This is getting ridiculous now. Points of View is targeted at a mainstream audience and warranted in the view of the BBC at the time, a bigger name who the audience is more familiar with, that’s why he got paid more not because he is a man.
If this case is successful it’s going to get to the point where talent and appeal to the viewers can’t be rewarded.
Indeed, if I recall correctly, Jeremy Vine's predecessor on POV was Sir Terry Wogan and you couldn't get a bigger BBC name at the time. And before Terry Wogan it was Anne Robinson. If Samira Ahmed thinks she's in the same league then she's very much mistaken. Newswatch began in 2004 and was presented by a relative unknown in Raymond Snoddy. He's not exactly a household name, even now. How Samira Ahmed can compare the two programmes is beyond me. I'm all for people being paid equally for the same job but we're seeing time and time again that it's just not that clear-cut in the media world.
Remember we're talking about the same Samira Ahmed who thought she was in the same league as Dimbleby to be the next host Question Time.
I'm sure she's a nice person and a hard worker, but she does come across a bit above her station sometimes as if she thinks she's a household name!
Carrie Gracie has also waded in on Twitter.
I have nothing against people being paid the same salary for the same job. But where's it going to end? If this is upheld, its going to cause more harm than good for genuine pay dispute cases. What's next? A regional news presenter expecting the same salary as Huw Edwards or Fiona Bruce because they're technically reading the news on the same channel?
Last edited by Worzel on 30 October 2019 11:34pm - 5 times in total