What the commentators said
The “great reveal” of BBC salaries “has, for the most part, been grim fun”, said Emine Saner in The Guardian. Can Alan Shearer’s “most obvious of observations” really be worth up to £450,000? “How many Clare Baldings would you get for one Gary Lineker? (Nine).” Who, outside of Northern Ireland, has heard of Stephen Nolan, a DJ who earns up to £449,999? And who knew that Charlie from Casualty was raking in up to £399,999? The figures don’t tell the whole story, said Jane Garvey in The Daily Telegraph: many stars are “conveniently missing”, because they’re paid through independent companies; others work exceptionally long or antisocial hours. But they make a clear point. If you want to be valued by the BBC, “be a man with a very big ego; be a man with a very big brain; be a retired sportsman or, sod it, just be a man”.
It’s shocking that discrimination should be “rampant” at this “beacon” of progressive integrity, said Josie Cox in The Independent. Laura Kuenssberg, Fiona Bruce and Sophie Raworth all earned hundreds of thousands less than Huw Edwards. Sarah Montague, Jenni Murray and Emily Maitlis didn’t even earn enough to get on the list. Why? Having spent many years as a BBC executive, “I know that pay is largely governed by how loud the talent or their agent screams and complains”, said Janet Street-porter in the same paper. Some huge salaries are explained by contracts dating back decades, with built-in yearly pay rises. Either way, the “real scandal” is the failure of BBC management to confront waste and keep costs down.
The BBC claims that it has to keep up with the competition, said Will Hutton in The Observer. This argument is “palpably overstated. Where else are John Humphrys or Jeremy Vine likely to broadcast to such big audiences in such well-loved, prestigious programmes with such fantastic production support?” Given half a chance, dozens of presenters would jump into their shoes. “The most likely result of this BBC sex war will be that the women will get more while the men stay the same,” said Charles Moore in The Daily Telegraph. “Then the whole point of exposing the figures in the first place – to force the BBC to control its costs – will have been upended.”