|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 19, 2017 13:51:14 GMT
You seriously suggesting Murdoch's influence on Government and attempts to undermine public services is as recent as that? Its been going on since Thatcher. I'm not saying that the policy of disclosure is necessarily wrong, though its a really stupid policy and one that is ultimately only serves competitors. It is the motive behind it that is wrong. I'm suggesting you're talking bollocks claiming it has anything to do with Murdoch (nice subtle change from claiming it was the price of remaining PM I'm sure no one noticed). It applies to all publicly funded organisations so why should the BBC be any different. |
|
|
|
Post by rat on Jul 19, 2017 14:00:52 GMT
You seriously suggesting Murdoch's influence on Government and attempts to undermine public services is as recent as that? Its been going on since Thatcher. I'm not saying that the policy of disclosure is necessarily wrong, though its a really stupid policy and one that is ultimately only serves competitors. It is the motive behind it that is wrong. I'm suggesting you're talking bollocks claiming it has anything to do with Murdoch (nice subtle change from claiming it was the price of remaining PM I'm sure no one noticed). It applies to all publicly funded organisations so why should the BBC be any different. Hey fyd, hope the ankle is OK. But tell me, why would someone with your ability, choose to support this lot? Seriously, why? |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 19, 2017 14:59:29 GMT
some eyewatering figures there, but this is what really grates my teeth for the cheek and audacity of these fookers: - An NHS boss paid £850,000 in one year still claiming £1.40 for a bus ticket |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 15:06:31 GMT
some eyewatering figures there, but this is what really grates my teeth for the cheek and audacity of these fookers: - An NHS boss paid £850,000 in one year still claiming £1.40 for a bus ticket many a mickle makes a muckle |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 19, 2017 15:24:56 GMT
Below is a quote from the govt.official " tvlicensing"......can someone explain why we need a licence if we choose to watch other channels and never the BBC? ........... "What is live TV and when do I need a licence for it? Live TV means any programme you watch or record as it’s being shown on TV or live on any online TV service. It’s not just live events like sport, news and music. It covers all programmes on any channel, including soaps, series, documentaries and even movies. If you’re watching live TV, you need to be covered by a TV Licence: if you’re watching on TV or on an online TV service for all channels, not just the BBC if you record a programme and watch it later if you watch a programme on a delay to watch or record repeats to watch or record programmes on +1, +2 and +24 channels to watch live programmes on Red Button services even if you already pay for cable, satellite or other TV services" www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one |
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 19, 2017 15:41:05 GMT
You seriously suggesting Murdoch's influence on Government and attempts to undermine public services is as recent as that? Its been going on since Thatcher. I'm not saying that the policy of disclosure is necessarily wrong, though its a really stupid policy and one that is ultimately only serves competitors. It is the motive behind it that is wrong. I'm suggesting you're talking bollocks claiming it has anything to do with Murdoch (nice subtle change from claiming it was the price of remaining PM I'm sure no one noticed). It applies to all publicly funded organisations so why should the BBC be any different. Your totally misunderstanding my point. the fact that it applies to all funded organisations is not the motivation for doing it, thats very obvious to anybody. Gove has been put in the Cabinet on Murdoch's request at at time when May is vulnerable that has not been denied by any senior Tories. Its not subtle! Murdoch has been running a campaign to dislodge public services inc. BBC for years + a Cabinet working for Murdoch's interests and anti-public services. Its not Rocket Science! BBC is not perfect, but we will sure miss it when its gone. Only people outside the UK now seem to understand its significance. Like Health and Education it is being undermined according to a specific agenda. |
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jul 19, 2017 15:54:11 GMT
Lineker 1.75-1.79 million, wow! Shearers wage of 450k is much more reasonable that's 1.75 million to much  |
|
|
|
Post by Waggy on Jul 19, 2017 15:59:15 GMT
Lineker 1.75-1.79 million, wow! Shearers wage of 450k is much more reasonable that's 1.75 million to much He only announces who plays, asks Shearer 3 questions then tries to make a joke |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 19, 2017 16:00:59 GMT
I'm suggesting you're talking bollocks claiming it has anything to do with Murdoch (nice subtle change from claiming it was the price of remaining PM I'm sure no one noticed). It applies to all publicly funded organisations so why should the BBC be any different. Hey fyd, hope the ankle is OK. But tell me, why would someone with your ability, choose to support this lot? Seriously, why? My ankle is titanium now will outlive me, just strengthening my leg should be back quicker than Jack was. Keeping how much and what people take from public funds worked out well with MPs didn't it. |
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jul 19, 2017 16:01:10 GMT
