Jump to content

Saturday 20th April 2024:  kick-off 12.30pm

Scottish Cup Semi-Final - Aberdeen v Celtic

🔴⚪️ Come on you Reds! ⚪🔴

BBC pay


Kowalski

Recommended Posts

It's a manufactured scandal over nothing really though isn't it? By people with vested interests in seeing a massive watering down of the BBC. The only scandal here is the number of distinctly average commentators working in the BBC regardless of what they're paid. The one show folk, Lineker on MOTD (not away from it I should say), Shearer on MOTD, Evans, Norton etc. could all be easily and quickly replaced by any number of different people without any reasonable difficulty. These folks are ten a penny. Similarly Kuntsberg and Humphrys. To quell the monetary issues, they should just put a cap on the salaries for these roles and see the caliber of appointment they could make. I would highly doubt that they'd get much worse/better than the above bunch for a fee of <£150K. They might actually get people with more integrity/humility how feel it isn't right to be charging the public broadcaster such ridiculous sums for their services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well put Rico, can't say it's an outrage at all, although I do feel that you've been harsh on lineker as I do feel he has more integrity than others. Despite what he's paid, I think he does a good job and certainly one of the better ones at the BBC. Another idea from the tories to deflect away from the fact that they are all intolerable, incompetent self serving cunts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do feel that you've been harsh on lineker as I do feel he has more integrity than others. Despite what he's paid, I think he does a good job and certainly one of the better ones at the BBC.

 

I have nothing against Lineker at all, I think he comes across well and seems a nice chap. His slating of the Daily Mail and refusal to back down was excellent.

 

However I just feel he adds little, if anything, to MOTD. He's an announcer, nothing more. You could happily replace him with Richard Gordon for example without losing anything. The production value and quality of football make that show what it is, not any number of yer Linekers, yer Shearers, yer Lawrensons and so forth. They're ten a penny. Lineker is easy going, polite and certainly good at his job, but he's nae James Richardson in terms of analysis or insight. In other words, he's poor value. Not shite, but it just seems unnecessary to be paying more than say double yer UK average income. A premium for being on TV of course (with the additional harassment and publicity that brings); somewhere around a well paid accountant plus 50%. Maybe £120K at a max? That'd seem very reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but he's nae James Richardson in terms of analysis or insight. In other words, he's poor value. Not shite, but it just seems unnecessary to be paying more than say double yer UK average income.

I'd add Gary Imlach as another smaller channel sports presenter who is just on top of everything, and no doubt as equally underpaid.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a manufactured scandal over nothing really though isn't it?

It is, but, this.....

 

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-second-class-licence-fee/

 

.....I agree with, and have been saying as much for many a year now. Pay lineker his millions, pay guffy fitba £68m a year for highlights, but if you're doing that, then Scottish fitba needs its £6.8m a year and a highlights package at 10.30 on a Saturday night on BBC1!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to Cosgrove at lunchtime and he made some excellent points about it. Revealed his own pay too, of £41K for the off the ball shows and lunchtime appearances on John Beattie. He was quite humble that it was a large payment for what amounted to around 8 hours per week.

 

Much in line with what was said here, Lineker a nice chap with a decent twitter account but as an auto-cue reader, he was exceptionally poor value for money.

 

Interesting that this appears to be being made into a male v female (Cosgrove mentioned the minorities v whites factor too) argument rather than an argument of over-payment for all. Maitliss, Kuensberg and so on are all vastly overpaid for what they do.

 

He also made the point that the BBC shouldn't ever be saying "well Sky/ITV/BT etc will just offer more", which I agree with. The BBC should set the level it wants and not be dictated to by others. Much in the same way as it's news coverage shouldn't be dictated by what stories are covered in the tainted press. It stems from the top of the BBC though and - to be fair - it takes place in other public/charitable organisations where CEOs get paid "the going rate".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Listening to Cosgrove at lunchtime and he made some excellent points about it. Revealed his own pay too, of £41K for the off the ball shows and lunchtime appearances on John Beattie. He was quite humble that it was a large payment for what amounted to around 8 hours per week.

 

Much in line with what was said here, Lineker a nice chap with a decent twitter account but as an auto-cue reader, he was exceptionally poor value for money.

 

Interesting that this appears to be being made into a male v female (Cosgrove mentioned the minorities v whites factor too) argument rather than an argument of over-payment for all. Maitliss, Kuensberg and so on are all vastly overpaid for what they do.

