e.g. criminal conventions

How dare criminals congregate in large groups. Is this legal? 😉

These are the people Wootton approached as Martin Branning? Well, if I were a blackmailer I'd choose people who'd be more willing to break the law or who are in need of cash.

So as a non-Brit, I take it the Dan fellow is a conservative right-wing gay?

I can’t stand those maladjusted cunts. Traitors to the gay community, and of course, they always turn out to be psychotic sex-pests. Also, even worse, he’s FAT.

Maggie Smith is another good actress I just thought of.

Never mind the catfishing scandals, what are the odds he's a regular DL poster? I'm guessing 75%.

^ There are a couple of mean queens on here that certainly fit the Dan Wootton MO

R80 There are a couple issues going on with Wootton. An ex-partner (Adam) came forward with allegations on Twitter (Adam allegedly has restraining orders against him placed by other men who have dated him in the past). A former sex worker (who allegedly did jail time for blackmail schemes) posted allegations of sexual assault against Wooton on Twitter. Today, the Byline Times posted an article alleging Wooton has catfished men on apps offering huge amounts of money for them to pose and send sexual compromising photos.

The first two from Twitter are probably bogus. The catfishing sounds possible.

^ That Byline Times piece was good. They're just about the only reputable news outlet left in GB

Alex claimed to have found similar material to what the Byline Times wrote about - i.e. compromising sexual material of a colleague. You have to wonder why Wootton was collecting this type of material of colleagues. For kicks or, more sinisterly, to use as leverage? I've linked to the thread Alex made with his claims.

[quote]From Byline Times: "Among them are a very senior executive at Rupert Murdoch’s News UK alongside at least six other staff at The Sun newspaper – one with close links to News UK CEO Rebekah Brooks – friends, Facebook associates and users of the dating apps Grindr and Gaydar."

Byline Times say that a second instalment of their investigation is coming out today.

Also, this was interesting:

[quote]Insiders at GB News said that the presenter cried when he first saw Byline Times’ published story on Monday in the GB News green-room during the opening ad-break on his show. Another source claimed that his production team of 16 people were shocked and the atmosphere was “funereal”. Insiders also claimed that Wootton took advice from a former tabloid editor. Whatever that advice was, he seems to have decided to stake the colours of the entire GB News operation to his own career by claiming that Byline Times’ journalism was somehow an attack on the channel, rather than a public interest revelation about his personal behaviour over many years, while employed at other news organisations.

[quote]Harwood is so obviously manufactured.

Tom Harwood is a genuine pro Brexit anti immigration anti migrant anti benefits right wing Tory.

He's fully engorged with gender ideology. He recently got involved with the "is t ok for a man to breastfeed a baby even if there's no health benefit to the baby and the man is a nipple fetishist" debate.

I wonder if Dan has any photos of Cameron Walker, GB News resident twink and royal reporter!

I don't think this has been discussed but what was the ultimate goal of getting videos of his colleagues having sex on film and spending a significant amount of money offering it?

Was it to blackmail them?

Seems like an awfully expensive way to get porn.

I've already seen some WHY AREN'T THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA COVERING THIS tweets this morning.

The BBC, Sky and ITV are covering the story on broadcasts and their websites.

The Guardian, The Telegraph, Independent, Daily Mirror, Daily Express and Daily Record have all covered it, there's nothing on The Sun or the Mail Online websites.

From his ex-boyfriend:

That site above in R93 is dodgy as hell.

....and the Oscar goes to...........Dan. With a wee hand on his heart and squeezing out a tear over the sound of a crackly voice.

Lily Allen says that she was bullied by Wootton.

"Lily Allen @lilyallen

following on from my tweet yesterday, i see that some think i was blaming Dan Wooton for my dependencies. I don’t expect people to understand the pain associated with being harassed in the very public way that i was for a good 15 years. but just because you can’t understand it, it doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen, it did. Peaches Geldof, Amy Winehouse and Caroline Flack were all bullied and abused, subjected to the same kind of harassment that i and many others were, and at the same time. it was the culture back then, we were fair game, because we were female, young, articulate, well paid, brilliant at our jobs, vulnerable and relatable, we all wore our hearts on our sleeves and spoke our truths. And for that we needed to be destroyed. I can’t speak for the women above and neither can they, for obvious reasons, but i know how trapped i felt, how lonely and isolated i was, how scared i was, how unfair and desperate it all felt and how substances and alcohol felt like the only way to escape.

Dan Wootton last night claimed he is a victim of a smear campaign by nefarious players with an axe to grind, that his accuser is running a campaign to destroy his life.

The irony is not lost on me, maybe now Dan can begin to understand what it felt like.

I actually wish him well, i hope that he comes out the other side of whatever it is that he is facing, and that eventually it leads him to a place of happiness, peace and truth."

Ok the guy is a piece of shit, but:

[quote] it was the culture back then, we were fair game, because we were female, young, articulate, well paid, brilliant at our jobs, vulnerable and relatable,

Yes, Amy was brilliant, the other women mentioned...🙄

I do think that British tabloid culture is very toxic. They go HARD after certain celebs. And Wootton has been part of that all his career.

The phone hacking scandal is just one example. That killed Murdoch's News of the World which routinely had celeb gossip scoops.

Some of the coverage of her was undoubtedly vile, including photos of her collapsed in a field, but Lily Allen is someone who was boosted massively by celebrity tabloid culture.

She came from a dysfunctional family but was a wealthy well connected privileged nepo baby who was willing to give a journalist a quote slagging off another female celebrity to get a headline, which in turn led to more press coverage.

The idea that she and Amy, Peaches etc were targeted because they are women is also bullshit. Footballers get it much, much worse but there's a lot less sympathy because they earn so much.

100!

[quote]I do think that British tabloid culture is very toxic.

As an English person I think it's a reflection of the English personality, I'm afraid.

As Quentin Crisp once said: England: cruel people, kind system. America: kind people, cruel system.

Byline will release part 2 tonight when Dan is on air, around 9.15pm apparently

Total FMD

Americans need to quit thinking British culture is Masterpiece fucking Theatre (ITV drama).

& Brits need to stop thinking of America as the country of FUN.

It's WAY past that.

R103 by the way FMD in the UK stands for foot and mouth disease. Stop trying to make FMD happen, Gretchen.

[quote]The idea that she and Amy, Peaches etc were targeted because they are women is also bullshit. Footballers get it much, much worse but there's a lot less sympathy because they earn so much.

LOL fuck off with this bullshit.

R102 It appears they didn't.

R106, what's it supposed to mean?

Where are the new accusations?

[quote]Ohonr is the new BEARKING!

Not until you start a thread with “Disling an ohonr wirh a pecnil” and it gets 600 replies. Which it won’t. You’ll never make Ohonr happen.

How do a bunch of dots in OP’s image ending up looking like the guy? They’re just dots. Is it witchcraft?

"@BylineTimes · 22h

Thanks for your responses. We are getting a lot of new information which will take a bit more time to process, so bear with us a short while we investigate further"

It seems that they needed to check out new information offered to them but the second part should be out tonight.

2nd part of their Wootton investigation is out.

Leave Dan Wootton aloooone

[quote] In one of the cases, a very senior member of The Sun team took a kitchen knife to a meeting with a former editor of the newspaper with the intention of slitting their own wrists in front of the executive, who had sided with Wootton in a dispute ultimately settled for a six-figure sum.

Mary!

[quote]Former staff have told Byline Times’ investigators how Wootton “continually tried to make people admit they were bisexual or gay – he challenged people on their sexual orientation all the time”.

[quote]“He sexually harassed these male colleagues all the time. One would come in and Dan would often comment on the way he looked and goad him, saying ‘are you sure you want to be married? We all know you’re gay’.

That's not sexual harassment, it's banter!

R116 I'm sorry but if you bring a knife to a work meeting with the intention of possibly killing yourself, you have serious pre-exisiting mental health issues.

R117 Making jokes about straight guys "being gay" for dressing well is now considered "challenging people's sexual orientation" and harassment. Fucking straight people! So I can be called a faggot but if I make a joke about gay stereotypes I'm harassing a straight guy!

This latest Byline piece is rather "gossipy," like high school level mud slinging. Look, I'm sure Dan Wootton is a terrible human being and I really don't care what happens to him.

r118 No, in any decent workplace you can't be called a faggot

r119 Just ignoring the million quids worth of payouts and legal fees, eh?

[quote]“As the boss, he had control over the company payment system. He would sabotage other journalists. He would go into the payment system and find out the names of contacts. He would then get in touch with them himself and make them deal with him directly.

...

[quote]In February 2020, on her first day in the role, Wootton left Newton furious by “demanding” she promote him, prompting a “cute” move by the new editor, who reached out to Wootton’s “best remaining royal contact” and placed them on a special retainer ensuring that they dealt exclusively with her.

Well that's just beautiful

Are we going to talk about the fact that Dan Evan who has been writing these articles is a convicted criminal?

Oh is this him?

And that changes thing how, r122?

R124 A former News of the World (was Part of Sun Media) employee who convicted and who might have an axe to grind against former Sun employees...

[quote]“As the boss, he had control over the company payment system. He would sabotage other journalists. He would go into the payment system and find out the names of contacts. He would then get in touch with them himself and make them deal with him directly.

[quote]“It was impossible to do your job. The most valuable thing a journalist has are their contacts. They are our stock in trade. It was a classic campaign of constructive dismissal. He knew what he was doing.”

I have to admit I'm struggling to feel sorry for a Sun journalist working on the celebrity desk who lost access to contacts leaking celebrity gossip and tip offs.

First of all, it's News UK, not "Sun Media".

Secondly, and for the umpteenth time, these allegations have been reported on for years. If they're false, why did News UK not take the chance to deny them? And are you claiming all the victims he spoke to were lying?

You idiots defending Wootton are just so fucking useless. Oh, let me guess, you're not defending him, you don't even care about him, just "asking questions" or some bullshit.

True r125, but it seems like this is a whole world of sleazy, backstabbing, lying whores and grifters who all have deep resentments and hatreds. I doubt anybody involved in this story has clean hands.

Dan Wootton is a pig, but yeah, given what's coming to light about Dan Evans I'm taking it all with a grain of salt.

LOL r129 is the same poster as r122, trying to pretend his bullshit is having an effect. Forget to switch accounts?

[quote]Secondly, and for the umpteenth time, these allegations have been reported on for years. If they're false, why did News UK not take the chance to deny them? And are you claiming all the victims he spoke to were lying? You idiots defending Wootton are just so fucking useless. Oh, let me guess, you're not defending him, you don't even care about him, just "asking questions" or some bullshit.

News UK, The Sun and Dan Wootton have always had appalling reputations.

These "revelations" are like learning that Leonardo di Caprio holidays with women in their early 20s or that Naomi Campbell has abused housekeeping staff.

I'm not defending Wootton, and I'm not feeling a huge amount of sympathy to those people who worked with him to humiliate performers on a regular basis and got paid very well for it.

[quote]I'm not defending Wootton

Sure you aren't, you just keep trying to downplay these reports for totally not defending-the-cunt reasons.

[quote]These "revelations" are like learning that Leonardo di Caprio holidays with women in their early 20s or that Naomi Campbell has abused housekeeping staff.

Seriously Dan, you need to work out some better lines, because this is just pathetically poor.

LOL R132

Dan Wootton is a vile reprehensible stain on humanity. And so are the other people at The Sun who helped him do what he did. And Lorraine Kelly and Piers Morgan who regularly have the Markles on to trash Meghan in the name of "news". The treatment of Alexandra Burke when she was on Strictly was one of the nastiest bullying campaigns I've ever seen play out in the media.

So it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that he bullies his colleagues. And knowing what happened with phone hacking, especially the Sienna Miller story, it's no surprise that The Sun and News International are toxic. There's nothing in the Byline article today that makes me think "oh that's shocking" because none of it is shocking. There are snakes in a nest of vipers? Who knew!

And I don't feel sorry for the other Sun journalists who were bullied in the same way I don't feel sorry for the armed robbers who were arrested after the getaway driver ditched them and drove off with the money they stole at gunpoint.

It's strange because Dan Wootton was responsible for the Amber Heard domestic violence article which Depp sued over and lost. I largely believe Amber Heard and the Depp truthers are now celebrating his "demise" as a way to discredit her.

No, not the stress-induced hair loss.

:"Byline Times has now spoken to multiple former editorial and support staff at Britain’s biggest tabloid, many of whom are fearful of being identified after their experiences working at Murdoch-owned News UK – with one left suicidal, another suffering stress-induced hair loss, and others deserting the industry."

Popbitch:

[quote]Dan Wootton has replaced Huw Edwards at the centre of this week's media storm – and, unlike Huw, Dan decided to address the allegations facing him on air.

[quote]In his big Errors Of Judgement speech on Tuesday night, Wootton claimed that the so-called smear campaign against him was the result of "nefarious players" and "dark forces" trying to shut down GB News.

[quote]An interesting theory, but anyone who received Issue 1029 of Popbitch will know that our first questions about the mysterious Martin Branning appeared in March 2021 – a full three months before GB News launched.

[quote]It's typical of Dan to be so modest and self-effacing, of course, but we hope he realises people aren't just interested in this story because of the connection to GB News. They're interested in it because of him.

[quote]And it's extremely well deserved.

And the story from 2021 they referred to:

[quote]It’s not uncommon for a certain type of media dickswinger to assume a fake identity in order to take care of some of their more illicit extracurricular activities. Donald Trump used to call news desks as “John Barron”, for example. Max Clifford used to arrange his sex parties with the alias “Terry Denton”.

[quote]For a while now we’ve been hearing some well-sourced whispers that there’s someone working in the UK media who has outsourced some of their more sketchy work – including the odd spot of attempted blackmail – to a secret second identity: “Martin Branning”.

[quote]We’re keen to know a little more about it all, so if you’ve ever had the pleasure of dealing with “Martin"

Byline is funded, in part, by Hugh Grant and Elton John - two men caught in their own sexual scandals. Elton recently lost his lawsuit attempting to suppress his sexual harassment matters. Their both pissy little bitches who want to use Byline and the courts to suppress the press because that press revealed their peccadillos. They care nothing about exposing the press. I don't trust anything printed by them.

I also suspect OP is some weirdo Markle stan who thinks taking down Wootton in some way invalidates anything he or any other press have reported about Markle and her husband. Those two have failed in every arena in which they tossed their hat. Toppling Wootton will not reverse the tide on those two. Pick a better horse next time, OP.

Also Popbitch:

[quote]We're glad to see the Sun has taken us up on the advice we offered them last week, launching a proper investigation into their former golden boy, Dan Wootton.

[quote]It sounds like it's in safe hands. HR sent out emails this week to employees they thought might potentially have been affected by the alleged actions of Wootton, or could shine some light on his time at the News Of The World and the Sun.

[quote]And on at least one of those emails, forgot to use BCC – so all the individuals who received the email could see who else got it too.

Please, God, ONE thread where no one from the fucking "Royal" family is mentioned! Just one!!!!

And even more from Popbitch:

[quote]During the Phillip Schofield saga, Dan Wootton wrote in his regular Mail column that the reason he quit his job at ITV was because they tried to ban him from talking about Schofield and Meghan Markle on air. Unwilling to be bound by such suffocating conditions, Dan claims he proudly told them where to stick their job – and left.

[quote]This might astound you, but it seems recollections of those events differ somewhat from person to person. The story that survives at ITV is that Dan was suspected of leaking stories that he'd gleaned from hanging around at ITV and feeding them back to his paymasters at The Sun – in breach of the terms of his employment.

