Jump to content


BBC stars wages made public

Recommended Posts

You might find it more of a struggle to follow the play if you were blind. Every little helps :D

 

I think if he was even there to help the visionally impaired, the salary still isn't justified.

 

A journalist from the Independent made a similar statement.

 

He just lacks any analysis skills and is unable to bring anything fresh to MOTD- you go to Sky Sports and see Neville/Souness/Redknapp almost drag an issue over a few days (not that I am a fan of any of them).

 

But if you are going to be paid half a million quid, at least make it look like you are doing something Joe Public can't do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BBC propaganda.

 

Used to justify large amounts of money being demanded from poor people (under threat of a court fine and imprisonment if they don't or can't pay) to be handed over to very wealthy BBC people.

 

In reality, the BBC doesn't permit anybody to pay just 40p per day. If it does, why can't I pay 40p today? Then another 40p tomorrow? BBC propaganda, nothing more.

 

Can't pay. Won't pay the hated TV tax!

 

Sponging cheat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is striking about the list is the gender gap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who do think gets paid more, Suzanna Reid and the odious piers Morgan or the two on BBC breakfast? More to point do think Morgan and Reid are paid the same? I'll bet they get far more than the BBC duo and Morgan gets more than Reid by a fair wedge too.

 

The whole thing is just an excuse to kick the BBC about. Are the papers, who to a man (or woman) leapt on the subject about to tell us their top earners?Will itv or sky release who gets paid what? Of course not.

 

We dont have to pay to watch ITV and rest though do we so who cares what their presenters are earning and why should they tell us? It's a choice to pay for sky etc..

 

Male and female colleagues should be paid the same regardless if they're doing the same job and regardless of which tv/radio station they are on though!

 

BUT in the case of suzanna Reid and Piers Morgan, i truly truly truly hope Suzanna is paid FAR MORE than him purely just for putting up with him! bit like danger money or something :hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BBC propaganda.

 

Used to justify large amounts of money being demanded from poor people (under threat of a court fine and imprisonment if they don't or can't pay) to be handed over to very wealthy BBC people.

 

In reality, the BBC doesn't permit anybody to pay just 40p per day. If it does, why can't I pay 40p today? Then another 40p tomorrow? BBC propaganda, nothing more.

 

Can't pay. Won't pay the hated TV tax!

 

Trying to justify to breaking the law? Ok, and you wonder why the lower social classes have a reputation they have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trying to justify to breaking the law? Ok, and you wonder why the lower social classes have a reputation they have.

 

Sometimes bad laws have to be broken. It's called civil disobedience. Major social change worldwide has sometimes only happened when good people have refused to obey bad law.

 

Our BBC Masters won't like it, of course. They will try to protect their privileged lifestyles at any cost. This wealthy elite despise the licence fee payer and demand that we pay the money without any control over how it is spent or even information about who gets paid what.

 

---------- Post added 21-07-2017 at 10:28 ----------

 

Trying to justify to breaking the law? Ok, and you wonder why the lower social classes have a reputation they have.

 

The "lower social classes"? What decade are you living in? The 1950's?

 

---------- Post added 21-07-2017 at 10:32 ----------

 

What is striking about the list is the gender gap.

 

The BBC has for years believed that older, more mature women have little value.

 

The BBC is institutionally Sexist AND Ageist. FACT.

Edited by Car Boot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do pay my dues to the BBC and their coverage of Wimbledon was very good.

 

Having said that, no matter how many times I read a part of their "rules" I can't get my head round it... You need a TV license to watch ANY live broadcast.

 

To me this is the part that needs seriously looking into. I see there are many BBC fans that will argue against any change. Maybe they fear their viewing being trimmed as it's no longer force paid for by people that don't want or use it.

 

As for the pay of the so called stars. Most of the ones I find interesting don't come out on top. I could have poor taste. Or the BBC needs to get a grip!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We dont have to pay to watch ITV and rest though do we so who cares what their presenters are earning and why should they tell us? It's a choice to pay for sky etc..

 

Male and female colleagues should be paid the same regardless if they're doing the same job and regardless of which tv/radio station they are on though!

 

BUT in the case of suzanna Reid and Piers Morgan, i truly truly truly hope Suzanna is paid FAR MORE than him purely just for putting up with him! bit like danger money or something :hihi:

 

The problem I have Chelle is that ITV is paid for by adverts, Sky is paid for by adverts and subscription fees. Neither ITV or Sky are going to go against the people that pay them to run their adverts as that might affect their profits. Channel 4 is also paid for by adverts but it's a registered charity, hence why C4 seems to put on a lot more controversial programs than ITV for example (whether you like them or not is a different question!). A lot of countries around the world view the BBC as an excellent broadcasting company and most countries that have ONLY pay per TV are quite jealous of ad-free TV. However, in the same way that ITV has to pander to it's backers, the BBC has to pander at least slightly to whichever government is in power as it's it won't want to rock the boat too much in case it's funding it cut. Difficult one to sort really but I think the BBC is good value for money in general. A lot of it's programming is of high quality even if I don't watch a great deal of it live. For the relatively low cost of the TV license I think we do well out of it especially when you compare to a Sky subscription but things should be reviewed and improved all the time and if the TV license is the wrong model and isn't giving the best value then it should of course be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem I have Chelle is that ITV is paid for by adverts, Sky is paid for by adverts and subscription fees. Neither ITV or Sky are going to go against the people that pay them to run their adverts as that might affect their profits. Channel 4 is also paid for by adverts but it's a registered charity, hence why C4 seems to put on a lot more controversial programs than ITV for example (whether you like them or not is a different question!). A lot of countries around the world view the BBC as an excellent broadcasting company and most countries that have ONLY pay per TV are quite jealous of ad-free TV. However, in the same way that ITV has to pander to it's backers, the BBC has to pander at least slightly to whichever government is in power as it's it won't want to rock the boat too much in case it's funding it cut. Difficult one to sort really but I think the BBC is good value for money in general. A lot of it's programming is of high quality even if I don't watch a great deal of it live. For the relatively low cost of the TV license I think we do well out of it especially when you compare to a Sky subscription but things should be reviewed and improved all the time and if the TV license is the wrong model and isn't giving the best value then it should of course be changed.

 

I completely agree Kate, i'm not complaining about paying the fee myself! i dont mind paying it, i pay it off once a year and dont think about it again til the next year but what gets me is the difference in what the ''stars'' of the BBC earn.. it's not right, and it is the public that is basically being forced to pay it but have no say in where and who the money is paid to..

 

I dont mind the BBC, i enjoy the Iplayer and i listen to BBC radio 2 which i think is one of the best radio stations going but would i mind if they threw in some advertisements so i didnt have to pay a fee, no i dont think i would mind..

 

It's out dated and it definately does need a review..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We dont have to pay to watch ITV and rest though do we so who cares what their presenters are earning and why should they tell us?

 

You do pay, albeit indirectly. Regardless, how do you know the BBC staff are overpaid if you have nothing to compare against.

 

Male and female colleagues should be paid the same regardless if they're doing the same job and regardless of which tv/radio station they are on though!

 

BUT in the case of suzanna Reid and Piers Morgan, i truly truly truly hope Suzanna is paid FAR MORE than him purely just for putting up with him! bit like danger money or something :hihi:

 

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do pay, albeit indirectly. Regardless, how do you know the BBC staff are overpaid if you have nothing to compare against.

 

 

 

Agreed.

 

I'm not questioning that they are overpaid, it's the inequality amongst them that i have an issue with..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.