Post by Teddy Bear on Aug 30, 2009 22:01:06 GMT
I was going to tag this article from The Times on the end of the topic about Jana Bennett's recent resignation from her husband's company following the revelation that she was also the company secretary for it while earning £280,000 a year as a BBC executive, and that this company had also benefited from BBC contracts at the same time. But then I felt the comments she made here were so outrageous they deserved a separate topic to show somebody typical of the patronising arrogant reprehensible immoral mindset running the BBC.
Not enough that she dismisses the publics right to know just how much 'stars' hired by the BBC are earning, as "too complex to understand", but goes on to add that BBC staff deserved to be treated differently from workers in other areas of the public sector.
She said: “The BBC is in a market; in the broader sense it’s part of the creative industries. It performs a fundamentally different role than that performed by, for example, policemen or teachers.
The only thing that's creative about the BBC is the methods its hierarchy uses to extort and spend more money on themselves, or how it distorts stories to maintain their particular bias. She's right about them being different than policeman and teachers though, the latter perform a social service.
Not enough that she dismisses the publics right to know just how much 'stars' hired by the BBC are earning, as "too complex to understand", but goes on to add that BBC staff deserved to be treated differently from workers in other areas of the public sector.
She said: “The BBC is in a market; in the broader sense it’s part of the creative industries. It performs a fundamentally different role than that performed by, for example, policemen or teachers.
The only thing that's creative about the BBC is the methods its hierarchy uses to extort and spend more money on themselves, or how it distorts stories to maintain their particular bias. She's right about them being different than policeman and teachers though, the latter perform a social service.
Jana Bennett, BBC TV chief, says stars’ pay is too complex to understand
Patrick Foster, Media Correspondent
The BBC will not disclose the salaries of its top stars because the public would not understand why they are so high, according to one of the corporation’s top executives.
Jana Bennett, head of the BBC’s television channels, said that members of the public could not fully comprehend the complexities of the television industry or contribute to the debate about the pay of stars such as Jonathan Ross, who is reported to be on a £6 million-a-year deal with the corporation.
Speaking as part of a panel on presenters’ fees at the Edinburgh International Television Festival, Ms Bennett, director of BBC Vision, said that BBC staff deserved to be treated differently from workers in other areas of the public sector.
She said: “The BBC is in a market; in the broader sense it’s part of the creative industries. It performs a fundamentally different role than that performed by, for example, policemen or teachers. It is a category error to suggest that the public would actually be able to contribute to working out what we do about it. It’s like me talking about Tom Cruise’s movie deals. I’m not of that sector.”
Ed Vaizey, the Shadow Culture Secretary, said that if a politician made similar comments there would be outrage. “A politician caught on camera saying the public don’t understand why we need to be paid £120,000 gets a front page and outrage. What Jana is saying is that the public don’t have the right to know talent and executives’ pay at the BBC because they wouldn’t understand why they’re paid that money,” he said. “ I think you’d find the public is far more sophisticated than your remarks suggest.”
The gaffe came hours after Ms Bennett suffered another bad moment on stage, when she was jeered and booed as she performed in a talent show hosted by the ITV presenters Ant and Dec. The BBC executive played guitar and sang a folk song about the recession but was forced to stop the recital after being cut short by the judges. After a vote among delegates she finished second to last in the competition.
The Tories have stated that they would force the corporation to publish the pay of their top stars, because they are paid out of the public purse. Mr Vaizey continued: “If you think Jonathan Ross is worth the money, go out and argue the case. Imagine if I was arguing that MPs’ salaries should be kept secret. We are moving into an age of transparency and the BBC, which is entirely funded by the taxpayer, has to take account of that.”
This year the corporation published the salary bands of its top 50 executives, as well as line-by-line expense claims of its top 40 managers. Later this year it will make public the pay of its top 100 decision makers. The broadcaster says that it will publish a figure for the total pay of all its on-screen stars, but has not set a date.
Patrick Foster, Media Correspondent
The BBC will not disclose the salaries of its top stars because the public would not understand why they are so high, according to one of the corporation’s top executives.
Jana Bennett, head of the BBC’s television channels, said that members of the public could not fully comprehend the complexities of the television industry or contribute to the debate about the pay of stars such as Jonathan Ross, who is reported to be on a £6 million-a-year deal with the corporation.
Speaking as part of a panel on presenters’ fees at the Edinburgh International Television Festival, Ms Bennett, director of BBC Vision, said that BBC staff deserved to be treated differently from workers in other areas of the public sector.
She said: “The BBC is in a market; in the broader sense it’s part of the creative industries. It performs a fundamentally different role than that performed by, for example, policemen or teachers. It is a category error to suggest that the public would actually be able to contribute to working out what we do about it. It’s like me talking about Tom Cruise’s movie deals. I’m not of that sector.”
Ed Vaizey, the Shadow Culture Secretary, said that if a politician made similar comments there would be outrage. “A politician caught on camera saying the public don’t understand why we need to be paid £120,000 gets a front page and outrage. What Jana is saying is that the public don’t have the right to know talent and executives’ pay at the BBC because they wouldn’t understand why they’re paid that money,” he said. “ I think you’d find the public is far more sophisticated than your remarks suggest.”
The gaffe came hours after Ms Bennett suffered another bad moment on stage, when she was jeered and booed as she performed in a talent show hosted by the ITV presenters Ant and Dec. The BBC executive played guitar and sang a folk song about the recession but was forced to stop the recital after being cut short by the judges. After a vote among delegates she finished second to last in the competition.
The Tories have stated that they would force the corporation to publish the pay of their top stars, because they are paid out of the public purse. Mr Vaizey continued: “If you think Jonathan Ross is worth the money, go out and argue the case. Imagine if I was arguing that MPs’ salaries should be kept secret. We are moving into an age of transparency and the BBC, which is entirely funded by the taxpayer, has to take account of that.”
This year the corporation published the salary bands of its top 50 executives, as well as line-by-line expense claims of its top 40 managers. Later this year it will make public the pay of its top 100 decision makers. The broadcaster says that it will publish a figure for the total pay of all its on-screen stars, but has not set a date.