 

He also made the point that the BBC shouldn't ever be saying "well Sky/ITV/BT etc will just offer more", which I agree with. The BBC should set the level it wants and not be dictated to by others. Much in the same way as it's news coverage shouldn't be dictated by what stories are covered in the tainted press. It stems from the top of the BBC though and - to be fair - it takes place in other public/charitable organisations where CEOs get paid "the going rate".

 

Interesting point. Do you not think they should be paid the going rate? At the end of the day they're employed to maximise the company/charity's performance and profits. Whether the end goal is to pay dividends to wealthy board members or to  provide the blind with guide dogs is irrelevant surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point. Do you not think they should be paid the going rate? At the end of the day they're employed to maximise the company/charity's performance and profits. Whether the end goal is to pay dividends to wealthy board members or to  provide the blind with guide dogs is irrelevant surely?

 

I think the "going rate" for CEOs is unacceptable and not based on anything other than perceived self-worth and cronyism. I don't think charities need to, or should, follow the practices of the rest of the private sector. In the same way as the BBC should set its own news, rather than taking its guide from the papers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As former BBC employee I can comment on this topic via first hand experience.

 

The BBC is full of pay inequality. Someone mentioned it already - Stuart Cosgrove gets £41k for 8hrs work? Disgrace - if that was a bank it would be outrage.

 

The whole place is riddled with an air of cultural entitlement, a sense of arrogant entitlement and we are the BBC so we can do what we want culture that led to cretins like Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall getting to do what they want, when they want and no one being able to stop it. And you don't need me to enlighten you what they were doing and what they got paid.

 

These newsreaders read the news from an autocue. People in news desk do the hard work but don't get paid £500k for it.

 

There are people in IT getting screwed all over the place by the BBC. Not paid going rate for incredibly stressful roles while dickheads like Alan Shearer get free nights in a 5*hotel in Salford, £500k for talking rubbish (and having no personality).

 

The laugh of it is if you want sky sports - you buy it. If you want BT Sport - you buy it. If you don't want BBC tough - they take you to court for not paying its per head fee.

 

It's out of date and should move into the 21st century. 

 

Stuart Cosgrove, Kirsty Wark - incestuous media mafia freeloaders bleeding the license fee payer dry. And as for that arse Chris Evans - £2.2m per year? How does he get away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are people in IT getting screwed all over the place by the BBC. Not paid going rate for incredibly stressful roles while dickheads like Alan Shearer get free nights in a 5*hotel in Salford, £500k for talking rubbish (and having no personality).

 

Stuart Cosgrove, Kirsty Wark - incestuous media mafia freeloaders bleeding the license fee payer dry. And as for that arse Chris Evans - £2.2m per year? How does he get away with it.

 

Fucking IT?  Fuck off.  IT people are the most overpaid people on earth. If you're unhappy at the BBC go contracting at any number of places earning more.  If you don't, it's your problem, no one else's.

 

I'd much rather have Cosgrove and Wark on 40k a year doing what they do than have one IT person paid one penny more than they should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking IT?  Fuck off.  IT people are the most overpaid people on earth. If you're unhappy at the BBC go contracting at any number of places earning more.  If you don't, it's your problem, no one else's.

 

I'd much rather have Cosgrove and Wark on 40k a year doing what they do than have one IT person paid one penny more than they should.

 

Fit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Partly true, there is more money in contracting elsewhere outside of the BBC especially in London. So yeah, if you are in the contracting IT game then the BBC is possibly not, in general, the place to be.

 

But there in is the problem - and the misunderstanding.  The BBC is rife with inequalities across the board. There are many people getting paid well in IT contracting at the BBC and other being shafted for doing same job.

 

What happens on MOTD happens in IT service management.  Some people get a huge salary and others only half despite doing the same work.

 

ATOS for example (who were involved with the disability scheme system thing) get something like £300m from the BBC to look after infrastructure. That is £300m of your license money they get.

 

Capita (managed consultancy) are getting paid £50m to administer the license fee.  They have authority to send people demanding letters and threaten CCJ's if you dont pay.

 

There are hundreds of other suppliers that the BBC procures from via multi million ££ contracts. 

 

Nobody doubts that people in media whether they are Graham Norton or Lineker are in media so can command big money - its the nature of the beast.  But this is an organisation that lives off of you and me.  YOU and ME pay for it via license fee and its the whole culture is rife with inequality, have and have nots and its getting worse.

 

If an ordinary worker at the BBC does a 2nd job he would get dismissed or reprimanded by HR for conflict of interest.  Lineker however has a £5.4m PT deal with BT Sport to do its Champions League despite them being the main competitor of the BBC.

