CM
For those who don’t have access to/haven’t been able to watch the 6 and 10 this week - you can find Clive’s special reports on the YouTube channel. He is a fine example of how good the BBCs journalism can be - the final in the reports will be from him tonight on the 6/10 bulletins.
Report One: https://youtu.be/3n-v0AuDMkI
Report Two: https://youtu.be/6vVOZ5kdKqs
Report Three: https://youtu.be/Skd6-B7EeqAthis
Report One: https://youtu.be/3n-v0AuDMkI
Report Two: https://youtu.be/6vVOZ5kdKqs
Report Three: https://youtu.be/Skd6-B7EeqAthis
JO
I am fully supportive, of course, about everyone getting the same amount of pay if they do the same job. It's a disgrace when it doesn't happen.
I have employed people for over 20 years and the idea of paying one person less who has equal talent and equal responsibilities because they are "x", "y", or "z" is an outrage.
However, despite its good intentions, the Gender Pay Gap legislation is an imperfect way of uncovering pay inequality. I am all in favour of its existence but I do wish the formula that employers are required to use was more accurate.
Emily and Naga attracted the attention they did because they expressed an opinion. I would agree with you about Andrew Neil - I don't know why he doesn't get the same treatment - I am at a loss to answer that, tbh.
With Victoria, she was a victim of budget cuts. If it had been a man presenting it, I am certain the same decision would have been made. Of course, I don't live in that parellel universe so I can't say for sure.
To contend that there is no such thing as two sides to an argument is a strange argument tactic.
If BBC News is staffed by people who also share the same view that there is a universal truth and that anyone deviating from it is indulging in fiction, then the corporation won't last until the end of the decade with a government as hostile as this one to its existence.
johnnyboy
Founding member
that's a fair question, and one that wouldn't be fair to fully answer in this thread without throwing it wildly off topic.
my view is that it has a lot with do with the structural flaws in the management of an organisation that has recently publicly exposed Emily, Naga Munchetty, and Victoria Derbyshire to needlessly bad publicity and admonishment, not to mention the long running equal pay disputes. I'm afraid this does exist.
my view is that it has a lot with do with the structural flaws in the management of an organisation that has recently publicly exposed Emily, Naga Munchetty, and Victoria Derbyshire to needlessly bad publicity and admonishment, not to mention the long running equal pay disputes. I'm afraid this does exist.
I am fully supportive, of course, about everyone getting the same amount of pay if they do the same job. It's a disgrace when it doesn't happen.
I have employed people for over 20 years and the idea of paying one person less who has equal talent and equal responsibilities because they are "x", "y", or "z" is an outrage.
However, despite its good intentions, the Gender Pay Gap legislation is an imperfect way of uncovering pay inequality. I am all in favour of its existence but I do wish the formula that employers are required to use was more accurate.
Emily and Naga attracted the attention they did because they expressed an opinion. I would agree with you about Andrew Neil - I don't know why he doesn't get the same treatment - I am at a loss to answer that, tbh.
With Victoria, she was a victim of budget cuts. If it had been a man presenting it, I am certain the same decision would have been made. Of course, I don't live in that parellel universe so I can't say for sure.
I utterly disagree with your notion about 'both sides' - there are no 'both sides' when it comes to fact and fiction. And Newsnight is an analytical programme - not a regular bulletin. The BBC will not be imperilled, and the fact it has programmes like this point to its strength, reach, and relevance.
To contend that there is no such thing as two sides to an argument is a strange argument tactic.
If BBC News is staffed by people who also share the same view that there is a universal truth and that anyone deviating from it is indulging in fiction, then the corporation won't last until the end of the decade with a government as hostile as this one to its existence.
JA
It's a story about television, and that's included under entertainment.
Emily explaining her absence from Newsnight is the leading story on the BBC News website “Entertainment and Arts” section.
Entertainment and Arts?
I’ve often found that section of the website to be a receptacle for stories that don’t quite fit anywhere else. It’s hardly “entertainment”.
Mind you, the same story is positioned at Number 3 in the UK News section of the site.
(I’m viewing the International edition of bbc.com/news)
Entertainment and Arts?
I’ve often found that section of the website to be a receptacle for stories that don’t quite fit anywhere else. It’s hardly “entertainment”.
Mind you, the same story is positioned at Number 3 in the UK News section of the site.
(I’m viewing the International edition of bbc.com/news)
TR
Regarding the Maitlis situation: does anyone think that the fact that she was speaking from Studio E (the most recognisable studio for viewers, with the open newsroom behind) make any difference? Would being in the normal studio have made any difference to how the BBC reacted?
My answer is probably not, but I wonder.
My answer is probably not, but I wonder.
MA
Chris Mason and another chap who got Jonathan Van Tam to open up in yesterday's conference.
which programme are you referring to, Mark?
Chris Mason and another chap who got Jonathan Van Tam to open up in yesterday's conference.
