 |
| BBC ‘stars’ pay from public funds 2017 Source: TV LICENCE RESISTANCE |
I was somewhat taken aback on hearing a statement in Parliament that the BBC enjoyed revenues from the British public amounting to £3.8billion plus another £billion from sales. The BBC's total income was £5.0627 billion in 2017–2018 (Wikipedia).
It puts into perspective the BBC's bleat about the £745m cost of maintaining government policy of free TV licensing for the over 75s which was part of the fee settlement reached with the BBC.
Although funded by the tax payer through the licence system BBC 'stars' have not suffered the wage restraint demanded of public servants. In the latest BBC pay list Gary Lineker has replaced Chris evans at the top with a salary of £1,750,000-£1,759,999 for presenting Match of the Day and Sports Personality of the Year. If £1 million were knocked off that figure he would still be over paid for a task that could be easily performed by any reasonably competent sports journalist/personality.
Why are there so many sports editors, correspondents and commentators most of whom are biased beyond measure? News readers hand over to sports presenters who utter a few words before handing on to a sports correspondent, something the news reader could have done. There is layer upon layer, all adding to production costs.
While on the subject of news readers I do not see Reeta Chakrabarti on the list despite being among the best of the bunch along with Ben Brown who appears on the bottom rung. Can it be because they have not turned their presentations into personality shows when personality is all that appears to count at the BBC?
The BBC needs to take a good, hard look at itself. Soccer has been elevated to a state of religious fanaticism with BBC soccer 'stars' being remunerated on commensurate levels with the enormous amounts paid to star players.
Auntie might have known best when she was the voice of the nation but those days are long gone.
Just on the BBC website. Under "Faith and Ethics" the three pictures/headlines are: "Botswana scraps anti-gay laws in landmark ruling","Rocketman film banned in Samoa over gay scenes", and "Vatican issue controversial guidance on gender". The articles have a legally defensible balance, but a very very obvious bias.
ReplyDeleteThe BBC are supposed to be free from bias or interference through their independent Trust status, but in reality that now means that they are beyond control and a law unto themselves. Given this, the license fee is an anachronism that should be abolished, but it is difficult to see how an politician can gain from taking on this mighty media organisation, and in reality is quite likely to be crushed.
x
I never listen to the BBC anymore, even BBC Wales, which practised ageism in sacking Sara Edwards, particularly for such a replacement. However, she seems happy enough as lord lieutenant.
ReplyDeleteRob
The Church in Wales and the BBC have a lot in common.
ReplyDeleteThey're not fit for purpose.
They're both profligate with other people's money.
They're both fascinated with all things gay, Trans and politically correct.
They're both more interested in peddling the zeitgeist instead of serving their respective purposes for which they were founded.
They're both pro EU and anti Brexit.
They're both anti traditionalist.
They both no longer receive my financial support.
Stop watching TV and stop paying.
Simples.
Bravo Simon, well said.
DeleteAs a result of Juno's profligate 'Pilgrimage' to Spain the Diocese of Llandaff no longer receives my widow's mite.
As from May 2020, when my free TV licence is revoked, neither shall the BBC.
With income in excess of £5 billion the over-staffed and over-paid BBC doesn't need my help.
So is this the reason why the BBC wants over 75 year olds to pay the Licence Fee?
ReplyDeleteI don't use the Beeb for anything "important" anymore... It's all so biased and dishonest. For me, REAL news comes for the (carefully filtered) internet. And for religion I have (of course) Ancient Briton and Anglican Unscripted. This latest attack on the elderly, many of whom are very lonely, is disgraceful. And isn't it odd? Last week the generation under attack was lauded by the BBC as "heroic". This week they're just a burden and a drain on resources.
ReplyDelete