 

Just how is that allowable or fair?

 

Its virtually impossible in London as it is to buy house, even buy a flat is impossible.  People like Lineker probably have 6 houses simply because he is paid more than ordinary hard working person.

 

Its the inequalities in salary and benefits at places like the BBC that typify and sum up what is wrong with UK culture.  Too much inequality, too much arrogant privilege and not enough ordinary workers getting fair pay.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking IT?  Fuck off.  IT people are the most overpaid people on earth. If you're unhappy at the BBC go contracting at any number of places earning more.  If you don't, it's your problem, no one else's.

 

I'd much rather have Cosgrove and Wark on 40k a year doing what they do than have one IT person paid one penny more than they should.

 

 

Oooft. IT is like every other dept. They have good folk and bad folk. Overpaid folk who do fuck all and take credit for the work of others and who often have little to no understanding of wtf is going on. Then you have the clever cunts who do all the work and get abused by colleagues in other depts because they're frustrated that they don't know what they're doing.

 

I don't know if IT is over or underpaid in general. If anything I'd say under (obviously) but they certainly don't get the fucking basic human respect that they deserve. Some of the folk I've worked with over the years have been treated dreadfully and usually it's because some thick cunt can't get a grasp of something and lashes out.

 

The IT folk that have an understanding of what they're doing (which admittedly isn't everyone) and can talk to people are worth their weight in gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As former BBC employee I can comment on this topic via first hand experience.

 

The BBC is full of pay inequality. Someone mentioned it already - Stuart Cosgrove gets £41k for 8hrs work? Disgrace - if that was a bank it would be outrage.

 

The whole place is riddled with an air of cultural entitlement, a sense of arrogant entitlement and we are the BBC so we can do what we want culture that led to cretins like Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall getting to do what they want, when they want and no one being able to stop it. And you don't need me to enlighten you what they were doing and what they got paid.

 

These newsreaders read the news from an autocue. People in news desk do the hard work but don't get paid £500k for it.

 

There are people in IT getting screwed all over the place by the BBC. Not paid going rate for incredibly stressful roles while dickheads like Alan Shearer get free nights in a 5*hotel in Salford, £500k for talking rubbish (and having no personality).

 

The laugh of it is if you want sky sports - you buy it. If you want BT Sport - you buy it. If you don't want BBC tough - they take you to court for not paying its per head fee.

 

It's out of date and should move into the 21st century. 

 

Stuart Cosgrove, Kirsty Wark - incestuous media mafia freeloaders bleeding the license fee payer dry. And as for that arse Chris Evans - £2.2m per year? How does he get away with it.

 

 

I wrote to the BBC and told them due to covering for pedos and backing the no campaign 2014 .

That I will no longer be watching the beeb any longer to listen and  watch a government view..

Ended with take me to court . That was nearly 3 years ago I'm not paying for something I do not need..

I've  not watched that channel since.

Still waiting for the chap at my door fk them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

BBC Scotland news is full of unionist old croanies reading the news /VIEWS.

 

It needs updated throughout.

 

And best of all some passionate younger folk.

 

These news readers are now dinosaurian.

 

Only my view though. ::)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As former BBC employee I can comment on this topic via first hand experience.

 

The BBC is full of pay inequality. Someone mentioned it already - Stuart Cosgrove gets £41k for 8hrs work? Disgrace - if that was a bank it would be outrage.

 

The whole place is riddled with an air of cultural entitlement, a sense of arrogant entitlement and we are the BBC so we can do what we want culture that led to cretins like Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall getting to do what they want, when they want and no one being able to stop it. And you don't need me to enlighten you what they were doing and what they got paid.

 

These newsreaders read the news from an autocue. People in news desk do the hard work but don't get paid £500k for it.

 

There are people in IT getting screwed all over the place by the BBC. Not paid going rate for incredibly stressful roles while dickheads like Alan Shearer get free nights in a 5*hotel in Salford, £500k for talking rubbish (and having no personality).

 

The laugh of it is if you want sky sports - you buy it. If you want BT Sport - you buy it. If you don't want BBC tough - they take you to court for not paying its per head fee.

 

It's out of date and should move into the 21st century. 

 

Stuart Cosgrove, Kirsty Wark - incestuous media mafia freeloaders bleeding the license fee payer dry. And as for that arse Chris Evans - £2.2m per year? How does he get away with it.

An interesting read 100K, but can't agree with you on Cosgrove, he's great value, and certainly not incestuous, frequently disses the BBC, and is staunchly pro-indy, unlike his masters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...