[quote]To make sure it wasn't coincidence, they pulled the old Wagatha Christie trick on him: deliberately floating some fake gossip his way to see if – by some miracle – it made its way into the paper.

[quote]And it did. So they dropped him.

I generally agree with you r131, though I suspect Dan was just a bit worse, or maybe just better at it. I suspect some of them would maybe try to not be a garbage person here and there. Dan seems to have decided, no, I'm going to be a cunt and never stop cunting from dawn to dusk. He certainly is one of the least sympathetic "victims" of tabloid journalism ever.

[quote]Byline is funded, in part, by Hugh Grant and Elton John - two men caught in their own sexual scandals. Elton recently lost his lawsuit attempting to suppress his sexual harassment matters. Their both pissy little bitches who want to use Byline and the courts to suppress the press because that press revealed their peccadillos. They care nothing about exposing the press. I don't trust anything printed by them.

I agree with you about that - the Huw Edwards story unleased a lot of support for a privacy law which is part of Byline's idea of "ethical media" where they only target the people who deserve to be exposed. And Elton John and David Furnish's injunction against the baby oil paddling pool sessions with the personal trainer isn't worth being reported.

[quote]I also suspect OP is some weirdo Markle stan who thinks taking down Wootton in some way invalidates anything he or any other press have reported about Markle and her husband. Those two have failed in every arena in which they tossed their hat. Toppling Wootton will not reverse the tide on those two. Pick a better horse next time, OP.

I started the thread as discussion in the Huw Edwards thread started focusing more on Wootton. I also posted at R133. I loathe Wootton and his bullying, I'm not especially enamoured by Meghan and Harry but loathe the way Thomas Markle and his wretched family were repeatedly invited on to British tv to slag them off.

I think every person mentioned in this thread is contemptible and that's why I can't bring myself to care about this. Here's another slime--Omid Scobie.

Apologies, R141. SM has been awash with their fans who seem to think the reporting on Wootton somehow translates into a defeat of all press who criticized the royal couple, valid or not - it does not sound like you are in that milieu. I don't have any issues with people such as Wootton being exposed but detest Byline and those who fund its enterprises as their intent is to silent negative press (IMO).

If anyone's curious, this is the original Martin Branning piece that Popbitch published before GB News was even created.

Why doesn't the Daily Mail have anything about this?

R145 Wootton is a Daily Mail Columnist, so they aren't going to say anything until/if it becomes impossible to continue to employ him.

I don't give a damn what happens to Dan Wootton but I have to roll my eyes at why people pounce on these stories (usually people on the opposite side of the political spectrum of the person being exposed). I don't why we have to maintain this fallacy that people who work in the media are nice people off camera-they are not! It takes a huge amount of ambition and self-confidence to make it in the media, and most people don't have a problem with walking all over people to do it. I'm not condoning it, but that's just a fact.

If all these allegations are true, then I hope Wootton gets whats coming to him, but it's also not wrong of me (although those on these threads who cannot support any kind of logic one way or the other) that the people making these allegations (an ex-boyfriend, an ex-sex worker, and Dan Evans) all have criminal convictions and that Evans is currently a principal witness (although he has retracted his witness statements after the judge called out some factual inconsistencies) in a number of celebrity court cases (most notably involving Prince Harry, Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley and Hugh Grant) with aims to censor the [right-winged] tabloid media in the UK. The fact that these revelations are coming out when Wootton's program is routinely the number news program at 9 pm and GB News (which is a horrific channel btw) is beating Sky News in the ratings, is slightly suspect. That's my opinion and i know at least one of you (looking at you OP) will get their tits in a twist that people can think differently than you.

[quote]I don't why we have to maintain this fallacy that people who work in the media are nice people off camera

No-one thinks that, that's just a strawman you made up.

[quote] that the people making these allegations (an ex-boyfriend, an ex-sex worker, and Dan Evans)

Just ignore all the other victims that Byline Times spoke to (and who News UK paid off), that's it.

For someone who doesn't care about Wootton, you're sure going out of your way to try and dismiss these reports.

[quote]Wootton's program is routinely the number news program

It's not news though, is it?

[quote]The fact that these revelations are coming out when Wootton's program is routinely the number news program at 9 pm and GB News (which is a horrific channel btw) is beating Sky News in the ratings, is slightly suspect. That's my opinion

Shitty opinion in my opinion. People have been looking into him for years, well before he joined GB News (as confirmed by Popbitch and The Guardian's Jim Waterson). The real reason it has come out now is that it stuck in people's craw that The Sun and most of the rest of the media went after Huw Edwards while saying nothing about what they had heard about Dan Wootton.

R147 & R148 You could have published this in one post instead of two!

R149 We're different people.

R150 not according to your IP honey ;)

R151 We genuinely are different people. You're lying about the IP thing. Only Murie! can see that anyway.

Tell me what my IP is if you want to prove it.

[quote]Shitty opinion in my opinion. People have been looking into him for years, well before he joined GB News (as confirmed by Popbitch and The Guardian's Jim Waterson). The real reason it has come out now is that it stuck in people's craw that The Sun and most of the rest of the media went after Huw Edwards while saying nothing about what they had heard about Dan Wootton.

It says a lot about the media that Wootton's story was only published IN DIRECT REPONSE to Huw Edwards being "exposed" by The Sun.

And the instinctive response by the GB News crowd to defend Wootton is the same as the instinctive response to defend Edwards by the people who hate The Sun.

Can't wait for Murdoch to die.

[quote]It says a lot about the media that Wootton's story was only published IN DIRECT REPONSE to Huw Edwards being "exposed" by The Sun.

Because victims were so sickened by Wootton's hypocrisy that they were now willing to speak out.

Once again for someone who claims to not like Wootton, you're working overtime to try and dismiss these stories and defend him, even now parroting his lines about this being a media smear campaign against him

Concern trolling.

R147 and R148 are different posters.

[quote] Once again for someone who claims to not like Wootton, you're working overtime to try and dismiss these stories and defend him, even now parroting his lines about this being a media smear campaign against him

Where did I say it was a smear?

It’s all true, Wootton is a nasty horrible man but for whatever reason this story hasn’t been publishes for years.

Saying the reason is now ‘hypocrisy’ opens the door to moralising celebrities being exposed for their actions.

Actually, parts of the story have been published for years, in Private Eye.

And opens the door? Because tabloids have never exposed celebrity hypocrisy before?

Jeez.

"@BylineTimes · 3h Update on our next #MediaToo Dan Wootton story. There has been some illicit attempts to access our work by unknown third parties. We’re conducting a full security review with our IT consultants. This may delay our next story a little till this evening

@BylineTimes · 2h Security update two. The same team member who we believed was hacked had blood smeared over the windscreen of his car this morning. This may very well be a coincidence, but rest assured both incidents have been reported to the police"

Reply to someone who commented that it didn't seem likely to be a coincidence:

"@BylineTimes

It seems much less of a coincidence the more we investigate. This might delay our next story to Monday, but wrongdoing must be rooted out"

[quote] And opens the door? Because tabloids have never exposed celebrity hypocrisy before.

Byline supports privacy laws and limits on tabloid excesses. They’re a highly partisan group. And that’s okay because they’re the good guys right?

Looking forward to the Marina Hyde takedown later

Wootton's lawyers seem to both be lying about that he wasn't told about the claims before they were published AND engaging in SLAPP (i.e. strategic lawsuits against public participation, or strategic litigation against public participation, are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defence until they abandon their criticism or opposition).

Holy fuck I nearly choked on my Fry's coffee cream reading Twitter.

Dan is only launching a crowdfunder to pay his legal costs!!!

What a fucking grifter!

Well we know now that he definitely cannot meet the criteria to get a Coutts account.

r162 Provide a source to back up your claims

If Wootton successfully defends himself, his legal fees and costs will be paid by the other party, right? It sounds like he's not very hopeful if he's beating bushes for cash. Setting the stage for his eternal victimhood.

Can afford to offer £30k for nudes, can't afford a lawyer, sounds legit

True r169. In fact, I wonder if anybody is still waiting for their payout. That would be a fun lawsuit to throw into the mix.

[quote]If Wootton successfully defends himself, his legal fees and costs will be paid by the other party, right? It sounds like he's not very hopeful if he's beating bushes for cash. Setting the stage for his eternal victimhood.

Wootton would be defending his reputation, not defending a legal action, as he would be the claimant in any case he takes against Byline. Hope that doesn't sound pedantic. A good comparison would be Rebekah Vardy's libel action against Coleen Rooney, which Vardy lost along with all sense of dignity.

There's a lawyer called Mark Lewis who has been very effective winning libel cases. He represented Jack Monroe (since exposed as a grifter) when she took on Katie Hopkins and has represented Rachel Riley against numerous Jew hating Corbyn fanatics.

One Corbyn fan crowdfunded to take legal action against The Sun after the Jeremy Clarkson article on Meghan Markle was published. People will throw money at anything if it's their side.

Wootton crowdfunding a legal defence is highly suspect...a very Trumpian cash grab. That be said, I'm sorry but who would be stupid enough to believe some stranger online offering £30k for your nudes is legit.

Jukes is being bullish but we'll see.

"@peterjukes · 2h

Important. We're crowdfunding for our journalists and their three years of investigation. We're not yet crowdfunding for legal fees because we think it's very unlikely given the evidence we have Wootton will ever initiate proceedings"

"@peterjukes · 2h

By this time next week, I bet a lot of Wootton's crowdfunders will want their money back. Bookmark this tweet"

"@peterjukes · 2h

In addition to the 30 detailed evidential questions @BylineTimes sent to Wootton's lawyers earlier this week, we've sent another 20 plus today to answer by Monday.

Every article we publish has been built up forensically.

The current response from Wootton: 'hard left blog'"

Third part of Byline Times's Wootton investigation.

Martin Branning, you in danger, gurl!

They spent three years investigating this creep's kinks and bullying? All because he broke the story on Megxit and cackled like a fool about woke and cancel culture. How about exposing medical malpractice, government corruption, police brutality or trafficking? This is what Elton John and Hugh Grant are subsidizing? Stop the press.

R176 You know that they do both things? Just have a look at their website.

Sounding a bit desperate, Dan.

I haven't really been following this much because I think everyone on GBNews is a bat shit white supremacist, but I am curious why no mainstream media outlet in the UK has really picked up on this story. The BBC did report Dan Wootton's reaction to Byline's initial report, but not the allegations themselves and none of the "serious" outlets have picked up the allegations. It's been more than a week now.

That does seem odd r179. I'm American, and I know the rules are somewhat different on reporting allegations, but the guy in the third part said he is willing to work with the police. If he actually files an official police report, would that turn it into a more generally reported story, or would there still be kind of a hush. Pressuring and blackmailing somebody into performing sex acts on camera seems like a pretty serious allegation.

[quote]I haven't really been following this much because I think everyone on GBNews is a bat shit white supremacist, but I am curious why no mainstream media outlet in the UK has really picked up on this story. The BBC did report Dan Wootton's reaction to Byline's initial report, but not the allegations themselves and none of the "serious" outlets have picked up the allegations. It's been more than a week now.

It's because hardly anyone knows who Dan Wootton is outside of social media.

The chair of Tesco who regularly appeared on the media quit in May this year after being accused of inappropriate behaviour towards women. The story ran for a day.

Dan Wootton has a similar level of fame to Owen Jones who, according to Private Eye, has been found guilty of bullying other journalists. Jones was instrumental in the campaign to bully Suzanne Moore out of The Guardian. When Pink News libelled Julie Bindel, the response of Owen Jones to the article and his promotion of it was evidence of the damage done to Bindel's reputation.

You could ask why the mainstream media hasn't covered Owen Jones as well. It's because they're minor characters in public life currently involved in HR disputes with their private companies.

Nobody cares about this insider shit except those on the inside a small set of enthusiasts. They know this.

The guy in R174's link made some very stupid decisions, but that doesn't mean he deserved the way Wootton treated him. Wootton sounds like a psycho, particularly given that he blackmailed him into making a sex tape of him and his partner, with whom he was seemingly infatuated. Creepy AF.

I'm genuinely confused by aspects of the story.

How many times did "the victim" film for Wootton and what was he paid in total? How old was he?

He was offered "up to £5,000 a week for “modeling and other work”." Where was Wootton getting the money from considering he was 25 at the time?

And this bit

[quote]In his journalistic career, Dan Wootton has revealed a number of men as gay or bisexual – including Duncan James from the band Blue and a star of the BBC reality show The Apprentice.

Are they hinting that the guy was fucking celebrities and reality contestants and that Wootton was using the sex tapes as leverage to get an exclusive?

His career in general is rather questionable - from Wiki:

[quote]Wootton joined the News of the World TV team in February 2007,[11] becoming TV editor in November 2007,[12] and show-business editor in November 2008 until its closure in July 2011,[9][13] when he then became a columnist and feature writer for the Daily Mail and editor-at-large for Now magazine.

Those are some pretty big jumps upwards. And I don't think they were down to him having a winning personality.

r184 I remember that they also put in that Wootton asked the man if he'd ever slept with a celebrity. That seemed like a bit of an odd thing to put in when the man said he hadn't and then there wasn't really a follow-up to that. You could be onto something !

Especially interesting that the Sun seem to be shitting themselves even though he no longer works for them. If it was something he purely did privately, why are they getting lawyers all over it?

"@AdamBienkov · 4h

The Sun says it has appointed law firm Kingsley Napley, which describes itself as the "go-to firm for white collar crime", to help investigate the allegations against its former employee Dan Wootton."

[quote]Kingsley Napley also represented Rebekah Brooks during the phone hacking scandal

Well there we are.

Grand standing MPs are awful.

I watched some of the committee when ITV execs were interviewed after Phillip Schofield and there were a few decent questions but most of the questions were asked with the intention of getting a short clip the MPs can upload to Twitter,.

hahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahaha ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa

I hope he's sweating and unable to sleep right now.

4th part. Definitely worth a read if just to go WTAF.

(TL;DR - Wootton 'rented' porn star accounts on Facebook to catfish people who seemed to be people he knew, and then he paid the porn stars to go and film themselves having sex with that person. And he used The Sun's money to pay for at least one of the hotels but lied about it being for a contact for a Depp/Heard story.)

Odder and odder. I think it's pretty safe to say now he was blackmailing celebs

Did people really use Facebook to hook up?

The EastEnders portmanteau will forever be the gayest story behind a pseudonym ever.

If part 4 is anything to go by then he’s finished for sure right? They seem to have the receipts. He must be sweating streams with anxiety right now.

[quote]If part 4 is anything to go by then he’s finished for sure right? They seem to have the receipts. He must be sweating streams with anxiety right now.

The hypocritical right-wing media who went postal about the Huw Edwards claims are totally silent about these claims. And in addition, police in the UK prosecute very, very few crimes. So he must fancy his chances for sure.

[quote]The hypocritical right-wing media who went postal about the Huw Edwards claims are totally silent about these claims. And in addition, police in the UK prosecute very, very few crimes. So he must fancy his chances for sure.

The right wing media aren't "totally silent" about these claims. The Express and Telegraph have both covered the Byline expose which you'd have seen for yourself by typing "DAILY EXPRESS DAN WOOTTON" or "DAILY TELEGRAPH DAN WOOTTON". The Sun and Daily Mail haven't reported any allegations against Wootton, not surprising considering his professional relationship with them. The Guardian didn't cover the allegations about their sex pest journalist Nick Cohen or their bullying journalist Owen Jones.

And worth repeating again for those at the back, MOST PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA WHO DAN WOOTTON IS. He's considered neither famous not respectable so any scandal is met with a shrug from most people, like it was with Nick Cohen and Owen Jones.