Looking beyond all the who gets paid what bitching they will now ensue. The motive for all this is the Govt's campaign to destabilise and undermine the BBC. I find that more disturbing. This information is there to serve their competitors and primarily Murdoch and further strengthens his position. I don't want to know or give a shit how much they get paid. 100% agree. They get paid far less for the same job on a different network. The BBC is absolutely essential and prevents the likes of Murdoch further controlling the population. The Tory's constantly moan about political bias on the BBC when they get caught out and the bbc investigates them they did this during the election to change further transmission in there favour, this is why they hate the organisation as the bbc is a good investigative channel the Tory's would be happier if all the news was like Russia, china, and north Korea where the state lie to there people so they can brainwash them |
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jul 19, 2017 16:05:15 GMT
I'll be interested to see how much that Claudia Winkleman is paid... Half a Million for her. She has no great insight, never made me laugh. Balding works like a b@$t@&d, but gets less than half what Winkleman. PS I don't like Balding either, but she knows some $#!t & puts a shift in Balding is free lance and gets money off any channel she works for |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 19, 2017 16:09:32 GMT
I'm suggesting you're talking bollocks claiming it has anything to do with Murdoch (nice subtle change from claiming it was the price of remaining PM I'm sure no one noticed). It applies to all publicly funded organisations so why should the BBC be any different. Your totally misunderstanding my point. the fact that it applies to all funded organisations is not the motivation for doing it, thats very obvious to anybody. Gove has been put in the Cabinet on Murdoch's request at at time when May is vulnerable that has not been denied by any senior Tories. Its not subtle! Murdoch has been running a campaign to dislodge public services inc. BBC for years + a Cabinet working for Murdoch's interests and anti-public services. Its not Rocket Science! BBC is not perfect, but we will sure miss it when its gone. Only people outside the UK now seem to understand its significance. Like Health and Education it is being undermined according to a specific agenda. Do you read the canary by some chance ? It was announced in september 2016 that the BBC would have to do this at the time May was not in a weak position at this time and Gove was not in the cabinet so your whole supposition is rubbish. |
|
|
|
Post by Waggy on Jul 19, 2017 16:22:18 GMT
I would love to see how many pay the correct tax now.
|
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 19, 2017 16:25:08 GMT
What this useful exercise shows is the BBC pays far too much for some of its so called talent.
Lineker is a great example. Fronts a weekly football programme that most viewers couldn't care less if someone else presented it.
They should cap salaries to £150k (and I'm being generous there). When someone feels they can earn more from the private sector, they can go there. This would leave space for someone else to step up.
|
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Jul 19, 2017 18:35:04 GMT
Public sector pay at the top is an absolute disgrace. I stopped subscribing to Private Eye because it was so depressing reading about the corruption and self aggrandizement within all parts of the public sector. University VC's is another self interest lobby that is ripping the arse out of education. This gravy train all started with Tony Blair's govt in 1997 when he decided he needed to pay public sector employees top whack to attract the best talent. Great idea in principle but the overseers of standards and accountability were govt quangos that were/are part of the same gravy train. Get a job in the public sector and 'graft' your way to the top. |
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 19, 2017 18:59:11 GMT
Your totally misunderstanding my point. the fact that it applies to all funded organisations is not the motivation for doing it, thats very obvious to anybody. Gove has been put in the Cabinet on Murdoch's request at at time when May is vulnerable that has not been denied by any senior Tories. Its not subtle! Murdoch has been running a campaign to dislodge public services inc. BBC for years + a Cabinet working for Murdoch's interests and anti-public services. Its not Rocket Science! BBC is not perfect, but we will sure miss it when its gone. Only people outside the UK now seem to understand its significance. Like Health and Education it is being undermined according to a specific agenda. Do you read the canary by some chance ? It was announced in september 2016 that the BBC would have to do this at the time May was not in a weak position at this time and Gove was not in the cabinet so your whole supposition is rubbish. I'm obviously not making myself clear. I didn't suggest that Gove's position was related to this. Gove is there to represent Murdoch in the many areas he wants to influence (and they are many, this is just one) This disclosure of BBC incomes very obviously predates that specific manoeuvre. I didn't say otherwise. This is an ongoing agenda from Murdoch going back decades. He's determined every election in living memory and every referendum. The Gove manoeuvre is an opportunist act based on May's vulnerability that strengthens his already strong hand in Government. Gove is there to help engineer the dismantling of all public services. |
|
|
|
Post by woodstein on Jul 19, 2017 21:22:57 GMT
II Half a Million for her. She has no great insight, never made me laugh. Balding works like a b@$t@&d, but gets less than half what Winkleman. PS I don't like Balding either, but she knows some $#!t & puts a shift in Balding is free lance and gets money off any channel she works for Do you mean she bats for both sides?? |
|
|
|
Post by woodstein on Jul 19, 2017 21:28:42 GMT
I don't mind proper entertainers earning decent money (but not preposterous money - same with footballers) such as decent comedians (if any are still alive) but I have an issue with simple (!) presenters. Do we really need them? No, just show the games and the odd interview in sport and play more music on the radio instead of us having to hear bile!
