GB News commentator to sue charity for not offering internships to white people

Get that lady a bottle of SPF 5000 and a shot of B12 immediately! I’d also recommend she carry an umbrella for just in case it *doesn’t* rain.

The "whitest of white"

The type that would gently poison themselves to maintain complexion. *^(Not hating though, I'm pale as death myself.)*

Specifically the undead

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

She's a GB News commentator... GB News is a hard-to-far-right propaganda channel set up by people based outside the UK to push hard-to-far-right views onto the UK. It has given hard-to-far-right politicians (including ones in office) their own programmes and segments. Between its launch in June 2021 and May 2025 it had lost a total of £141m. It is funded by Paul Marshall, a Conservative Party donor, multimillionaire (maybe billionaire now), and hedge fund manager who also owns the conservative website UnHerd and the conservative magazine The Spectator. He is a "committed Christian" (in his own words) and describes himself as a classic liberal, despite pushing far-right content. So... ...probably.

[deleted]

In one.

Oh they did, they found it to be perfectly lawful, and the irony is they also happen to be the very organisation she ‘wanted to do the internship with’ in the first place 💀

They are relatively new in the last few years, but yes exactly. They get around the broadcasting regulations by claiming to be an entertainment channel and not a news channel.

Oh lucky you 🫩 Yea, similar to Fox but bit more Sinclair tinted. It’s aimed at working class white people, bankrolled by Dubai-based VC and [other foreign mainly crypto-type billionaires](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/29/revealed-nigel-farage-was-given-undisclosed-5m-by-crypto-billionaire-in-2024?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other), and wants to make its viewership angry at brown people. Except that instead of ‘step 3: ???? Step 4: profit’ it is ‘step 3: profit, step 4: ??????????’

Pretty much yeah. And they have sitting members of parliament with their own shows like Farage and Rees Mogg. It's a f****** joke

As Jon Stewart said, ‘the valley between the power you yield and the victimhood you claim is the real offence’

Christ you don't want that fecker anywhere near a concentration camp, it'll only give him ideas.

...... They aren't already?

It's the same playbook they've successfully used in the states. Sue minority group focused outreach programs since they are not offered to the majority white demographic and shut them down due to it.

She's not doing it for attention. She's almost certainly being backed by US money and they have manufactured this situation and will keep doing it. It's what they did in the US and it's been happening in the UK less obviously for the last decade and some. Some of the most clear examples have been these very sick babies where it's had to go to court to because the doctors and the parents disagree on withdrawing life support or offering a particular treatment. In those cases the parents have largely been innocent pawns, but they've been supplied with fancy lawyers and their beliefs and grief have been manipulated into high profile cases seeking to change public sentiment and undermine established law and practices around medical decision making (that extend far beyond the given situation).

Same reason we can accept a charity that declares no men, no women, no adults, no cancer-free people, or no humans etc. Sometimes certain demographics have been historically oppressed, or are facing challenges unique to their demographic that cause short and long term disadvantages for them in some areas of life, and organisations like this one help to overcome those disadvantages.

> What if an ethnic minority is overrepresented in a sector? As OP said, the charity is focused on sectors where minorities are underrepresented.

Then there wouldn't be a charity trying to get more Indians into that sector would there? This charity is focused on sectors where minorities are underrepresented

"What if someone was doing the opposite of what that charity was doing?" ...then that would not be the same? Strong vibes of, "If my Grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike"

> The Bar Council has said the scheme is “lawful positive action under sections 158 and 159 of the Equality Act **based on evidence of under-representation in relation to access to the profession**”. [Section 158](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/158) [Section 159](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/159) **Evidence has to be shown** that access to or promotion within a particular profession is being **unfairly restricted based on a protected characteristic** (age, gender, race, religious belief etc.) "unfairly" is included because, for example, someone who keeps kosher or halal may not be able to execute all the duties of a traditional butcher, but that same restriction wouldn't apply in a kosher/halal butcher's. In the former case, being unable to fulfill duties because of *personal* religious beliefs may be a legitimate obstacle to promotion, in the latter, it is not. (There is then a different topic of "reasonable accommodations" for those kinds of situations (for the above example, it might be "only responsible for animal products for the kosher/halal line" rather than "responsible for all animal products), but that's a whole other conversation) If you want to play the "why no whites" card, then you would need show, **with evidence**, that there were significant obstacles, challenges and biases against Caucasians in that industry. That may well exist in certain industries - off the top of my head, I don't know many Caucasians who specialise in caring for dreadlocks, a traditionally black hairstyle, or running their own Indian cuisine restaurants - and in those cases, this act could kick in to help them find training and placements. The issue at hand is that this Caucasian presenter has deliberately applied to a field where Caucasians are overrepresented and face no systemic challenges in getting into the field using a programme designed to help the disadvantaged. To make a comparison: It's like showing up to the homeless shelter in your new Mercedes and wondering why you're not top of the priority list. Edit: typed "your" instead of "you're" like an absolute fool

In order to legally create these schemes you have to demonstrate there is a need for the scheme (this is true of any protected characteristic not just ethnicity). You couldn't legally run this scheme to get women into teaching, but you might be able to in some areas of engineering or physics. You could potentially run this scheme for men in areas like childcare or elder care. The purpose of the scheme has to be about achieving equity, you are not legally allowed to discriminate for the sole purpose of discrimination. They aren't simply saying "no whites" they are saying we are creating an opportunity for this one group of people that we can evidence are not being treated equitably in this situation. It's not about taking places from white people - firstly, these opportunities normally exist in addition to the already existing opportunities not in place of, and secondly to think they're taking places from white people you have to be of the mind set that those were white people's places in the first place (I know that's not what you said specifically, but it's a common argument in these discussions). Lastly, occasionally people do explicitly say no women, no Jews, no blacks, but more often they code their discrimination in ways that make it much harder to prove it was discrimination "not a good cultural fit" or "too ambitious" or lots of other excuses that don't have a lot of substance but are hard to argue with.

[deleted]

Tbf theres f*** all programmes like this for white working class who alongside British carribbean make up the most deprived, with the least chances of success and a multitude of issues. The class system in the UK is a little different to a lot of places, itself was brought in by colonialism with the normans to oppress the English. Which is why a lot of elites have French sounding names and the poorest have old-english names. Its very similar to the Indian Caste system- how do you think the British aristocracy knew how to exploit their caste system into what it is today? That said she is very very middle class she has not had any barrier for success so its ridiculous haha If these people want to make a point they should make these opportunities for white working class because they certainly have the funds too. Yet they wont because of the class system and they just see white working class as serfs. Theyre hypocrites. Edit: here's a good piece on it regarding education; https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/07/british-education-failure-white-working-class I think people often forget that the first victims of the British empire were the working class.

At least in the US, something like 80% of DEI funding in academic and corporate settings has ultimately gone to/benefitted white women. 

Barriers in education? There are almost 50% more women enrolled in higher education in the US than men. And yes, I know this is in the UK, but the ratio is almost identical. 58-42 in the US and 57-43 in the UK.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

From experience of working with 10000 Interns you aren't getting working class kids though, you just get middle class kids with pushy parents. Kids who just happen to be black.

Fair points, I'll admit I wasn't able to read the whole article due to the paywall so I wasn't aware it was community funded. I'm not choosing to be offended though just going by what information I had.

But if I don't choose to be angry, I feel nothing at all!