Which major advertisers paused or withdrew ad spend from GB News and when did they act?
Executive summary
Major advertisers began pausing or withdrawing ads from GB News within days of its launch in mid‑June 2021. By about 17 June 2021 at least a dozen brands—including Ikea, Nivea, Kopparberg, Grolsch, Octopus Energy, Vodafone, Pinterest, Specsavers and Ovo Energy—had publicly said they were pausing or reviewing placements; some described the actions as temporary pauses while they assessed the channel [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Fast reaction: advertisers moved within 48 hours of launch
GB News launched on 13 June 2021 and advertisers began withdrawing campaigns almost immediately; industry reporting notes that advertisers began pulling campaigns “within 48 hours” and that by the following Thursday (around 17 June) roughly eleven brands had confirmed pauses or suspensions of advertising [5] [1]. Press and watchdog trackers list early names including Ikea, Nivea, Kopparberg, Grolsch, Octopus Energy and others as acting in that first week [6] [2].
2. Who said what: pauses, reviews and “not knowingly” placements
Companies used several distinct rationales in public statements: some said they had paused placements pending a review of the channel’s editorial tone; others said ads had run without their direct knowledge because of programmatic buying; and a handful framed their action as a values-based decision. Examples recorded soon after launch include Nivea and Ovo Energy saying they had “paused” advertising while they assessed the channel, and Ikea saying it had “not knowingly” advertised on GB News [4] [3] [6].
3. Partial lists and trackers — campaign watchers vs. campaign critics
Multiple sources compiled advertiser lists in real time. National newspapers and local outlets published lists of companies that had withdrawn or paused adverts in June 2021 [1] [6]. Campaign groups such as Stop Funding Hate and later trackers updated advertiser rosters and argued the boycott had continued and inflicted financial harm, citing both removals and continued advertiser reluctance into 2022–2025 [7] [8].
4. What “paused” meant in practice — not a uniform boycott
Several companies explicitly framed their moves as temporary or procedural—pausing to “fully understand the channel” or to wait until it proved “genuinely balanced”—rather than an outright, permanent boycott [9] [5]. Ethical‑advertising analysis noted that many firms described actions as reviews in line with internal policies rather than ideological boycotts [9]. Available sources do not assert that every named firm permanently cut ties; many statements used the word “pause” [9].
5. GB News’ response and the political context
GB News characterised the departure of advertisers as a “massive advertising boycott” in subsequent commentary and political allies pushed back against advertiser pressure [10]. The channel’s later business choices—such as introducing a paywall in November 2023—were explicitly tied to revenue impact from advertiser reluctance [11]. Campaigners and some media outlets framed the initial advertiser exits as a response to fears the channel would mirror US‑style “anti‑woke” programming [12] [7].
6. Ongoing debate: brand safety, programmatic buying and media scrutiny
Reporting highlights three competing dynamics: brands’ concerns about “brand safety” and corporate values, programmatic buying systems that can place ads without brand sign‑off, and activists’ attempts to persuade advertisers to withdraw support [6] [4] [7]. Industry commentary argued advertisers were justified to pause given the channel’s early tone; critics of the advertiser actions argued such pressure could chill free expression and politicise media buying [12] [10].
7. Limits of the record and what’s not in these sources
The supplied sources document the initial wave in mid‑June 2021 and list many brands that paused or said their ads appeared without intent [5] [6] [2]. They do not provide an exhaustive, day‑by‑day chronicle of every advertiser decision through 2025, nor do they uniformly show which pauses became permanent withdrawals; for comprehensive, ongoing advertiser rosters and exact dates beyond the early June 2021 window, available sources do not mention a definitive, continuously updated master list [8] [11].
8. Bottom line: rapid, public pullback; nuance in motives
In short, a clear and immediate pullback of ad spend was visible within days of GB News’ June 2021 launch, with a cluster of major brands publicly pausing ads while they reviewed the channel or saying ads ran via programmatic routes without their knowledge [5] [6] [4]. That pattern drove months of debate about brand safety, the ethics of targeted boycotts and how advertisers manage automatic placements; different sources present both the advertisers’ corporate‑values rationale and critics’ claims that such moves became politically charged [9] [10].