|
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 19, 2017 21:50:34 GMT
Public sector pay at the top is an absolute disgrace. I stopped subscribing to Private Eye because it was so depressing reading about the corruption and self aggrandizement within all parts of the public sector. University VC's is another self interest lobby that is ripping the arse out of education. This gravy train all started with Tony Blair's govt in 1997 when he decided he needed to pay public sector employees top whack to attract the best talent. Great idea in principle but the overseers of standards and accountability were govt quangos that were/are part of the same gravy train. Get a job in the public sector and 'graft' your way to the top. Yes the higher up they get the more they think the public is there to service them rather than the other way around. I remember Bob Crow on question time ripping into Gordon Brown after he had announced a review of government spending on projects to make sure they were value for money in light of the financial crisis, his point being they should have done that before they started work on them. |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 19, 2017 21:56:57 GMT
Do you read the canary by some chance ? It was announced in september 2016 that the BBC would have to do this at the time May was not in a weak position at this time and Gove was not in the cabinet so your whole supposition is rubbish. I'm obviously not making myself clear. I didn't suggest that Gove's position was related to this. Gove is there to represent Murdoch in the many areas he wants to influence (and they are many, this is just one) This disclosure of BBC incomes very obviously predates that specific manoeuvre. I didn't say otherwise. This is an ongoing agenda from Murdoch going back decades. He's determined every election in living memory and every referendum. The Gove manoeuvre is an opportunist act based on May's vulnerability that strengthens his already strong hand in Government. Gove is there to help engineer the dismantling of all public services. Gove is there because he is a brexiter, you seriously overestimate Murdoch's power and in the referendum The Sun was for Brexit but the FT, Times and Sky were and are now pretty much part of the remain campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Jul 19, 2017 22:10:12 GMT
Not on the whole of national media they aren't |
|
|
|
Post by woodstein on Jul 20, 2017 5:19:35 GMT
Steve Wright £550,000 for doing exactly the same show he was doing 30 years ago, wonder how much the old woman and the rest of his sycophantic entourage get ! The old woman's dead now. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2017 5:33:34 GMT
Vanessa Feltz £450k Her agent is phenomenal Her agent put 2 deals on the table. 450K a year, or access to the all you can eat sunday carvery at the BBC canteen once a fortnight. They decided on the cheaper option and gave her the 450K with no buffet... |
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 20, 2017 6:24:47 GMT
It hopeless trying to compare their salaries. Evans on 2.2m for five three hour shows a week (have BBC forgotten he doesn't present Top Gear anymore) but lineker on 1.7m for a two hour show for nine months plus the odd live game. How many appearances does sheep shearer do stating the bleedin' obvious for a cool half million.
Then the actors are really "seen off" with highest paid Derek Thompson on 350k but the highest paid actress is Amanda Mealing on 250k in the same programme. It's bonkers that there is so much disparity. Not saying that some people are not worth paying more but the difference for doing apparently the same type of job and attracting similar audiences just doesn't make sense.
And where is Matt Le Blanc who hosts Top Gear?
Reading through the reactions of some of the BBC employees makes you laugh if it wasn't so serious.......Lineker blames his agent for his salary. You could always say no Gary.
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jul 20, 2017 8:04:42 GMT
I'm not a big fan but Burley seems to sum it up succinctly....
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jul 20, 2017 8:57:43 GMT
Lineker thinks it's funny..
|
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jul 20, 2017 9:56:24 GMT
Simple answer. Stop paying your licence fee.
|
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 20, 2017 10:38:03 GMT
I'm not a big fan but Burley seems to sum it up succinctly.... I'm not sure what the beef here is? Is it that the salaries are too high or Is it that women should be allowed to pick up the same high salaries as the men. I rather suspect (but I may be wrong) the female professionals in this industry beef is the latter. They want to be as highly (and unjustly) rewarded as their male counterparts. All swilling at the tough together but equally. |
|
|
|
Post by iamcliveclarke on Jul 20, 2017 11:03:55 GMT
Lineker thinks it's funny.. Ive just had my twatter account frozen after sending Lineker a message saying along the lines of 'you've wrecked your England legend status in my eyes by being such a money grabbing cunt ' |
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jul 20, 2017 11:08:55 GMT
Million pound wages for reading from a screen.
|
|