Huw Edwards on the other hand is a high profile public figure and the story wasn't JUST about Huw Edwards, it was about the BBC failing to act on complaints about its employees.

I posted at R184 and asked if Byline were hinting at Wootton getting hold of celebrity sex tapes and using them as leverage. If that becomes the story, be it Duncan from Blue or an Apprentice candidate, then the story of "Sun journalist is unethical cunt" becomes something a lot bigger. But at the moment the story is "horrible man with dreadful reputation accused of deeply unpleasant and potentially illegal behaviour".

Agreed, R197. Huw Edwards is known by virtually everyone in the UK, whereras most British people wouldn't recognise Dan Wootton if they fell over him in the street. There's no comparison.

[quote]it was about the BBC failing to act on complaints about its employees.

Oh that's bullshit, they emailed the parents who did not reply, and when they tried to call them on the number they provided, the number was disconnected.

Wow. This guy is a massive scum bag.

^ yep!

" why doesn't the Daily Mail have anything to say about this?" I've wondered that myself. In fact I haven't seen much coverage of this. He's back on his show, like nothing is happening. He sure loves to go after some people hard, maybe the tables have turned. He seems like an self assured vicious man.

R202 Wootton is a columnist for the Daily Mail. They aren't going to touch this story until there is no choice. While I believe Wootton is a creep and a piece of scum, until the mainstream media start grabbing hold of this story, I'm not going to pop any champagne bottles. While Byline does seem to have good sources (and they suggest they have the receipts), the fact that no major outlet in the UK has touched this story does make me think it's not as "iron clad" as Byline presents it. Major media outlets will not report on these type of allegations unless their sources and evidence is rock solid.

[quote]the fact that no major outlet in the UK has touched this story does make me think it's not as "iron clad" as Byline presents it. Major media outlets will not report on these type of allegations unless their sources and evidence is rock solid.

and yet they all - left and right-wing media - were happy to breathlessly report on the Huw Edwards and Philip Schofield allegations for weeks - which were a lot more flimsy.

The rumours about Philip Schofield took years to reach the mainstream media, R204. And he's miles more famous than Wootton.

Sordid people discussing a sordid subject.

R196 and R204 do you live in the UK?

Wootton's MailOnline column hasn't appeared this month. Private Eye has pointed out that his last column urged Sunak to get the UK out of the ECHR while Wootton's lawyers sent out letters arguing that the ECHR means that Wootton should be entitled to privacy. You have to laugh. Also because so much of his work is about not giving celebs privacy.

Most or all of this must be for his own kicks, what would he get out of blackmailing randoms on Facebook?

Looks like he's on the hook for fraud too if he was paying pornstars with The Sun's money.

Rupert Murdoch's money.*

Am I supposed to care about whether celebs have privacy? Fuck Hugh Grant and the OP's corporate overloads. Dan Wootton sucks and deserves whatever comes of this, but the people subsidizing these investigations suck, too.

Overlords. Freudian slip.

You're ALL cunts!

r209 They weren't randoms, we know he was picking at least some people he worked with, and there's a good reason the Byline Times article mentions one of the victims was targeted during the BAFTAs

Same here, R211. Could not care less about Wootton, but the people salivating at this latest news give not one whit about journalistic integrity or for anyone who may be a victim of Wootton's. Most are Meghan Markle and/or Prince Harry fans who want someone to blame for their spectacular downfall. They've failed in every single endeavor and made themselves a laughingstocks all on their own. But I guess it is easier to blame those that profit on their demise than admit the pair incompetent grifters who richly deserve their fate.

That's some serious conclusion-jumping, R215.

Funny how these posters who claims not to care at all about Wootton, are so desperate to make stuff up in defence of him, isn't it?

Still waiting for a source for the repeated claims that Elton John and High Grant are funding Byline Times.

Yeah, the requisite H&M mention was a clear tactic.

Here's the BAFTAs mention. First thing I note is that there's a suite paid for by the sponsor at the Savoy. Do they do that for journalists? Or celebs? Second thing is that Wootton broke with his Branning alter ego for it.

[quote]"This newspaper has also spoken to another man Wootton paid to make a secret film of an unwitting third party in 2012, this time at London’s Savoy hotel in a suite paid for by the then sponsors of the BAFTAs, the telecoms company Orange. The man said he had initially dealt with Wootton’s alter ego Martin Branning and had made secret films for Branning for £250 a time, before being approached openly by Wootton and asked to meet another man whom he covertly filmed without consent. He said: “It was on a Sunday, during the BAFTAs, while Dan was still at The Sun. I got a message from Wootton himself. He asked me to secretly record me [performing a specified sex act on a man who did not know he was being filmed] at a hotel room at The Savoy for money.”

[quote]Funny how these posters who claims not to care at all about Wootton, are so desperate to make stuff up in defence of him, isn't it? Still waiting for a source for the repeated claims that Elton John and High Grant are funding Byline Times.

I don't know about Elton John but Hugh Grant has repeatedly endorsed Byline and there are close links between Hacked off and Byline.

Elton John and his partner David Furnish had an injunction to stop the media in England and Wales reporting on David's frolics with a man in a paddling pool, despite the stories being published elsewhere in the world.

Byline famously ran a story about Tory MP John Whittingdale, who they saw as an enemy. A Byline journalist was attacking the media this week for its coverage of the Farage banking story, a man they see as an enemy.

Byline is a highly partisan outlet who have a lot of celebrity support because they take on the tabloids. As I've said previously, The Sun and Wootton in particular are despicable but a privacy law is very troubling.

[quote] As I've said previously, The Sun and Wootton in particular are despicable but a privacy law is very troubling.

The funny thing is that Wootton's lawyers are pushing the 'privacy' argument. I personally don't want a privacy law. I think that people who put themselves in the public eye have to take both the benefits (money, fame) along with the downsides (more scrutiny, loss of privacy). In other words, you can't have your cake and eat it.

But that doesn't take away from Byline Times's brave reporting of this when no-one else will. I support freedom of press and that means a wide range - sometimes the right-wing press has good reporting and sometimes the left-wing press has good reporting.

Elton linked Harry up with his current representation and Harry is now also part of the group of celebrities, including Elton and Hugh, suing various publications. They are all closely linked.

r220 Endorsing isn't the same as funding, is it? Just look at all the random shit you're throwing at the wall, hoping something sticks.

And let's see a source for your claim Byline support a privacy law

Here's Byline founder Peter Jukes arguing why the Huw Edwards story shouldn't have been reported.

And he's right.

Seeing as Jukes is making a privacy argument based on elderly closeted homosexual Huw Edwards coming to terms with his love of legal teenage dick, would it also have been a privacy issue if 60 year old father of five heterosexually married Huw Edwards was paying an 18 year old woman for sex?

Assuming no conflict of interests, yes. Do you have a point?

Was it a breach of Kevin Spacey's privacy when the Old Vic revealed 20 male staff members had complained about Spacey less than 24 hours after Spacey made public that he was gay?

R215, the laughingstocks are right-wingers like you who are obsessed with Harry and Megan. They are even being targeted by the Heritage Foundation.

LOL do you actually think you're making a clever point? Or are you just do dumb that you can't see the difference between a situation between consenting adults and not?

Or just throwing more shit at the wall?

r230 meant as a reply to r228

There's a difference between reporting on a celebrity's private life and doing illegal shit like tapping people's phones, hacking them, or blackmailing people for dirt.

[quote]LOL do you actually think you're making a clever point? Or are you just do dumb that you can't see the difference between a situation between consenting adults and not? Or just throwing more shit at the wall?

You didn't answer. Is it breaching someone's privacy for an organisation to reveal multiple complaints were made about a former employee?

I'm not a privacy expert. But the element you're missing, because you're an idiot, is the public interest. Yes, it was in the public interest for the Old Vic to do that. So if it was a breach of privacy, it had a good reason to do so. Again, get to your point so we can laugh at you.

And the argument was made that the Huw Edwards story was in the public interest - 40+ year age gap, power and wealth imbalance, inappropriate behaviour towards other younger men, breaking the law, inappropriate messages to younger colleagues.

Argue that Huw Edwards didn't meet the threshold of a front page expose, but the likes of Spacey will do the same.

r235 Nope, the Sun actually never even tried to argue it was public interest. Their only attempt to defend their bullshit was 'we're asking questions on behalf of the parents'. The police had already confirmed to the parents no laws were broken. There was no public interest element in any of the Sun's 'reporting'.

And I've already told you why there's a difference - the Edwards case, as reported by the Sun, lacked a victim. The Spacey case had multiple.

[quote]inappropriate messages to younger colleagues

Which may be the only aspect that does have a public interest aspect. And was broken by the BBC, not the Sun.

Seriously, THAT was the argument you were building to? Beyond weak, and just making yourself look like an idiot. And all to try and defend someone you claim to not care about.

R229, I'm a progressive leftie, ftr, always have been. The Bidens, Obamas, Newsom, Pelosi, etc. are all "we don't know her" at this point. Quit trying to make this a left/right thing. Meghan torched her own reputation and it has been quite entertaining. Your comment completely gives away that you are some weirdo Sussex stan. Let me tell you, it is never going to get any better for either of them so you might want to pick a different horse to back. Stop blaming everyone else for pointing out the obvious with those two.

R236, you can hiss and spit all you want but you're the one wiping your screen clean.

If you want to stop the media from reporting the Edwards story be prepared when predators like Spacey take advantage of those privacy rules.

r238 You really thought you had a clever point, didn't you? Aww, bless.

R237 works for the Heritage Foundation. Why would you side with a bunch of racist right-wingers because that's who hates them

What part of Biden, Obama, Newsom, et al do you not understand, R240? Can you not admit, even to yourself, that Harry and Meghan are ridiculed by people of all stripes? They have literally failed on multiple continents. The days of trying to blame their failings on racism don't fly with the general public anymore.

I had to laugh, I recently saw a comment from some Sussex nutter who claimed that "privileged Western democratic nations" were to blame for Harry and Meghan's unpopularity. So, it used to be just racist Britain but now it is all of Western democracy? You can't make this shit up.

Please, and I mean this nicely, fuck off with the Harry and Meghan discussion in this thread.

Popbitch's latest today:

Sun burn

With enemies like these...

There's a chance – a chance – that the recent Dan Wootton stories haven't come as a complete surprise to the big cheeses at NewsUK.

Last year, the Sun threw a party to celebrate 40 years of the Bizarre showbiz column, inviting all its former stalwarts and editors to a big, fancy cocktail bash. The turnout was impressive, but one former editor – Gordon Smart - was notably absent.

Editor Vic Newton made mention of this as part of her speech on the night, passing on Gordon's reason for not attending. She informed the crowd (including Dan) that Smart was a no-show because he'd said he never wanted to be in the same postcode, let alone the same room, as Dan Wootton.

Or, to quote her exactly "...that cunt Dan Wootton."

Workplace Harrisment

A legal grey area

How should Dan Wootton be feeling about the fact that NewsUK has hired Kingsley Napley as external lawyers to investigate all these recently aired allegations of workplace bullying, sexual catfishing and redirection of company funds to pay sex workers?

Well, it's a bit of a mixed bag. On the plus side, Kingsley Napley has previously worked miracles for Murdoch, managing to get Rebekah Brooks off all those pesky phone-hacking charges back in the day.

Their track record with suspected sex cases is less impressive though – and, sadly, former client Rolf Harris is no longer on hand to offer a testimonial. From the website of Kingsley Napley: "Individuals with a reputation to protect often need to be shielded from the media glare when trouble may be ahead." An interesting concept for a newspaper to indulge.

Ill behaviour

A subtle interview technique

Bad as things are for Dan Wootton right now, he can take a small amount of solace in the fact that most of the celebrities he's turned over in his career are keeping a dignified silence about their experience of him. That boot can't be far off dropping though.

We heard the Dan Wootton charm offensive for ourselves once, live and direct, while we were out for lunch with a popstar's people. Midway through the meal, Dan called – demanding to speak with their client.

He had just conducted an interview with the popstar's estranged father about his ill health, and was now insisting that the singer grant him a tell-all interview in response. How did Dan attempt to secure such a delicate, emotional exclusive? By loudly and sustainedly screaming down the phone that he would see to it that her career would be ruined if she didn't sit down with him and tell him all about her sick dad.

She declined. And that's why you never hear of Adele any more...

^ I believe it

I believe it, too. Good for Adele for sticking her ground.

FYI, grifter Wootton has raised £37,000 so far.

Press Gazette is reporting that "no writs or pre-publication injunctions (possible in privacy cases) have yet been served against Byline".

P.P. Arnold

Apologies wrong thread.

R246, his crowd funding is stalling...not so popular after all with his 'fan club'. He is the most vile piece of scum ever to leave NZ and head over to the Motherland.

Byline's latest article is talking about how both The Sun and MailOnline failed to report allegations about Wootton to the police, and in the case of MailOnline, continued to publish his work on five occasions - despite being contacted many times and knowing about it a month before The Sun published their Huw Edwards story.

Neither have reported at all about the Wootton claims.

So I wonder if the porn stars would count as the co-conspirators, or if that's another element yet to be revealed. Dan must be shitting himself

That's the second article to mention Duncan James. The "world exclusive" story by Wootton was in the News of The World in 2009.

This was Duncan in 2013

[quote]Blue star Duncan James said he never planned to tell his fans that he was bisexual after claiming the News of the World forced him out the closet.

[quote]The boyband star revealed in 2009 that he swung both ways in a ‘coming out’ feature but now insists his tale was under duress from the closed tabloid.

[quote]‘I didn’t decide to come out, I got outed by them,’ the 35-year-old singer told GT magazine.

[quote]‘They had a team of investigators and had an inkling I was up to some stuff and they had a file on me. They found some guy who knew all about me and told me they’d either run his story or I could tell them mine, and it was better to come from me. They say every boy band has a gay member in it and I guess I’m that one in Blue.’

And in 2014 Dan Wootton ran a story where Lee Ryan confessed to being bumchums with Duncan.

Great spot, R252. I think you're on to something there.

[QUOTE]Press Gazette is reporting that "no writs or pre-publication injunctions (possible in privacy cases) have yet been served against Byline".

Aren't these injunctions relatively easy to get?

I don't know but I do know that injunctions are expensive - a search tells me that they cost between £10,000 and £150,000. Maybe grifter Wootton decided that he'd rather pocket the money from his fundraiser.

R7 Didn’t his father ever teach him that baskets read better with empty pockets? Fewer visual distractions.

R7 Ouch!

“Judge Richardson told Brady his attacks on Mr Wootton, a MailOnline columnist, had “everything to do with your craving for celebrity status and your irritation that the press were not in the least interested in your somewhat uninteresting life.”

FYI, I checked and R256 plus R257 are the same person. Probably Dan but what do I know?

Is that actually true about Brady or is the judge being pissy? I'm in the U.S. and I'm vaguely familiar with her suicide. He was initially blamed by Wootton?

Up to £150K for an injunction. I guess privacy can be bought. I'm only familiar with injunctions through following football. Ryan Giggs and Avram Grant come to mind. Are they worth it? It seems like stuff leaks anyway.

I'm not sure the point would be in Wootton seeking an injunction against Byline. What would an injunction restrict Byline from reporting?

As was highlighted with Elton John's husband David Furnish's injunction, the story of Elton John's husband David Furnish and extra marital activities in a paddling pool were widely reported around the world, just not in the England and Wales where the injunction applied.

