Why a Former TV Regulator's New Criticism of His Old Job Matters

Michael Grade, a senior government official, stepped down as head of Ofcom — the body that oversees British TV and radio — in April 2024. Within weeks, he rejoined the Conservative Party in the House of Lords. Since then, he has given interviews defending GB News, a right-leaning news channel, and criticizing how Ofcom does its job. This is striking because Grade ran Ofcom until very recently.

In these interviews, Grade argued that mainstream broadcasters dislike GB News not because it breaks the rules, but because it covers topics — immigration, Brexit — that they have historically downplayed. According to The Guardian, he said the real issue is competition between channels, not rule-breaking. He also stated that following broadcast rules is straightforward.

What Actually Happened in the Regulatory Process

The story is more complicated than it might first appear. Ofcom conducted formal investigations into GB News and found it had broken its impartiality rules — the basic obligations that apply to all TV and radio stations the regulator licenses. In May 2024, Ofcom said the channel had breached these rules in a specific interview featuring a serving politician. The regulator indicated it might impose a fine.

Then, on 13 March 2025, Ofcom withdrew three of its breach decisions against GB News. This reversal came after a High Court judge ruled on the dispute between GB News and Ofcom. The judge's decision changed how the regulatory picture looked. Ofcom did not admit it had done anything wrong systematically, but it did back down on those specific findings — which gave GB News a real win on those particular cases.

The timing is important here. Grade was defending GB News while the regulator was still investigating. The court's later ruling on how the rules should be interpreted makes it harder to say simply that one side was obviously right.

What These Impartiality Rules Actually Mean

Ofcom's impartiality rules do not mean TV stations have to be completely neutral in a bland sense. They do not require equal time for every viewpoint, and they do not ban strong editorial voices.

What they do require is this: on topics involving politics, industrial disputes, or public policy, a licensed broadcaster must present a range of significant views. This can happen within a single program or across multiple programs. The rules have more flexibility than people often assume — which is part of what Grade is arguing when he says compliance is straightforward.

Where these rules get messy is in practice. It is one thing for a presenter to have a strong opinion. It is another thing for a program to repeatedly push one political position without showing meaningful alternatives. GB News, which launched in 2021 with an explicitly right-leaning approach, has repeatedly tested this boundary. Ofcom's enforcement record suggests the regulator believed the channel crossed the line in at least some cases. The High Court's decision to overturn some of those rulings means we still do not have a completely clear answer about exactly where the line is.

Why This Matters Beyond One News Channel

This pattern has happened before: former officials from other regulatory agencies have stepped down and then publicly questioned decisions made on their watch. Sometimes they are defending themselves, sometimes they genuinely believe something was wrong, sometimes both.

Grade rejoined the Conservative Party unusually quickly after leaving, which makes his motives worth questioning. That said, his core argument — that traditional broadcasters dislike GB News for competitive reasons, not because of rule-breaking — deserves serious consideration on its own merits, regardless of his politics.

The bigger picture here involves Ofcom's credibility. When a regulator's enforcement decisions get overturned in court, it raises questions about whether the underlying rules were interpreted correctly. If the court has signaled that impartiality rules allow more editorial freedom than Ofcom's enforcement suggested, that affects all broadcasters, not just GB News. Every news organization and current affairs program will be watching to see whether Ofcom revises how it applies the rules, defends its approach, or quietly shifts its practice.

What Grade's Time as Chair Left Behind

Grade became chair in May 2022. His four-year tenure overlapped with GB News's most turbulent period with the regulator. He left behind an enforcement record that is now partially reversed and a public debate about whether Ofcom's approach was fair — a debate he himself has now sparked.

That does not necessarily mean he is wrong. The observation that mainstream broadcasting misses important angles on high-salience topics like immigration and Brexit is not unique to conservative voices, and it is not disproved by the fact that Grade is a Conservative peer. The separate question — whether GB News's editorial choices reflect genuine market demand for coverage that others have neglected, or whether they simply lean into political favoritism for commercial gain — is distinct from the regulatory question of whether those choices violated the rules.

What Grade's public comments have accomplished is to bring this debate into the open. Instead of it being settled quietly between lawyers, it is now something named officials are arguing about in newspapers. That changes how the conversation unfolds.

What Happens Now

Ofcom is now operating in a new environment. A court has tested the regulator's impartiality enforcement and found it wanting in at least some cases. The practical question for Ofcom is whether to revise how it applies the rules, to appeal further if it believes the judge got it wrong, or to move cautiously while the legal situation becomes clearer.

For GB News, the court's decision is a partial win — withdrawn decisions matter — but it is not a clean sweep. The channel's broader compliance history remains on the record, and its broadcast license still carries ongoing obligations.

Grade, meanwhile, is no longer running Ofcom. But former regulators do not fade away quietly; they reshape how people think about their old institutions. His claim that rule-following is straightforward is either a criticism of those attacking GB News, a criticism of Ofcom's enforcement culture, or both. The court's ruling suggests that second reading cannot be ignored.