The Newsroom

BBC News Channel: Presentation

Move to Broadcasting House and new look today (April 2008)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
BR
Brekkie
Great stuff from the BBC as those polticians resort to new tactics to avoid admitting their own failings:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8045371.stm

So good she answered his question with no hesitation at all - £92,000 a year for a role primarily on the news channel (and reporting I think).
NE
newscentre
My God... £92K for a three hour slot to co-present on the News Channel? That's outrageous! The channel's viewers for that programme are measured in the low thousands.
It's just crazy that presenters on a news channel get that... what people want from presenters is someone who can read the autocue with style and interview with skill. You can get that for half the price. I'm stunned.
AN
all new Phil
I imagine she works slightly more than 3 hours a day, and that she's also probably at the lower end of the pay spectrum. Good on her for answering him.
DO
don1977
Apparently Tim Wilcox is on £500k a year. And that's on a rate of £10 an hour Cool
IS
Inspector Sands
My God... £92K for a three hour slot to co-present on the News Channel? That's outrageous! The channel's viewers for that programme are measured in the low thousands.


If the presenters of rolling news channels were paid according to their audience figures they'd all be paupers!

For a non-name presenter I think that's about right
IS
Inspector Sands

That being said - there are live points at Broadcasting House, Bush House and Marylebone High Street. So sometimes the interview may be from there. Usually though it's Millbank.


Do they still have a live point at Broadcasting House since the rebuild?
GM
nodnirG kraM
I imagine she works slightly more than 3 hours a day, and that she's also probably at the lower end of the pay spectrum. Good on her for answering him.


Her voice was faltering at times, but I think she handled that well - just a pity they had to break away from the 2-way before the argument could have been resolved. Entirely without prejudice to either party, or towards the current media farce surrounding MPs' expenses, I think both put forward a good case, and it's the sort of thing that should have taken priority over the sports headlines or a badger caught in a tree, or whatever else was about to be reported.

Oh, and for Gracie's job, £92,000 is barely anything.
BR
Brekkie
I'd imagine £92k is on a par with what high profile print journalists would be getting.
MA
Markymark
I'd imagine £92k is on a par with what high profile print journalists would be getting.


Wages in any profession are dictated entirely by 'Market Rates'. It's as simple as that.
LE
Lester Founding member
92K is an obscene amount of money for essentially reading off an autocue 80% of the time. Doctors who save lives are on less than that.

Disgusting.
GM
nodnirG kraM
Because that's all newsreaders do, isn't it: read from the autocue.
DV
DVB Cornwall
92K is an obscene amount of money for essentially reading off an autocue 80% of the time. Doctors who save lives are on less than that.

Disgusting.

Well why don't they retrain as journalists.

I'm actually surprised at the amount quoted I'd have thought it should be higher. Some people really should stop becoming all hairshirt over these issues.

Newer posts