BTW if anyone can find a picture of Daniel Laurence, the "businessman" who tried to sell his story of olive oil paddling pool "romps" with Elton John's husband David Furnish then I'd be interested to see them! The personal trainer Danny Williams who Elton John's husband David Furnish "kept" was very pleasant to look at.

[quote]Up to £150K for an injunction. I guess privacy can be bought.

One of the worst thing about injunctions - if 'justice' can only be bought by the rich, then it isn't real justice. And even if Labour comes to power I bet you they won't get rid of this or reform it.

Re: Brady - the police actually got him jailed for harassment but what are the chances that Wootton will be jailed for harassment assuming that Byline's reporting is correct? Very low in my opinion. The state of media, police, politicians and justice in this country is fucked up.

I hope he finally gets his comeuppance. Guilt-free Schadenfreude is always a pick-me-up.

Just checked on Wootton's 'Give me money' page stalled at 25% of 'asking price'. Just goes to show he ain't that wonderful of a friend to the rich, famous or 'woke' mob.

And, of those, how many cancel their transaction with their CC company or bank?

There's a long standing issue with crowdfunded legal challenges.

The "celebrity" "cook" Jack Monroe became famous when she sued Katie Hopkins after Katie Hopkins confused her with Laurie Penny.

Last year Monroe was criticised by Tory MP Lee Anderson and she asked for donations on PayPal to sue him. She never took legal action and when there was criticism from people who donated money she claimed she had donated it all to charity.

Most crowdfunding like this comes from the left. Someone set up a crowdfunder to pay Jeremy Corbyn's legal fees after he libelled some Jews and they raised over half a million quid. That's multi millionaire career politician Jeremy Corbyn who has spent 40 years in parliament.

The organiser created a limited company and are still seeking donations they will use for other legal fees.

Maybe it's the nature of the internet but left wing polarising figures are far more effective at raking in cash than right wing figures.

That's because the right wing does it privately and under the table, usually from just a few sources.

In the U.S. it's the other way around. At least that's how it works for Trump. He solicits funds from his cult to fund his multiple criminal defenses. He can legally use campaign donations gleaned from numerous pleas his dunce acolytes continously respond to. He's constantly putting his hand out, and receiving.

Byline has an interview with the ex who found the holdall. Even the story of how they started dating is fucked up

[quote]But after a couple of years knowing each other platonically, and as Truby’s relationship with a man he describes “as at that time the love of my life” ran into trouble, he says Wootton began to pressurise him for more.

[quote]“I thought Dan was my best mate,” he says. “But he put me under immediate pressure to move things forward with him. I was asking for time and space, but I got ultimatums. I was put in a position. He said ‘we either get together or I’m gone from your life completely’.

[quote]“I was vulnerable. I had just lost what I thought was the love of my life, and suddenly I was going to lose my best mate too. I didn’t even have time to grieve the relationship. I just found myself tumbling into this relationship with Dan.”

And another example of Dan using expenses to get himself money

[quote]“Dan had the News of the World pay money to my bank account as a ‘source’ an absolute minimum of 10 times,” he says. “He told me it was for his actual sources, and I knew his boss knew who I was, so I didn’t question it too much. It was never life-changing sums – always hundreds not thousands, but still big lumps.

[quote]“I didn’t really understand his world – I just thought it was a normal thing for reporters to do sometimes in order to protect people’s confidences. I would give the money to him and I don’t know what happened to it after that. He had other friends who’d do it for him too.”

And could he be faking his politics?

[quote]“When I knew him, his politics were centre-to-centre-left,” he says. “He was always so proud that one of his first breaks was interviewing Helen Clark when she was a Labour Prime Minister in New Zealand. Dan comes from a family of liberal people. His family are educators. When I knew him, his politics were the same as theirs. I never got an inkling from him that he would ever align himself with the hard-right. “I think he is faking it on GB News for the money and because he burnt so many bridges in the mainstream media.”

[quote]How Murdoch Made Dan Wootton into a Monster

I know this Truby man is (quite rightly) ashamed of having become romantically involved with someone so repulsive but trying to shift the blame for Wootton's cunty behaviour on to Wootton's employers is quite repulsive.

An example of what I mentioned at r267. This was up within a few hours of the indictments.

People like him are so toxic. They want to create Fox News in the UK and turn politics into a cesspit that an authoritarian such as Trump can capitalise on. It truly is lowest common denominator stuff; very cynical and manipulative but I don't think it's good in the long term for them either. They think it's all cool and fine now but chances are high they eventually lose control of it.

The UK went through the worst period in history with dreadful politicians in all parties.

We went from Brexit to Covid to Woke and had the most dreadful politicians in charge, all of whom are now disgraced and humiliated - Johnson, Corbyn and Sturgeon.

The dirt cheap gobshite tv format boosted by social media has allowed cretins like Wootton to flourish.

And it's not just right wing populism that benefitted, the Remainers who refused to accept any deal to leave the EU are responsible, as are the people who saw a conspiracy in everything the government did with Covid and the likes of Sturgeon who insisted there were no safeguards needed around self ID, and who then refused to acknowledge that a male rapist in a women's prison was in any way a problem.

The 10% extremists on either side don't reflect the 80% of normal people.

When exactly was Corbyn in charge? Equating Remainers with covid conspiracists just exposes you.

Christ, these Tory propagandists are forever stuck in 2019 with their straw Corbyns. This and high-traffic neighbourhoods are all they have left.

[quote]When exactly was Corbyn in charge? Equating Remainers with covid conspiracists just exposes you.

Well I didn't equate them, I pointed out that both benefitted from conspiratorial support.

There were a small but vocal group of people who wouldn't accept the result and genuinely believe the EU referendum was "stolen" - remind you of anyone? They genuinely believe that Boris Johnson is a Russian asset, despite his stance on Ukraine. They genuinely believe that the referendum result was a plot and not simply a lot of people who were fucked off enough to stick 2 fingers to the establishment.

And with Corbyn there are people who genuinely believe he was brought down by the Jews/Israel/The Jewish run Israeli funded establishment, despite Corbyn being a vain, ill tempered and stupid man who surrounded himself with enablers.

And with Covid there are people who genuinely believe there was a plan to cull the weakest in society, who STILL wear facemasks because they believe the government lied about the risks being reduced, who believed the plan to stretch out the length of time between first and second doses of the vaccine was a plot to kill people (it saved 10000 deaths and 5 times as many hospital admissions) and they believe Boris being admitted to hospital was a hoax.

The same people were pushing the conspiracy theory that the Huw Edwards story was a deal between Boris and The Sun to get attention away from Boris's whatsapp messages, despite The Sun being the paper that brought down Boris with the Chris Pincher story.

There are conspiracy theorists on the left and right and in the centre. Dan Wootton and GB news appeal to a lot of those people.

Claims not to be equating them, immediately goes on to equate them

I don't think they get that the usual top-line-no-analysis techniques that work with people who tune into their drivel don't work with those of us here who don't.

Dan has moved lawyers. I wonder why? Did Mischon de Reya drop him or did he move to cheaper ones?

"@peterjukes · 6m

Legal threats are always initially stressful… and then you look deeper, and realise what’s going on.

Worth noting Dan Wootton is no longer represented by @Mishcon_de_Reya. The law firm that is now acting for him is @griffinlawuk"

LOL at the sneer from R277.

I hope you enjoy the long queues at passport control when you go to Europe and get irate having to show your little black passport.

One of the small benefits of the chaos of Brexit.

The Brexit schadenfreude is DELICIOUS, and I have a front row seat.

r278 Haha, quite a climb down from top media lawyers to a firm based in Kent who don't even list defamation as one of their specialties. Their Twitter bio suggests a good reason he chose them

[quote]Niche dispute resolution firm that guarantees to share the risk of litigation with its clients.

Is that a posh way of saying 'no win no fee'?

R281 Yep, or partially! Check out this tweet.

From The Daily Beast [i]Confider[/i]:

"EXCLUSIVE — WOOTTON WTF: Some staffers at The Daily Mail have urged management to fire columnist Dan Wootton following revelations about his sordid double life, Confider has learned. Wootton, whose twice-weekly column hasn’t appeared in the Mail Online since June 29th stands accused of creating bogus online identities to trick and bribe men into sending him sexually compromising images.

“He is universally reviled across The Mail and staff are hoping he is bulleted very soon,” one Mail insider claimed to Confider. “Everyone is hoping Mail management kick him out and he never contributes to The Daily Mail ever again.”

Wootton had been using privacy law firm Mishcon de Reya LLP to send scary-sounding legal letters to media outlets (including Confider) inquiring about the story but Confider has learned they are no longer representing the former top Murdoch editor. After Confider reached out to Wootton for comment on Monday about the status of his employment with The Daily Mail, he directed us to attorney Donal Blaney from Griffin Law, who promptly sent us a three-page legal threat. A rep for The Daily Mail did not respond to a request for comment."

R275 - what a load of bollocks.

No one claims the referendum was fixed. The result was totally unexpected, especially the winning side.

The thing that gets remainer's goat is that the leave campaign was based on fear and lies - now does THAT remind you of anyone? Brexit has been a complete disaster, as any impartial person could have seen from the beginning.

Britain's only gotten a fraction of what it deserves, and they're too self-absorbed to know that, which make this even more delicious to watch.

Sure sounds like it, r281. In the U.S. it's called "contingency basis" which results on an agreed upon percentage beforehand. This works out well in cases where the plaintiffs don't have the financial resources to take on huge corporations, like Hooker Chemicals in the infamous Love Canal case where an entire subdivision plus was poisoned.

Dan, OTOH, seems to be on a wing and a prayer from a firm that wants PR.

[quote][R275] - what a load of bollocks. No one claims the referendum was fixed. The result was totally unexpected, especially the winning side.

So The Guardian didn't publish a story by crank Carol Cadwalladr called The Great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked

"A shadowy global operation involving big data, billionaire friends of Trump and the disparate forces of the Leave campaign influenced the result of the EU referendum. As Britain heads to the polls again, is our electoral process still fit for purpose?"

Did I imagine that?

[quote]The thing that gets remainer's goat is that the leave campaign was based on fear and lies - now does THAT remind you of anyone? Brexit has been a complete disaster, as any impartial person could have seen from the beginning.

I agree that Brexit has been a disaster, but I'm a democrat and my side lost. The hard Brexit that we were left with after Johnson's huge majority is dreadful. Theresa May's deal was the softest deal possible and kept most of the benefits of being in the EU yet Remainers marched against it and celebrated the biggest government loss in Parliament. No compromise deal was acceptable for many people who couldn't accept their team had lost.

People voted to leave the EU in good faith and were repeatedly told they were stupid so needed to vote again or in the Lib Dems case told they would revoke Brexit without a referendum.

If you're unwilling to recognise that those conditions helped create the market for GB News then so be it.

The Brexit deal was no scuppered by a one-off demonstration, don't be ludicrous.

It was scuppered by it being impossible to deliver on the lies that Johnson, Farage etc sold the public.

LOL at r287 trying to pretend he voted Remain, you're so transparent.

I freaking love it. Just like America with systemic racism, sly contortions like Brexit campaigns made to ensure systemic classism stays in place. Britain is an always will be subject to a "chosen" elite, and they're in the middle of seeing how that looks in a world that's moved on from their influence. DESERVED AND DELECTABLE.

[quote]The Brexit deal was no scuppered by a one-off demonstration, don't be ludicrous. It was scuppered by it being impossible to deliver on the lies that Johnson, Farage etc sold the public.

Theresa May's Brexit deal (effectively keeping access to the single market without FOM) was scuppered by the hard right, the Labour Party and hard core Remainers who wouldn't accept any deal to leave. Labour voted it down on the third go knowing Theresa May would be replaced by Johnson. How did that work out.

[quote]LOL at [R287] trying to pretend he voted Remain, you're so transparent.

Yes, I voted for Remain and would vote to rejoin. When Labour will the next election I will accept that result, unlike a lot of the GB News crew who will complain that Johnson was stabbed in the back.

You really can't see how similar you are to GB News viewers and presenters. SAD!

Britons fool themselves into thinking they're not provincial, but a deeper look shows they inflicted their backwater provincialism on the world.

[quote]Yes, I voted for Remain

And yet keep bashing remainers. Kind of like the way you keep saying you don't like Wootton and then go out of your way to try and dismiss these stories about him and parrot his claims about a conspiracy.

Like I said, you couldn't be more transparent. And the fact that you apparently think you're being clever about it makes it all the funnier.

R292, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm curious... which nations are not provincial?

[quote]And yet keep bashing remainers. Kind of like the way you keep saying you don't like Wootton and then go out of your way to try and dismiss these stories about him and parrot his claims about a conspiracy. Like I said, you couldn't be more transparent. And the fact that you apparently think you're being clever about it makes it all the funnier.

No, I criticise the vocal and influential Remainers who refused to accept any compromise and as a result left the UK in a much worse position than we would have been. Their refusal to accept a democratic result and push conspiracy theories helped radicalise the kind of people who watch GB News who Wootton appeals to.

And can you point out where I've dismissed the stories about Wootton? My post at R269?

Wottoon is an absolute cunt who has uses his platforms to bully and harass people celebrities. If he's used these sex tapes to blackmail people into giving them "I'm Gay!" exclusives then I hope he goes to prison. But the "WHY AREN'T THE MEDIA COVERING THIS" stories have a clear answer: because hardly anyone knows who Dan Wootton is. And lucky them.

r295 I can't be arsed to go through all your posts and list all the bullshit you've spouted, but you can make do with your OP post of this very thread

[quote]The police are now reviewing a TWENTY EIGHT page dossier of evidence scraped from various Twitter accounts.

Immediately trying to dismiss the story as just gossip taken from social media, when actually the Byline story was based on talking to the actual victims, several of whom have said they are also now contacting the police.

Summer fun!

[quote]Immediately trying to dismiss the story as just gossip taken from social media, when actually the Byline story was based on talking to the actual victims, several of whom have said they are also now contacting the police.

Have you forgotten about the man who went to prison for blackmail accusing Wootton of drugging and raping him in a tweet seen 5 million times?

Why didn't the media report that? Why didn't Byline cover that story?

And look, back to your usual throwing shit at the wall tactic.

What relevance does that have to the Byline story and your attempt to dismiss it as "evidence scraped from various Twitter accounts?".

Amazing sleuthing by Byline who looked up data breaches of passwords. The idiot actually used the same password for all his accounts - including 'Martin Branning' and 'Maria Joseph' !

[quote] Further analysis of the databases, which are openly available online, shows Wootton also used the same password for his LinkedIn and MySpace profiles alongside music and fitness-app sites between October 2016 and October 2018. Byline Times commissioned analysis of the data by an eminent PhD specialist in mathematical prediction modelling. The expert said the chances of Wootton’s password randomly duplicating those of Branning and Joseph were “zero”.

Bwahaha he's utterly fucked

K1W1C@tf!$her

Martin Branning is fucked!

Press Gazette is confirming that MailOnline has suspended Wootton's column while they consider the allegations made against him.

[quote]Wootton’s lawyer has since told the Guardian Wootton denies many of the allegations that have been levelled against him by his ex-boyfriend and reporting in Byline Times. The lawyer said: “For the avoidance of further doubt, our client did not at any time contact current or former colleagues at the Sun with offers of money in return for sexually explicit images, he did not engage in inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, and he did not misuse News UK funds.”

Very interesting that these claims contradict BylineTimes's reporting. It will be telling whether Wootton sues and wins or not.

Does Meghan McCain have anything to say about her friend, Dan Wootton, after appearing with him on GBtv or whatever it's called.

r305 Is it interesting? These fuckers always issue denials.

[quote]It will be telling whether Wootton sues

He won't

[quote]Very interesting that these claims contradict BylineTimes's reporting. It will be telling whether Wootton sues and wins or not.

I know some people here are very sensitive when it comes to mentioning Jeremy Corbyn but he was repeatedly called an antisemite and despite pleas from his supporters and offers money he never once did, despite the frequent denials.

Admittedly he was a very stupid man but not so stupid he would have lost a libel case her brought, now known as "doing a Vardy".

Dan Wootton is a horrible individual but the chances of him "doing a Vardy" are non existent.

I wonder what becomes of him. What does somebody like him to for work?

[QUOTE]when it comes to mentioning Jeremy Corbyn but he was repeatedly called an antisemite and despite pleas from his supporters and offers money he never once did, despite the frequent denials.

He never once did... What?

People aren't sensitive about Corbyn, they just can't see even the remotest relevance to your attempts to shoehorn into the conversation

Anyway, Popbitch this week:

[quote]There was once a time when printing details of the suspected shenanigans of Dan Wootton would earn you a punchy bit of post from feted London law firm, Mishcon de Reya. Alas, those days are no longer.

[quote]What with Dan's legal crowdfunder having petered out at £38,000 (barely a quarter of the £150,000 he had his heart set on); the Mail quietly dropping his column; and the recent purchase of a swanky £1.25m house putting a squeeze on his personal finances, it seems some economies are having to be made.

[quote]Farewell then, the £950/hr hellfire of Mishcon. Hello, the more frugal £400/hr fights with his new lawyers Griffin Law!

[quote]It still feels like an awful lot of money to shell out for letters that don't actually deny you're Martin Branning. But maybe that's just us...

---

[quote]Who is Donal Blaney, the new lawyer bravely taking up the case of Dan Wootton?

[quote]A self-styled "rottweiler for the right", Blaney's name has been a fixture in certain political circles for some time now, having high-level links to a couple of contentious conservative thinktanks, pressure groups and a company that was basically incorporated to rebrand what was left of Cambridge Analytica.

[quote]There's ties to the Mercers, ties to Steve Bannon – all that good stuff. But if you think Blaney is only interested in representing Dan Wootton as part of the ongoing culture war, you'd be wrong. The case touches on a lot of areas in which Blaney has real bona fides.

[quote]The law firm Blaney founded prides itself helping on people who have suffered at the hands of workplace bullies – specifically those who have resigned as a result of workplace harrasment and those who have been targeted by abusers using anonymised online identities. So he should make pretty light work of getting to the bottom of who this Martin Branning guy really is.

[quote]In fact, he might have already done it. (linked to the latest Byline Times article)

---

[quote]Legal letters from the notoriously fierce Hollywood lawyer "Mad Dog" Marty Singer are known as "Zinger Singers". Donal Blaney prefers to refer to his as "Bowel Openers".

Sorry R310, Corbyn never sued anyone for libel for saying he was an antisemite.

R308 Why the fuck are you talking about Corbyn? Please stop trying to take this thread off-topic. Also I think the very BIG difference is that Wootton has lawyered up and fundraised off the basis that he has a "good case for legal action".

Given that, I am obviously watching see what legal action he takes and what case he has. Both lawyers he has hired have been sending letters to anyone reporting on this.

[quote]The law firm Blaney founded prides itself helping on people who have suffered at the hands of workplace bullies – specifically those who have resigned as a result of workplace harrasment and those who have been targeted by abusers using anonymised online identities. So he should make pretty light work of getting to the bottom of who this Martin Branning guy really is. In fact, he might have already done it. (linked to the latest Byline Times article)

I don't understand this - are Popbitch actually hinting that Blaney's law firm are the ones who investigated the passwords and linked it all to Wootton?

No, I think it was more in reference to this from the Byline article:

[quote]Byline Times has asked the new legal representatives for Dan Wootton detailed questions about the password breaches. In response, they did not deny the connection between the four accounts and appeared to confirm that Wootton used the password for the accounts mentioned in this article. We will update this article if we hear more from Wootton or his representatives.

Thanks, I didn't quite get it.

Here's a screenshot from Griffin Law's site so it's true that they boast about being on the side of those bullied online by anonymous people.. which is pretty funny if Byline's allegations about Wootton are true.

Wootton's ex Alex has posted a picture of what seems to be an excerpt from a book or magazine by Duncan James's manager/publicist.

[quote]Simon Jones: I was asleep and [Blue's] Duncan [James] called me about 4 a.m. He said he had something to tell me and said, 'I like boys as well as girls.' I was like, 'Okay, that's fine.' He was worried it would be a really big deal. Later a showbiz journalist called and said, 'I have a story that Duncan James is gay.' It was for the News of the World and they had a kiss-and-tell from this guy he'd been seeing. They did that age-old trick of, 'We don't want to run this story, in fact we're not going to run it, but we think it would be great if he came out and did it with us.' It is blackmail. Why have you done the interview if you're not going to run it? The reason is because you've got all the facts and you can hold it over us.

Even the putrid Daily Mail has taken fright, and has paused publication of his column. This is well deserved. The guy is a seething, crazed bully. I hope he is shitting himself.

A technicality R318, he is/was employed by MailOnline, not the Daily Mail. They are two different entities.

The BBC casually dropping Wootton's job at ITV into the conversation.

[quote]During his time at the Sun, Wootton edited the paper's showbiz column Bizarre, and became the paper's executive editor. He was also previously showbiz editor at the News of the World and appeared on ITV's Lorraine as the programme's showbiz correspondent. He was named showbiz reporter of the year at the British Press Awards three times.

It's interesting that Donal Blaney of Griffin Law claims to be on the side of those facing workplace bullying.... especially given that he was linked to the suicide of a young Conservative activist some years ago who made recordings of himself being bullied by fellow activists.....

Wootton's new lawyers sound like a great fit for him:

"@peterjukes

We’re biding our time, but the latest legal threats we are getting from @griffinlawuk are something else.

@peterjukes · 4h

Have done with the physical ones, which are now with the police. We’ve identified one likely suspect for the phone call and email threatening violence"

Also, Griffin Law have deleted their tweets about Hunter Biden..

The "Every accusation is a confession" virus infecting the modern American GOP has crossed the pond and mutated to accommodate a tiny target population of self-hating British homosexuals that populate media, law, and politics. Who knew?

We should have a naming contest for said virus.

Interesting r320, and of course, that's what a real scandal is all about: turn over one rock, and soon you are turning over other rocks, and eventually exposing a whole world of sleaze and bullshit.

[quote]a tiny target population of self-hating British homosexuals that populate media, law, and politics

Wootton isn't even British. He's Kiwi. He's an economic migrant. Which he opposes on his show (I'm pretty convinced that he's a psychopath).

I like think I'm very tolerant of immigrants who want to come to Britain to make a better life for themselves but Wootton and Amanda Platell CAN FUCK OFF BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM thank you very much.

Can we add Kate Andrews to that? I wonder who's really paying her.

The Guardian now joins in - Wootton was using the Max Branning name to trawl Craigslist for a bit of rough

This keeps getting worse for "Martin Branning"

The Daily Beast's Confider: "Disgraced GB News presenter and former top Murdoch editor Dan Wootton is continuing to be paid his $250,000 freelance contract by The Daily Mail despite the publisher announcing they’ve paused his column in the wake of wild allegations about his twisted double life"

$250k salary plus whatever he's being paid by GB News which is no doubt huge too and he sets up that tawdry grifting fundraiser?

"Only fans performer". DO YOU MEAN PROSTITUTE JIM?

Did Martin Branning meet a PROSTITUTE? Or should we say DAN WOOTTON, 30, PAID A SEX WORKER?

And did gays in London really use Craigslist to meet men in 2013?

And what name does Andy Lee use when "performing"?

"Dan Wootton met young male reality TV stars through his work as a prominent showbusiness journalist and then privately propositioned them to do photo shoots at his home for “underwear brands”, Byline Times can reveal.

Among those Wootton targeted over an eight-year period between 2011 and 2019 – during which he was working for The Sun, ITV and the Daily Mail – were The Only Way is Essex star Kirk Norcoss, Big Brother contestant JJ Bird, and an X Factor singer who was just out of his teens.

Each had first encountered Wootton – today a star presenter on GB News – as a result of their involvement in the television industry, on which it was his highly-paid job to report and through which he enjoyed a powerful media influence."

[quote]an X Factor singer who was just out of his teens.

So a 20 year old, the same age as the man who received £30k from Huw Edwards and who was described as a consenting adult and old enough to make his own decisions by defenders of Edwards? SEX WORK IS WORK!

The way The Sun and Byline try to ramp up the ick on something already really, really sleazy is quite funny. These paragraphs could have appeared in The Sun during their Hew Edwards coverage.

[quote]“This story raises profound and deeply troubling public interest concerns,” he said. “Underlying it is an abhorrent abuse of power. There is a well-established legal principle that those who hold power – whether in government or in private organisations – must be subject to public scrutiny when their conduct falls so far below the standard expected.

[quote]Byline Times’ latest revelations about Wootton’s private and professional conduct raise questions about safeguarding for The Sun, the Daily Mail and ITV, according to Professor of Media Law at the University of Leeds, Paul Wragg.

[quote]“Here, we have serious safeguarding concerns that demand an explanation from ITV, the Daily Mail and The Sun, as to how one of its employees was able to use the status and charisma of his role to seduce others to bend to his will, to satisfy his own predilections, without consequence.”

Mary!

"to use the status and charisma of his role to seduce others to bend to his will" Imagine admitting to being seduced by the status and charisma of Dan Wootton and being bent to his will. I just shuddered.

Yuck, he sounds like a sleazy creep

[quote]Following the publication of the first part of this newspaper’s special investigation, Wootton reached out to Mr Norcross last month to ask him to contribute to a crowdfund – which has stalled at £38,000 on the way to the £150,000 total – to apparently finance legal action against Byline Times after it unmasked Wootton as ‘Martin Branning’ and ‘Maria Joseph’.

The shamelessness!

Norcross has stripped off for the cover of Gay Times and Attitude.

Shame he didn't do the triple crown and get Wootton's cash as well.

[quote]So a 20 year old, the same age as the man who received £30k from Huw Edwards and who was described as a consenting adult and old enough to make his own decisions by defenders of Edwards? SEX WORK IS WORK!

Do you have a humiliation kink? It's the only reason I can think of that you'd keep posting such stupid shit.

First thing - Edwards paid an actual sex worker, not an aspiring pop star. Secondly - as one of the most powerful showbiz reporters in the country, Wootton had an immense amount of power over the pop singer.

How many teenage prostitutes have you paid for sex R336?

I haven't. Oh, do you think you're making another clever comeback?

Maybe you should. Get all that pent up stuff out of your system.

So you're once again unable to defend your attempts to suggest the Huw Edwards story is the same as Wootton, and resort to shit throwing. Despite the fact that it has failed you constantly in the past. Learn a new tactic, I'm begging you.

Yeah, if I were a reality star or singer trying to make it in the business and refused Wootton I'd be feeling a little bit worried that he would hold it against me and use his job to give me bad press - or look over giving me publicity.

Also, WHY can't these people hire pro escorts and masseurs who cater for gay men? I don't use them but I looked them up and they're like £200 a hour. The trickery and pressure tactics is something else.

Because it's not about the sex, it's about the control and power.

Plus, I dare say for the stuff with the celebs, he was hoping to store up some blackmail material in case they became big stars

R342 That too, if I did do it I would be feeling a bit worried about that - can't win!

From PopBitch

[quote]The Guardian had some new allegations regarding Dan Wootton's supposed sex alias "Martin Branning" this week – having interviewed a man named Andy Lee, who claims to have had an in-person encounter with Branning in 2013, after Branning put out a call for male models on Craigslist.

[quote]This isn't the first time Andy has featured in the Guardian. He got a passing mention last year in Lucy Mangan's review of the Channel 4 documentary "My Massive Cock" thanks to his stand-out contribution to the show. His 10.5 inch penis

The biggest cunt from New Zealand hunted down the biggest cock in Ireland.

Doesn't look like 10.5

^ it's not shabby either!

Byline with an exclusive about payoffs going on at GB News so it's not surprising they're keeping Wootton on-air.

- Five figure payment to settle an employment claim against chief exec Angelos Frangopoulos (for propositioning a female member of staff and then allegedly undermining and marginalising her at work when she turned him down).

- A woman went on sick leave and then left after allegedly being told she was “so ugly” she should “put a bag” on her head and that she should “open” her “legs” to win a promotion.

- Second 'high' five figure payout for racial discrimination and breaches of the Equality Act. (The woman was harassed by racist emails and got no support from GB News.)

- Third payout for a male journalist because of racial discrimination from an executive.

My fav bit though is a quote from a source who says: “When GB News launched there was great hope it could become a disruptor to the broadcasting status quo – a real free-speech channel. But it is losing its way.” Doesn't free speech means freedom to be racist and misogynist? These people are clueless - they object when it happens to them but they still cling onto their 'free speech' misconception.

Fun little titbit in this fortnight's Private Eye - apparently poor wittle Dan has been whining that he's been made to feel unwelcome at his favourite club - The Ned - and that he's basically unofficially banned. Aww poor guy. The Eye also points out it costs £3500 to be a member there. You should probably be saving that money, Dan

Bump

It's gone very quiet

Private Eye report that The Sun is limiting its internal investigation to victims who are still Sun employees only. So that's saved them a lot of embarrassment, as most of the guys Wootton went after have left

According to this twitter account the ratings for Dans GB News show are down.It seems his hypocrisy and the scandal around him have caused some viewers to switch off.The channel is reportedly looking to make efficiency savings so he may well be at risk.

How does he still even have a show or a job? No wonder the ratings are down.

Byline had an article this week about Wootton's hypocrisy in going after Phillip Schofield.

r354 I think there was a LOT of psychological projection from Dan Wootton in his going after Philip Schofield and Huw Edwards with such fanatical zeal.

[quote]The GB News presenter has said he would ‘never out’ anybody

Hahahaha

UPDATE

Given what we know of his tactics, I have to seriously wonder if he has some kompromat on Frangopoulos and/or other people.

[quote]Again, a behaviour people have known about for years.

They ignored it because of his connections to Kensington Palace

[quote]How does he still even have a show or a job? No wonder the ratings are down.

GB News is a Fox News wannabe. They don't have a shred of decency and they don't care if any of their employees do either.

GB News actually have suspended Laurence Fox. Wootton still on air though.

And Fox is sharing DMs with Wootton that show him laughing at the exchange, contradicting Wootton's shocked and appalled statement.

Ava Santini Jones whatever her name is had a brief moment of fame appearing as a Media Gobshite on Good Morning Britain arguing Bridget Jones is a bad role model for women because she drinks too much and is unprofessional and boys being exposed to Bridget could think that Andrew Tate is a good role model.

Gobshite TV really has gone too far. BAN IT ALL.

What A CUNT!

Wootton now also suspended

What's truly pathetic about this story is how easy it would've been to legitimately criticise Ava Evans over what she actually said, as what she said was moronic. Really shows how pathetic and stupid Fox and his like are.

Wootton's teenage-looking GB News producer is a rabid anti-vaxxer and conspiracy theorist. Wonder if he's ever received any offers from Martin Branning. It's also always hilarious to me how the guys who complain about modern men being weak/womanly always look like they'd shit themselves if they ever found themselves in the vicinity of a fight

It gets funnier

[quote]I understand that some staff may have been alerted earlier - when an email from the HR department was accidentally sent to the “wrong” Dan W at GB News demanding an urgent meeting - that changes were incoming ..

I'd say reality was being written by Armando Iannucci, but I'm pretty sure this stuff is too ridiculous for fiction

The comedy doesn't stop! TalkTV - Murdoch's attempt to rival GB News - broke the Wootton news with an aston reading

[quote]HATE CHANNEL HOST SUSPENDED

"@IndiaWilloughby

I was the first person to quit GBNews. Week one, live on-air, Dan Wootton’s show. Because it STANK of hate. In the commercial breaks he was saying “What can we say to wind people up?”. Totally unprofessional. Anyone going on that channel knows what it’s all about."

"@AdamBienkov

GB News had ignored warnings from their staff members that the continued employment of Fox and Wootton was “an accident waiting to happen”.

One senior presenter said: “It’s about time. But why only suspend Wootton? They should get rid of him for good.”

Byline claims that Wootton was the highest-paid host on £600,000 a year on GB News (plus 250k from the Daily Mail). o_O They also say this:

[quote]Byline Times understands that it was the threat of “staff insurrection” over how Wootton, the show’s executive editor, handled the segment – and the apparent mocking of production staff (per Fox’s tweets) – which led to Wootton’s suspension.

r370 He had the gaul to try and crowd fund his legal fees against Byline when he is on that kind of salary!!

[quote]"@IndiaWilloughby I was the first person to quit GBNews. Week one, live on-air, Dan Wootton’s show. Because it STANK of hate. In the commercial breaks he was saying “What can we say to wind people up?”. Totally unprofessional. Anyone going on that channel knows what it’s all about."

Reminder that India Willoughby initially positioned themselves as the trans Katie Hopkins, a right wing Trump supporting gobshite for hire who called British beaches to be given barbed wire fences to puncture the dinghys of migrants crossing the English channel, thus drowning them.

When that clashed with Willoughby's trans activism they remodelled themselves into an anti government gobshite for hire, arguing that Keir Starmer is really a Tory.

Why did GB News think India Willoughby would fit the brand?

Well, quite, re: Willoughby. Which makes it especially hilarious that GB News was too much for even her. The far right and the far left often end up eating their own (also see Laurence Fox dragging Wootton down with him).

To underline that GB News is not mainstream Conservative/right-wing:

[quote]A Conservative MP has said GB News should be taken off air after presenters Laurence Fox and Dan Wootton were suspended over a misogyny scandal. Caroline Nokes said she agreed with remarks made by Adam Boulton, a former Sky News political editor, who called for Ofcom to shut down the channel as it did with Russia Today in March last year.

I think that sensible conservatives look at the U.S. and see how Fox News with its divisive populism helped to lead to an authoritarian and someone utterly unsuitable for governing like Trump. It's the creeps like Philip Davies and Esther McVey, Jacob Rees-Mogg and Farage who appear on GB News.

Well given how silent the majority of "sensible conservatives" (haha) are, it'll rapidly become the mainstream right, as it has in America, especially with Kemi or Suella as Leader of the Opposition (assuming we don't have another new PM before the next election)

Wootton sacked by the Mail. I suspect they saw the GB News story as a good reason to get rid of him and which allows them to quietly shelve the investigation into Branning

So a highly paid concern troll on the UK's version of Fox was taken down by....concern trolls?

Dan's being "anti-woke" is the only thing going for him.

LOL at Caroline Nokes who appeared on Newsnight last night.

[...]

Like the Russell Brand case, someone needs to make a complaint to the police.

Some of the criminal element is blurry - it sounds like some of the men were willing to have sex on camera - but if Wootton then used the videos to blackmail celebrities into giving him coming out exclusives then yes that's criminal.

Some info about the Mail's internal investigation. This bit is amusing -

[quote]This newspaper further understands that Wootton requested additional financial support from DMG when we started exposing him on 17 July. A second source close with knowledge of the matter said: “Dan wanted external help regarding the impact of the Byline Times investigation, which raised eyebrows at the Mail. At the time, he was earning the best part of £1 million a year and the need for him to enjoy further financial backing was not immediately obvious. “He was appearing four nights a week as the anchor on a national news channel known in the industry for paying pretty well. That was hardly going to go unnoticed.”

I think it may also be criminal to pretend to be a woman to solicit nudes from straight men. There was that female Scottish nurse who went to prison for catfishing straight women into giving her nudes.

Popbitch has some juicy details@

[quote]Dan Wootton's dramatic downfall these past 48 hours has drawn some fitting comparisons to Al Capone getting done for tax evasion.

[quote]All of a sudden he's persona non grata at GB News – not because of the multiple, well-sourced allegations of serious sexual misconduct and workplace harassment that have clouded him for months; but because he sat grinning gormlessly, like a wallaby getting its balls tickled, as one of his guests delivered a hugely sexist rant unchecked.

[quote]However, there was a little more going on behind the scenes. Even though on screen he might have just looked hopelessly out of his depth, the reason Wootton has incurred the wrath of his bosses is because he was repeatedly and actively ignoring multiple management commands.

[quote]From the start of Fox's rant, the voice in Dan's earpiece was telling him to stop Fox, to push back and apologise – but he tuned it out. Then one of the senior bods drafted an apology for him to read out after the item – and he skipped past it on the autocue.

[quote]Then the top brass were on the phone to the studio, insisting Dan apologise on air – and he just didn't.

--

[quote]If you're worried that all this Ofcom complaint commotion is going to be a distraction that allows Dan Wootton to slink off into obscurity, avoiding having to account for any of the many allegations of sexual catfishing and online predation that he leaves in his wake – here's a little something that might soothe you.

[quote]When whispers started swirling in media circles that the ST and Dispatches were working on an investigation together that was going to cause massive shockwaves through the industry, Dan was convinced it was going to be about him - and was absolutely shiteing it.

--

[quote]No better time to remind you that Laurence Fox's album, Holding Patterns, sold a mighty 43 copies in its first week of release in 2016.

--

[quote]Ever wondered how GB News became such a magnet for headbangers? It wasn't supposed to be that way.

[quote]Paul Marshall's original plan had been to set up a serious conservative news channel, which offered considered right-wing commentary and opinion. Right up until the point the woke mob came for his banjo-playing son, Winston.

[quote]Seeing his boy wrapped up in a media storm caused the red mist to descend over Daddy's eyes – and he has since OK-ed every shift into full-on wing-nut territory as a result.

[quote]Yet another of the world's ills we can blame on Mumford And Sons.

--

And finally check out the community note on this tweet

[quote]Dan wanted external help regarding the impact of the Byline Times investigation, which raised eyebrows at the Mail. At the time, he was earning the best part of £1 million a year and the need for him to enjoy further financial backing was not immediately obvious.

Does this mean he was earning £1m a year from Mail Online or from all of his media gigs combined?

An amazing amount of money for someone so unpopular to be earning from being a professional gobshite.

Dan is on £600.00 @ GBNews. He was on £350.000 @ Mailonline. A lot of dosh being paid for being an asshole!

Community notes at X/Twitter are really delivering, at least Elon managed to do something right.

GB News has suspended Reverend Calvin Robinson now for apparently showing solidarity with Laurence Fox and Dan Wootton.

Sidenote: I really wonder how GB News thinks they're going to make money with salaries like that. They made a loss of £30.7m in the year to May 2022 - I bet it's even worse for the year to 2023. Are their backers going to just keep pumping money in purely for an ideological project?

It's the same as owning a newspaper, done less for profit and more for influence. Though I think they thought Ofcom would've been nobbled by Boris appointing Dacre, so they can't get away with what they were hoping to (though they've gotten away with a lot)

Calvin Robinson was denied ordination by the Church of England because he is a backward looking crank.

Looking at what Calvin Robinson tweeted, he's turning on fellow GB News colleagues as well (attacking them as 'careerist' and 'ambitious') and he seems to think GB News bosses *are* worried that the money will run out.

GB News management seem to be seizing on this opportunity to begin cleaning the Augean stables.

So it must all be over now for Wootton, I can’t imagine any other media outlet employing him. He’s gone from a million a year to zero. What an idiot.

He'll pop up in the US. Probably as an ex-gay.

Think Rasputin, but ineffectual.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

LOL at Ava Evans cashing in with a Daily Mail interview and photoshoot. I guess they offered more than The Sun.

Not sure why but "political reporter and commentator (specialist area: trade unions)" made me laugh.

Look forward to her analysis on Unite's severing of ties with Labour.

Sunday Times: "On Wednesday, Frangopoulos was informed that GB News’s weather sponsor, the boiler and heating company Boxt, was withdrawing its advertising from the station."

"@GBNewsSpin

GB News lost 650,000 viewers between June and September of this year. A fall in reach from 3.35m to 2.7m. The channel is anything but winning."

Sounds like they need to clear the house of the cranks. Wootton with his 'anything to wind people up' ethos, Fox who is uncontrollable, Robinson with his extremist views.

Could this possibly mean that Ingraham and Hannity aren't far behind in their hypocrisy business?

This has nothing to do with Fox News (although the crankery over there is costing Fox News over $1 billion due to the Dominion and Smartmatic lawsuits.. another cautionary tale for GB News).

I know it has, peripherally, nothing to do with Fox News (but thank you for your delicacy trying to read me like a gullible idiot).

Except that increasingly patently false and traitorous news has been and is growing in output from the Fox News folks, which you simultaneously try to put down and deglamorize while you celebrate it.

The Sunday Times story is linked below.

GB News-style professionalism - this is what one of their producers tweeted to Sadiq Khan on Friday:

"@CharlotteCGill

Fuck Off. Do you think saying "maaaaate" to that boy with the machete would have saved that girl's life? London has a huge crime problem. It is financially mismanaged and out of control. You are a cynical and slimey abomination."

R404, don't look at the responses from other women to Sadiq Khan's tweet about women's safety if that offends you.

Khan has been absolutely woeful on women's safety and knife crime in London. He's very much a "thoughts and prayers" guy.

The Tory candidate standing against him makes the lovely Nadine Dorries look of sound mine. Poor London.

R405 It doesn't offend me. It's just laughable that a GB News producer thinks it appropriate to tweet like that (hurling insults). Just like Laurence Fox and his saying that he would never want to shag that woman instead of sticking to making the argument in a reasonable way.

"And, having recently secured backing from Ken Griffin, an American hedge fund boss whose $35 billion net worth makes him one of the world’s wealthiest men, he is seen as one of the frontrunners. Marshall’s stewardship of GB News will be seen by many as an indicator of how he might manage the Telegraph."

Ah, DeSantis's backer and the guy whose dishonest advertising campaign prevented Illinois from adopting a fair income tax but who couldn't sell his candidate for governor. Thank God, he left Chicago. He is not missed.

[quote]In the meantime, Evans was made aware of Fox’s comments by somebody within the GB News building.

The call is coming from inside the building

A new Byline Times article with plenty of interesting background about what's going on at GB News. The main takeaway is that Wootton likely isn't going to be back there any time soon and is allegedly thinking of going back to New Zealand.

GB News has 12 current Ofcom investigations and has officially breached Ofcom rules three times already. Ofcom investigations are uncommon at other networks and the last time a channel had that many, it was shut down (Russia Today). GB News has an Editorial Charter that outlaws ad hominem attacks on individuals and is increasingly looking like a tabloid joke of a channel. For those reasons, their money backers are looking to improve production standards and be taken more seriously.

Byline are promising even more

[quote]GB News (...) is reviewing the employment of a number of other employees ahead of a further Byline Times investigation to be published tomorrow.

And

[quote]At the time of writing, Wootton has yet to issue proceedings against Byline Times.

[quote]“There was a concern that Wootton’s antics were making GB News a parody of the free speech channel it was intended to be. It sat very poorly with the original vision to set a credible alternative tone for the right-of-centre political conversation in the UK. Wootton’s future there has been in question for a lot longer than many people, even he, might have believed.”

And yet the only criticism they have against Wootton and others is their tabloid style and personal attacks. Which rather suggests the leadership has been perfectly fine with the actual politics.

R409, JFC New Zealand doesn't want him back. Not enough following here for his huge ego. He's best to go to America, where he can job up with the Log cabin gays in Floriduh.

R411 He won't come back to NZ. He nuked all his bridges before he left, the soulless pig dog.

I could see him pop up on Sky News Australia as their "I'm in NZ and it's actually a shithole" type correspondent

While GB News is a cesspool of right-wing tinfoil hat types, shutting it down will only work to push the 'disenfranchised' nutters, as well as those on the fence between voting Labour or Conservative, to vote Tory in the next election. GB News' highest rating are in the so-called red wall of Northern England and the Midlands. Labour HAS to flip many of these seats back to them if they want to form government. There would be a backlash if OfCom shuts them down. Better to let GB News implode from within.

R414 is overestimating the appeal and relevance of GB News. Just because a small number of people are very vocal about something online doesn't mean squat.

In fact as shown with Racist Grandpa, the more people see of a certain tribe the more they are repulsed by it. That's happening with Fox/Wootton/Robinson.

GB News only had 100k people watching Dan Wootton at most and that's during primetime. You can be sure that almost all of them are voting Tory anyway.

R416, at least 5% of Wootton's viewers are self identifying journalists waiting for something to happen so they can tweet about it.

TBH, come to think of it, I bet a lot of them are UKIP type of voters. Farage gets the best ratings on GB News after all. Kippers always were a minority.

The current Farage party is The Reform Party is polling around 6-8%, led by Richard Tice with gay tv doctor David Bull as its deputy leader.

They could have an impact on the next election depending where they stand and if their supporters vote Tory or abstain.

Reform are not to be confused with Reclaim, Laurence Fox's political party which has 1 MP after the ridiculous Andrew Bridgen joined them after being suspended by the Tories for vaccine denial. Reclaim have a similar level of impact as the Corbyn supporting Northern Independence Party, Breakthrough Party,

[quote]Liz Truss there, telling an audience at the Conservative party conference that Britain needs "more GB News" - as the feed of her speech provided to all broadcasters *by* GB News repeatedly breaks up

Hilarious though this is, it's ridiculous that such a Mickey Mouse outfit were allowed into the pool

The single success of Corbynism was to facilitate the destruction of the Tory Party.

Labour's lurch to the left allowed the Tories to become a populist right wing party. When Corbynites obsessed about compulsory reselection of MPs the Tories just did it, withdrawing the whip from a load of moderates, bullying a load of others and replacing them with fringe nutters who should never have passed first stage vetting.

The 80 seat majority won by Boris was so humiliating for Labour that the Corbynites operated a scorched earth policy that forced Starmer to rebuild from ground zero, and he has rebuilt quickly and effectively. The Labour cranks who became MPs are finding themselves without seats through the boundary changes.

These nutters have been fooled into thinking a few thousand Twitter likes means popular positions.

Brexit destroyed the Tory party, not Corbynism

I didn't say Corbynism destroyed the Tory Party, I said the only success of Corbynism was to facilitate it.

The Tories could not have gotten to where they are today without the assistance of the most woeful opposition in history.

And now it's Labour who are benefitting from it.

I do think R414 has a point. Yes R415 is right that GB News has a small audience share (though since the spring, GB has been routinely beating Sky and BBC News during Prime Time hours), if it is axed by Ofcom it will rile the conservative base, even those who don't watch it, as another "woke" attack on free speech.

[quote]GB has been routinely beating Sky and BBC News during Prime Time hours

A completely meaningless statistic

'Most woeful opposition in history'

Those defeats were due to Brexit and the Tory party eating itself, not Corbyn lol

But hey, if you love stats that much, do one for seats gained at general elections.

[quote]I do think [R414] has a point. Yes [R415] is right that GB News has a small audience share (though since the spring, GB has been routinely beating Sky and BBC News during Prime Time hours), if it is axed by Ofcom it will rile the conservative base, even those who don't watch it, as another "woke" attack on free speech.

Owen Jones has a million followers on Twitter. His "unseat" campaign 2019 where he and Momentum activists would swarm Tory constituencies resulted in ZERO Labour gains, and in some cases increased the Tory vote share.

GB News is not influential in the same way Owen Jones is not influential but will promote itself as such because it wants to be.

R427 Will this do?

[quote]Those defeats were due to Brexit and the Tory party eating itself, not Corbyn lol But hey, if you love stats that much, do one for seats gained at general elections.

Not sure what you meant by defeats?

Just to highlight a few things that influenced where the UK is now.

2015 - Labour elect a lifelong supporter of leaving the EU as its leader, knowing there's going to be an in/out referendum called by the Tories who now have a majority government

2016 - the Labour leadership sabotages the Labour referendum campaign, Corbyn refuses to do any events with Cameron, the day after the referendum Corbyn calls for Article 50 to be triggered.

2018-2019 Having committed to leaving the EU in its 2017 election manifesto Labour vote against Theresa May's deal 3 times knowing it's the best the EU will offer, in the hope of bringing down the government. They succeed and Boris Johnson replaces Theresa May. Labour vote for a December general election with a batshit Brexit policy and a hugely unpopular leader.

2020 onwards - with an 80 seat majority and countless cranks in the party Boris Johnson's attempts at governing are as expected. Crisis to crisis, lying, scandals etc.

Farage , Cummings etc could not have believed their luck with how their project was helped by the most inept opposition in history.

And now Starmer can't believe his luck with the most inept government in history.

Lol at R429 posting a tweet from Damian from Brighton, a deranged Corbyn loon.

Corbyn got the most votes "this century" - yeah, and Theresa May got more votes.

Corbyn got the "biggest vote share" - yeah, and Theresa May had an even bigger vote share

r429 No, it won't. So I'll do it for you, shall I? Facing the weakest Tory PM and with the worst Tory campaign ever in 2017, he gained a paltry 30 seats. And then in 2019 he lost 60. A net loss for his entire leadership of 30 seats.

It's hilarious that someone with the username 'ConcernedEuropean' is defending an addled old man who was opposed to the EU and took a fucking holiday during the Brexit referendum campaign.

[quote]Not sure what you meant by defeats?

Are you an idiot? Losing votes in the Commons.

How lovely to see Concerned European defending the catastrophic Corbyn era.

Is he going to blame (((you know who))) for plotting against Poor Jeremy?

I wonder why the British public didn't want to vote for a party that would fly another nation's flag at its conference but not its own country's?

Mind boggling.

Dan Wootton is being formally investigated by Met police:

[quote]Detectives from the Complex Investigation Team of the force’s Central Specialist Crime division are looking into serious allegations relating to the obtaining of sexual images by deception and blackmail. A Met Police spokesperson told this newspaper: “In June 2023, the Metropolitan Police was contacted with regards to allegations of sexual offences committed by a man aged in his 40s. “Officers assessed all information available to establish whether any criminal offence has taken place. We can confirm that an investigation has now commenced into these allegations. “Detectives will continue to liaise with the complainant to establish the circumstances. There has been no arrest and enquiries continue.”

The claim was that Corbyn's opposition was "the most woeful opposition in history".

Hence the biggest number of parliamentary defeats inflicted on the government being a worthwhile stat, since the job of oppositions is, you know, to oppose.

By contrast you are certain to be old enough to remember William Hague's opposition, which inflicted not one single defeat on the government of the day, which itself would later be re-elected with a 167 seat majority.

But I've long been aware that the UK threads - even the ones not about Meghan Markle - on this site are infested by racist cranks (see R434) with colourful and tendentious interpretations of political history.

Since Starmer's lead is presently collapsing like a deflating souffle, why don't we take a closer look at another stat: one that measures actual votes cast? Does this one presage a smashing victory?

Let's see....

Byline has an article about allegations about 5 other GB News employees, including Darren Grimes who sexually harassed a junior male straight colleague but kept his job after Wootton spoke up for him.

Poor Concerned European, trying to spin the idea that Corbyn was a successful Labour leader despite leading Labour to its worst election defeat in 80 years.

Delusional batshittery.

[quote]Byline has an article about allegations about 5 other GB News employees, including Darren Grimes who sexually harassed a junior male straight colleague but kept his job after Wootton spoke up for him.

Jesus, they're worse than the SNP!

Flush them all

The reason people like this are against "woke" issues is that, if people actually too offense at certain behaviors and attitudes, their days of free predation without consequences would be over.

Every so-called "anti woke" crusader should be examined very closely. You know they'd find those skeletons.

Who would've imagined that the Crafty Wanker was a sleazebag

R441 They were very happy to be all over it when it's Philip Schofield and Huw Edwards. That backfired on them since I have doubts that all of this would have come out otherwise....

R438 is Tom Harwood on the list of those being investigated. He's allegedly a piece of work too.

Alex Phillips with a cryptic tweet a few days ago. She works for TalkTV now but used to work for GB News -

[quote]@ThatAlexWoman One of the worst things in life is really wanting to say something, but knowing you are silenced

Is she one who was paid 5 figures and signed a NDA after being undermined and marginalised for turning down Frangopoulos's advances?

r444 Given the other four are accused of harassing women, I think you're full of shit

R444 and R446 Tom Harwood has a reputation of being a total bitch and not in a fun bitchy queen way.

Bitchy queens aren't fun

Wootton's lawyers have been busy cowing people into taking down articles about the police investigation citing 'privacy prior to being charged' even though there are no compunctions when it comes to reporting about Russell Brand being investigated by police for example.

Notably they still have not issued proceedings against Byline Times whose articles stay up.

He really is shitting himself, isn't he?

[quote]Who would've imagined that the Crafty Wanker was a sleazebag

He's gotten away with this for so long because he's thick as thieves with everyone at Kensington Palace. He did a lot of their dirty work for them. He was willing to do or say anything for them. And they in turn have protected him for an extremely long time.

R451, the reason Dan Wootton "got away with" appalling behaviour is the same reason Kevin Spacey, Harvey Weinstein. Bill Cosby, Russell Brand did.

People don't take sexual harassment/bullying in the workplace seriously, the complainants put their own jobs at risk and organisations have no incentive for big organisations investigate bad behaviour.

And as we saw with many cases where men report sexual misconduct by other men, they are dismissed and laughed at.

Fuck all to do with the royals.

Re: the legal stuff. Here's a screenshot of what Wootton's lawyers are sending The Guardian, The Mirror et al. One, it confirms that the story he is under criminal investigation is true. Two, the judge in the Bloomberg LP v ZXC ruling they cite wrote, “The judgment is not authority for the proposition that the press may never publish that an individual is under investigation, but where the detail of the investigation has come from a confidential source”.

"@peterjukes

In the Bloomberg case the people were ONLY named based on police reports without previous reporting. In which case there is a reasonable expectation of privacy - not so with Brand or Wootton"

"@peterjukes

Just FWIW: Wootton’s lawyer has been threatening people on Twitter with exemplary damages and punitive costs merely for linking to factual public interest articles that detail a Met investigation into their client (who champions free speech). There is no precedent for this. And talking about individuals on Twitter merely linking to news articles, not media orgs, here"

r451/r452 The Crafty Wanker is Darren Grimes, not Wootton

Anyway, slightly tangential, but Laurence Fox arrested for ULEZ camera vandalism

Fox and Calvin Robinson both sacked from GB News. Wootton investigation (presumably into him ignoring orders about Fox, not the other stuff) continues

It's shocking how many GB News employees have tweeted in support of Fox and against the police when he encourages people to get an angle grinder and destroy lawful ULEZ cameras (Farage, Dewberry, Grimes, Neil Oliver, etc) when they go batshit when it's Extinction Rebellion. It just shows how they're ideologues and not really for 'law and order'.

"@TomLatchem 2h

BREAKING: @BylineTimes has been told Dan Wootton will be gone from GB news by next week latest. CEO Angelos Frangopoulos now fighting for his future, but one former employee says: "The station cannot survive - with or without him."

You just know that Wootton is probably throwing his lawyers at them.

As for the station not surviving - it wouldn't be terribly surprising when they are losing ~£30m year on year. The Kipper audience they cultivate isn't very lucrative and nor is it 'the silent majority'.

Chances they bring back Brillo Pad in an attempt to gain some credibility?

[quote]It's shocking how many GB News employees have tweeted in support of Fox and against the police when he encourages people to get an angle grinder and destroy lawful ULEZ cameras (Farage, Dewberry, Grimes, Neil Oliver, etc) when they go batshit when it's Extinction Rebellion. It just shows how they're ideologues and not really for 'law and order'.

TBF there's not much difference from them and the posho twats who throw soup at paintings and glue themselves to the road. It's ideological and performative panto that isn't designed to change minds or save the world but to validate their existence with attention.

As was put to climate protester Indigo Rumbalow, there really isn't much difference between her stopping traffic because she believes oil companies are literally murdering people and the god bothers who stand outside hospitals performing terminations because they think abortion is literally murder. The ULEZ camera vandals think the ULEZ scheme is literally killing people. A plague on all their detached insulated houses.

R458 Not likely, Brillo jumped ship after a couple of weeks, he was canny enough to see which way the wind was blowing.

Private Eye reporting they're considering a switch to only online, in an effort to escape Ofcom regulation. I'm sure the money saved on broadcasting costs would appeal too

Calvin Robinson mentioned in his video that the Online Safety Bill which the Tories passed in 2023 means that Ofcom will be regulating online too. I'm not clear if this would affect news/commentary or have the same rules though - anyone know?

There are rumours GB News is trying to poach Julia Hartley-Brewer from TalkTV to take over Wootton's spot.

And I'm still surprised that the Tories act like that GB News giving Farage a platform is good:

[quote]"The Reform Party will contest every single seat at the next general election. No deals with the Tories after the great Brexit betrayal, says @Nigel_Farage at @reformparty_uk conference"

omg, why won't he leave the UK? (apologies to the Kiwi poster)

"@TomLatchem

EXCLUSIVE: Dan Wootton’s departure from GB News has been “held up” by legal matters, according to sources, but @bylinetimes can confirm the journalist has put his house on the market with plans to move to Scotland, suggesting he has accepted he will be axed from the channel."

Ah yes, Scotland, the ideal destination for someone who rails against 'woke'

I'm pretty sure that he's a psychopath so I don't find it hard to believe that he could re-invent himself as a SNP 'Nat'. But I don't understand why Scotland?! Why not the USA like someone else mentioned would be a perfect fit for him? Visa issues? The fact that even US employers would balk at what has come out about him?

[quote]re-invent himself as a SNP 'Nat'.

Ohhh now that's a good point. He could be playing the long game, given Yousaf will likely have to resign after the general, and given the last leadership election his replacement is likely going to be on the right, so yeah that could well open an opportunity for him

I think the US is out because he's gay.

Scottish nationalism is being crushed faster than Gaza right now. I doubt Humza Yousef will be around for the General Election next year and the SNP will be left with a handful of Westminster seats, similar to pre 2015 levels.

Wootton won't want to be associated with the SNP, a brand as toxic as GB News. His media career is over.

[quote]the SNP will be left with a handful of Westminster seats, similar to pre 2015 levels.

Even the worst polling for the SNP has them at high-twenties. What you're talking about would need the Rutherglen results to be replicated Scotland-wide, which won't happen

You're ignoring several factors

1. A lot of Scottish voters fucking hate the SNP, their arrogance and incompetence.

2. A lot of Scottish independence supporters fucking hate the SNP.

3. A lot of Scottish voters hate the Tories and want to see them gone.

4. If it looks like there's going to be a big Labour government then a lot of voters will want to be backing the winning team

5. A lot of SNP politicians are actively looking to sabotage the leadership.

The SNP are going to get Milibanded.

Your opinions don't count as facts

Hun, do you honestly think things are going to get better for Yousaf?

This week alone he's had an MP quit and suspended a councillor after a racist/xenophobic attack.

The police investigation is convenient as long as it stops him being asked questions but either outcome is a disaster. Either Sturgeon/Murrell charged with fraud/theft the story carries on, if no one is charged then SNP finances are fair game.

The gender bill is massively unpopular and will be negative attention if the Scot Gov win the Section 35 challenge or humiliation of they lose it.

Yousaf has the charisma of a sacked in week 6 Apprentice candidate.

The SNP are in a downward spiral and Labour are getting their shit together. Scottish voters will have a choice of more division and grievance (as will English voters) or voting for the winning party who have promised lots of investment for Scotland.

And that's before the campaign kicks in when Yousaf (if he IS still there) is going to get humiliated. He was awful against two women in the leadership contest.

The "Labour takes us for granted" sentiment which led to the 2015 catastrophe has become "The SNP takes us for granted"

I agree that Yousaf looks fucked. Sturgeon, whether you like her or not was a one of a kind leader with real authority, a bit like a left-wing/nationalist Thatcher.

Here's Latchem's follow-up tweet where he says that Wootton is moving to Scotland because Wootton's partner is from there..... I'm trying very hard here not to judge this idiot partner - and failing!

"@TomLatchem

EXCLUSIVE CONTD: Dan Wootton is understood to have told his few remaining friends there is “nothing left” for him in London. He plans to move to Scotland because that is where his partner is from. @BylineTimes"

[quote]Hun, do you honestly think things are going to get better for Yousaf?

And where did I say things would get better for him? Just making up strawmen now? What I actually said is that believing the Rutherglen result would be replicated nationwide is ridiculous

what's the Wizard Of Oz go to do with it?

Sorry to move away from the lovely Dan and the inevitable collapse of his glittering showbiz career, however:

2010 - Labour get 42% vote and 41 of 59 seats, SNP win 6 seats on 21%

2015 -SNP get 49% vote and 56 of 59 seats, Labour get 1 seat on 24%

2017 - SNP get 36% vote and 35 of 59 seats, Labour get 7 seats on 21%

2019 - SNP get 45% vote and 48 of 59 seats, Labour get 1 seat on 18%

2023 - SNP and Labour polling at 35%

A deeply unpopular and petulant SNP are not just fighting a resurgent Labour, they're defending 16 years in government, contesting seats where the Lib Dems are second and the Tories are second.

The SNP have only done well with Westminster seats when a Tory government has been in place, and the grievance vote is strong. With a Labour landslide inevitable the SNP lose the anti Tory vote.

The SNP look like voting for a new policy where a majority of seats (29 out of the new 57 seats) will be the same as a vote for independence in a referendum. Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories couldn't dream of a better strategy to go up against.

And that's before an election campaign where the SNP are defending their record and Labour offer change.

The SNP are going to get battered like a deep fried mars bar.

And it's going to be a joy to watch.

On those percentages they'd still win 20 seats.

Lock him up, already.

[quote]A company source said: “News UK is taking this very seriously. The fear is of a big Lizzo-style pile-on of litigants [US entertainer Lizzo is facing a string of sexual harassment and hostility-at-work court cases] bringing possible law suits that try and make the firm liable for the alleged activities of an employee.

WTF?!?!!

It's not like there aren't established UK employment law cases that could be referenced.

R478 interesting, so this may actually go to court?

[QUOTE]The company is now also believed to be in possession of digital evidence connecting Wootton to those names

This is the first time I've seen the name Maria Joseph. Well, this is serious. Is the Sun obligated to pass along evidence of criminal wrong doing to Metropolitan Police?

I'm not a lawyer but I found this:

[quote]The High Court confirmed an employer can be liable, together with an employee, for wrongful acts committed by this employee provided list: (a) etc. these acts closely relate to the acts the employee was authorised to do; and (b) it is fair and proper to regard these wrongful acts as being done in the ordinary course of the employee’s employment. The legal basis being that the employer should be held responsible for these wrongful acts insofar as it recruited this employee into that position... the employer always has some scope to control the employee, no matter how highly skilled that employee is, and the employer is capable of designing systems the employee must follow to prevent the wrongful conduct from occurring.

So I can see why the Sun is shitting themselves, especially if it's true that Wootton used company funds (paying men to secretly videotape sex) and his position (using his job to get celebs to strip for him).

His profile was removed then restored to the GB News website back in December. It may have indicated the investigation was complete. They restored it after the watchdog group inquired about it.

Is the company crossing Ts and dotting Is and covering all bases before dropping the hammer?

It's been long clear that he's done. Even GB News would not want someone like Wootton with the seriousness of the allegations against him (which still have not been retracted despite his best attempts to sic lawyers on people).

It'd actually be more fun to speculate now on how long GB News will last. They are operating on a big loss and are scraping now by looking for people to pay a volunteer subscription. They are marginally more successful than Murdoch's TalkTV which is on its last legs, having sacked Piers Morgan, but they look fucked to me too. It all depends on whether their backers want to keep throwing £30m+ down the drain every year. Fun to also observe that GB News is super pro-Tory but the Tories continue to tank badly in the polls so GB News has almost no influence.

I love Popbitch.

"A ballsy move from the Sun to run a "BBC KILLED STEVE WRIGHT" story on its front page today, laying the blame of Steve's death at the feet of the Beeb for "breaking his heart". As we'd like to keep the mailout below the 100,000 word mark, we can't give a detailed run-down of all the breakdowns, burnouts, legal blow-ups and medical traumas that those working for NewsCorp have suffered. Suffice it to say, the Sun might not want to get into a pissing match with the Beeb over their effect on anyone's health, happiness or life expectancy. Especially not today. The anniversary of Caroline Flack's death."

Dan being a former Sun employee, of course.

The Met Police aren't taking any action against Wootton, Wootton says he has been cleared.

Legal note - he hasn't been cleared and the police don't have the power to do that. Nor have they released a statement. What this means is that there isn't enough evidence for CPS to almost certainly get a prosecution. It's the same reason why a tiny percentage of rape claims get prosecuted - these cases are hard to prove without doubt. So it doesn't necessarily mean that the claims aren't true or that he hasn't done anything.

Be interesting to see if he's back on GB News but I have a hunch not.

[quote]Dan Wootton’s lawyers have sent a letter to Byline Times, its editor Peter Jukes, and the journalists Dan Evans and Tom Latchem, informing them that Dan will be going after them for a ruinously large sum in damages and costs. Despite the contentious Supreme Court ruling in ZXC v Bloomberg setting the precedent that on privacy grounds those under investigation ought not to be named until charged, Byline Times maliciously chose to name Dan for political reasons (having themselves been the ethically dubious complainant to the Metropolitan Police in the first place).

[quote]Having ignored the established legal protections in place for those accused of criminal offences in an attempt to destroy Dan’s reputation, Byline, Jukes, Evans and Latchem now face the potential consequences, including financial and reputational ruin, that may await them. Guido’s advice is to cut your losses…

I wonder how Huw Edwards is doing these days

I'm sure the Byline team are quaking in their boots. More empty threats, wake me when a suit is actually filed

Yep, reads like more SLAPP to me. If Byline are telling the truth, then this will be like the Vardy-Rooney trial.

Has anyone asked themselves why Byline are the only media outlet going on this, especially when The Guardian and The Mirror withdrew their own articles based on Byline's investigations?

Is it possible that Byline have got aspects of the story wrong, or exaggerated elements based on their (justified) loathing of Wootton?

R491 Fair point but on the other hand, he's been trying to SLAPP everyone and Byline say that they don't understand the story, don't have all the information.

For all the claims of ethics in journalism Peter Jukes who runs Byline is a fucking crank. After the Hamas attacks on October 7th he was attacking British Jews for claiming there had been extreme sexual violence, despite all the evidence available.

Byline is an ultra partisan set up that slants its stories at a particular audience.

They're one of many anti Tory grifts that are looking at having to diversify as a Labour landslide looks inevitable. It would be hilarious if they have got it badly wrong.

Hi Dan!

^ Dan Wootton is "ultra partisan"

r491 If they'd got anything wrong, Wootton would've sued by now already. As it is, he's still just making bullshit empty threats.

Absolutely Dan Wootton is ultra partisan, as is GB News. Of course he is.

And so are Byline. GB News is "anti woke" and Byline is "anti anti woke".

Carol Vorderman and the other anti Tory obsessives think GB News will suffer from a Labour government. Far from it, GB News will retain its audience and carry on with the anti woke stuff.

It's the anti Tory organisations who will be hit hard, the grifts who fundraise on anger and bitterness against the Tories. Byline is part of ecosyste.

r497 The only reason GB News has been allowed to get away with so much is that Ofcom have been too scared to properly enforce the rules because they know the government won't back them. That's going to change dramatically once Labour are in.

You've been trying to dismiss the Wootton story since your OP post in this thread, fuck off trying to pretend you aren't partisan yourself.

[quote]Carol Vorderman and the other anti Tory obsessives think GB News will suffer from a Labour government. Far from it, GB News will retain its audience and carry on with the anti woke stuff.

If GB News's funders are willing to continue pouring tens of millions down the drain every year, they will continue. If not, they won't.

GB News is having no positive influence on the polls that I can see, other than to encourage people to vote Reform instead of Tory, which helps Labour. You have to laugh.

R499 you seem to think GB News is a vessel for the Conservative Party, in the way the The National is an SNP supporting "outlet".

GB News is an anti woke right wing set up, not Pro Tory. There is a difference. They'll carry on appealing people angry about Covid, angry that Brexit wasn't done properly, angry that Liz Truss wasn't given a proper chance, angry with anything and everything Labour is doing, angry with the BBC, with migrants etc.

When Labour gets into government and starts improving things where is the audience for Alistair Campbell's podcast? Where do the anti Tory voices go when they're sat in opposition, the bare bones of an opposition party?

Just like the Tories and SNP need each other to cling on to power the anti Tory grifts need the Tories. GB News and Wootton's brand of anti woke will still have an audience.

[quote]. GB News and Wootton's brand of anti woke will still have an audience.

Yes, a very small audience of mostly old, white, conservative people. But they still need their backers to pour tens of millions down the drain to fund that each year.

[quote]where is the audience for Alistair Campbell's podcast? Where do the anti Tory voices go when they're sat in opposition, the bare bones of an opposition party?

Making money from commentating on the shit show that will be the Tories in opposition. You actually think there isn't an audience for Campbell and Stewart mocking Kemi's attempts at PMQs? You think Byline Times won't have anything to report on as the Tory party lurches even further to the right? That's as asinine as thinking the Daily Show would end once Obama was elected.

And just for the record, I can't fucking stand Campbell and Stewart.

Dan Wootton is seeking damages, an apology and the retraction of articles from Byline Times after it reported on the fact he was being investigated by police.

Press Gazette understands that Wootton’s legal team is also writing to Carol Vorderman and former Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis over statements made by them on Twitter.

The suspended GB News presenter is also considering legal action against other media outlets over articles published in October last year.

"Considering legal action" in the same way that I'm considering buying a mansion. Where's the money Dan?

Funny how these claims of "considering" only came out after it was pointed out he grifted 30k for legal funds, and then spent none of it on, y'know, legal action.

R504 - why has Maitlis deleted her tweets if there is nothing in this story?

Ask her, Dan

R506 - do you think it's possible that people massively overreached with the Wootton story, and that his legal action is comparable with the people who sued Wootton's friend Lozza Fox over the paedo comments, and the non binary grifting tin can cook who sued Katie Hopkins?

What legal action is that? The one that you're only making vague threats of filing? Go to bed, Dan.

Threats or considerations of legal action are so passive aggressive.

I wish this turd would just flush away, no one needs to hear from him ever again.

I guess Jada didn't go ahead and sue the security guard who reported seeing Will getting his pleasure hole murdered by another dude. WE WILL SUE 😠

The Guardian has apologized to Wootton and is paying part of his legal costs.

R511 Confirmed by the Press Gazette

I'm not so sure this is a good look for him. He works as a journalist and is going after other journalists for reporting news? (Note that his complaint isn't that the reporting was *wrong* but that they reported that he was under investigation.. a privacy complaint.)

Not to mention the hypocrisy of him and the Huw Edwards situation

The reality is it's over. He will not face charges and according to the Police there was no evidence the accusations were true. Wootton is a small dicked loser but that's the reality of it.

[quote]The reality is it's over.

Likely Wootton's career here too. I'd bet that he's being seen as a big liability by both The Sun and GB News. Didn't he burn his bridges in New Zealand too or am I remembering that wrong?

Ofcom have formally ruled that an episode of Dan Wootton Tonight on GB News was in breach of their broadcasting rules (that's the one he was sacked for, when he allowed Laurence Fox to go on a rant, ignoring his producers).

Also, GB News's accounts for the year ending 31 May 2023 are out: a £42.4m loss. That's compared to a £30.7m loss for the year ending May 2022. My guess is that they have another loss similar or worse over the last year since they appear to have gone on a spending spree of hiring various Tory and Kipper names.

A lot of money for almost no discernible political influence in real terms that I can see. Their audience is too small both in number and demographics.

R517 - this has to be some write-off tax scam, right?

TalkTV going online-only too

R518 I don't believe so, which makes it even worse. My reading of this is that Paul Marshall wants to have political influence against 'woke' politics which is why he's sinking so much money into this. (Pls correct me if anyone thinks I'm wrong because I don't know a lot about this.)

Also here's some evidence for why I think that their losses will be either about the same or worse than 2022/23: GB News wages and salaries went from £821,000 in the year to May 2021 to £11m in the year to May 2022 to £18.2m in the year ending May 2023...

OMG Dan Wootton has sensationally QUIT GB News and sensationally LAUNCHED his own YouTube show where he will be RANTING about conspiracy theory talking points and SLAMMING wokeness with other anti woke guests.

[quote]Dan Wootton has sensationally QUIT GB News

Note that the article actually says "left", not quit. Given it comes so soon after the Ofcom censure, it's pretty clear GB News pushed him out.

[QUOTE]OMG Dan Wootton has sensationally QUIT GB News and sensationally LAUNCHED his own YouTube show where he will be RANTING about conspiracy theory talking points and SLAMMING wokeness with other anti woke guest

I wish Dan would SLAM his car into a brick wall.

What are the odds he'll turn the comments off on his YouTube channel? Do I even need to ask?

What are the odds he'll turn the comments off on his YouTube channel? Do I even need to ask?

What's up with DL? This is about the fourth time I've gotten double posts in as many days.

What's up with DL? This is about the fourth time I've gotten double posts in as many days.

Wootton saying that he might have to leave the UK to be able to comment on the UK because of the Online Safety Bill is especially funny because it was the Tories who passed that bill. How about you get that the Tories don't like 'free speech', Dan? His 'Ofcommunists' terminology is cringe to the extreme as well. They aren't communists at all and have been very, very lenient with GB News given that their task is to try to get balance in reporting.

These right-wingers are so desperate to be victims

Of course they are R529 - they hold the power and the privileges and yet they always want to be seen as being at the mercy of some ill-defined enemy. Whether that's Liz Truss' bat-shit crazy idea of a left-wing deep state (if only!) or the enemies are immigrants, the EU...it's always someone else's fault when they fail.

Maybe, just maybe, the vast majority of people are decent and moderate and simply don't agree with them.

These people set themselves up to be deliberately antagonistic, provocative and attention-seeking then complain when people react towards them negatively. It's such a tiresome game.

The right wing of the Tories are a bit late with their batshit conspiracy theories. The centrist FBPE crowd had their PUTIN BREXIT theory, the left have their ZIONISTS STOPPED JEREMY theory and now the Tories have their EVERYONE IS AGAINST US theory. And of course the SNP have their WESTMINSTER'S FAULT theory.

I wonder how much the wider public pays attention to this rather that minority view "news" outlets telling people what they want to hear.

Meanwhile Byline TV's main man Caolan Robertson has apologised to JK Rowling for calling her a putrid cunt after being ridiculed for his dreadful interview with India Willoughby and Byline's Josiah Mortimer wants to hear from Jews who disagree with the government's counter extremist officer who says London is a no go area for Jews.

Byline know the anti Tory appeal is coming to an end and diversifying into a very crowded anti GC/anti Israel market.

The Mirror to pay "substantial" damages to Wootton.

Although "substantial" damages means different things to different people, just like "substantial" penises. The academic Michelle Donelan defamed received "substantial" damages - the cost to the government was £15,000 which included the victim's share of legal fees.

Man, I’d love to beat people like him up. Just kick the shit out of them in some dark alley.

Yep, smug fat fuck. And the fact that he has Guido Fawkes shilling for him says a lot.

Paul Staines is a horrible little man (does he still live in Ireland?) and yet he is a far more effective journalist/gossip monger than Bylines.

Guido and Bylines are very similar in their outlook, driven by contempt for others. And of course Guido started as an anti Labour outlet who criticised the media for its failure to cover Labour scandals. And it managed to keep going after 14 years of Tory government, and I doubt Byline will.

Jim Waterson - the Guardian media editor who ran the since pulled stories on Wootton - started his career with Guido.

Like a circle in a spiral in a never ending wheel....

Jim Waterson used to work for Guido?

[quote]Byline know the anti Tory appeal is coming to an end

Keep telling yourself it, doesn't make it likely to happen. Surprise surprise you praise Guido.

Yeah, I really don't understand the idea that left wing publications will disappear just because Labour are in power? After all, The Telegraph, Guido, The Daily Mail, Express, etc. didn't disappear during 14 years of Tory government?

That argument makes no sense to me.

Byline doesn't define itself as left wing. Its selling point is that it's anti Tory/anti Tory media.

There have been so many "publicly funded" grifts set up to focus on anti Brexit feeling and then anti Covid sleaze/general anti Tory feeling. Byline, The Good Law Project and the awful Every Doctor are three. Every Doctor has diversified with their "emergency newsletter" on Gaza and their increasing attacks on Wes Streeting.

The less angry people this cohort of very online people feel the less they'll want to contribute towards it. The pool of money is drying up.

The pro Corbyn groups that were popular and well profiled between 2015-2019 have all but disappeared, with the possible exception of Ash Sarkar from Novara. A Labour victory will be good for this group as they'll be invited by the media to offer their left wing criticism of Starmer and Labour.

Your entire argument falls apart because no, its selling point isn't that it's anti-Tory. That's just another example of you being a right-winger (spare us your denials) trying to pretend to be the victim. The selling point is independent journalism. Since your post creating this thread you've tried to dismiss Byline, so we all know you're biased.

But even if we were to grant your premise - post-election it's almost certain that thanks to the nutters that make up its membership, we're in for either the Braverman or Badenoch era. That's going to be more than enough to fuel anti-Toryism. Not to mention pointing out the bullshit hypocrisy we're going to see from the right wing media who have turned a blind eye to scandal after scandal from the Tories, but who will suddenly start pissing themselves because Starmer wears a tan suit or whatever the fuck it'll be.

And on top of which: the very online people are always very angry.

So go on then, tell us how you're definitely not a right winger but you're now going to use right wing talking points and defend right wingers.

[quote]The selling point is independent journalism.

Independent journalism about WHAT?

They aren't specifically focussed on any particular area. The range of stories they publish proves that. Grow the fuck up.