:00:08. > :00:10.Hello and welcome to Newswatch with me, Samira Ahmed.
:00:11. > :00:13.Coming up, news presenters featured prominently in the BBC's list
:00:14. > :00:19.This week, are they really worth the money?
:00:20. > :00:22.And how will the BBC deal with the gap in pay revealed
:00:23. > :00:35.Wednesday was a difficult day for the BBC, as ordered by
:00:36. > :00:37.the Government against its wishes, the corporation published
:00:38. > :00:40.the names and salary bands of all its on-air employees paid
:00:41. > :00:45.This led to some uncomfortable interviews with those unused
:00:46. > :00:49.to being on the receiving end of questions.
:00:50. > :00:53.On paper, absolutely nothing that justifies that huge amount of money
:00:54. > :00:57.if you compare with me with lots of other people.
:00:58. > :01:07.I have never doubted how lucky I am to work in there.
:01:08. > :01:12.I think the BBC is really hurting today.
:01:13. > :01:14.John Humphrys and Jeremy Vine, the two leading news
:01:15. > :01:17.presenters on the list, earning over ?600,000
:01:18. > :01:23.They were followed by the likes of Huw Edwards,
:01:24. > :01:29.on more than ?550,000, Andrew Marr, earning over ?400,000, Fiona Bruce,
:01:30. > :01:33.with more than ?350,000, and Laura Kuenssberg on over
:01:34. > :01:36.?200,000, who was in the same range as Andrew Neil,
:01:37. > :01:44.Many BBC outlets indulged in what some viewers felt
:01:45. > :01:47.was washing their dirty linen in public, including Breakfast,
:01:48. > :01:50.with a surreally self-referential paper review
:01:51. > :01:57.Naga Munchetty and not on the list Charlie Stayt.
:01:58. > :01:59.It's not every day the BBC Breakfast sofa makes
:02:00. > :02:01.the front page of the Sun, but there we go.
:02:02. > :02:06.And many of the papers, as Naga said, are looking at some
:02:07. > :02:11.of the detail and some of the discrepancies highlighted.
:02:12. > :02:13.The Daily Mail say mutiny - bitter recriminations
:02:14. > :02:16.of the politically correct BBC as this gulf between men
:02:17. > :02:23.So that's us on Newswatch broadcast during breakfast,
:02:24. > :02:25.showing a clip of Breakfast, featuring a newspaper front
:02:26. > :02:29.Apologies for adding to the self-absorption,
:02:30. > :02:44.which on Wednesday prompted this from Rowena Kay.
:02:45. > :02:48.And another Twitter user called Jerome thought:
:02:49. > :02:53.between men's and women's earnings revealed by the list
:02:54. > :02:56.was being pored over to access, with Helen Blamires asking:
:02:57. > :03:14.Well, Amol Rajan has been reporting on this story all week at the BBC's
:03:15. > :03:22.Maybe I have a certain advantage in that I have not
:03:23. > :03:25.been here that long, so I haven't become best friends
:03:26. > :03:27.with some of the people I was reporting on.
:03:28. > :03:29.I knew I was talking about people like Huw Edwards
:03:30. > :03:36.You come across lots of awkward in situations in journalism.
:03:37. > :03:39.You think, how would I cover this if it wasn't the BBC
:03:40. > :03:41.and I was somewhere else, and you do it
:03:42. > :03:45.You have come from newspapers like the Independent.
:03:46. > :03:48.Has it affected how you view the row over BBC pay?
:03:49. > :03:51.I don't think it has affected how I reviewed the row.
:03:52. > :03:55.I approach this as a hack, not as a company man.
:03:56. > :03:58.It is fantastically gossipy and exciting detail,
:03:59. > :04:02.and this is a list of names and I find it fascinating.
:04:03. > :04:05.As an old-fashioned hack, I think this is, I would not say
:04:06. > :04:10.A lot of viewers said there was too much
:04:11. > :04:17.the media talking about itself to itself at the expense of other news.
:04:18. > :04:18.I don't think it was self-flagellating.
:04:19. > :04:22.If you are the BBC, you have to cover yourself in a way that
:04:23. > :04:29.I had two interviews with Tony Hall on the News at Ten,
:04:30. > :04:34.There was no way I was going to let the director-general get on the News
:04:35. > :04:39.So when I was editing the packages, I'd make sure that we were seen
:04:40. > :04:42.to be giving him a hard time, but I don't think
:04:43. > :04:46.There is an important story here, which is how public money is spent.
:04:47. > :04:52.There is a question of whether we did too much,
:04:53. > :04:55.which is complicated because it is to do with what else
:04:56. > :04:58.is on the news agenda, but I think we got it about right.
:04:59. > :05:00.There is also an accusation from some viewers that news coverage
:05:01. > :05:03.actually focused too much on the gender gap to distract
:05:04. > :05:08.Were you under any pressure to report the story any way?
:05:09. > :05:29.I can tell you hand on heart that no one tried...
:05:30. > :05:31.Having been a kind of media adviser and having thought
:05:32. > :05:36.about comms in a previous job and having gone through some
:05:37. > :05:38.difficult things in my journalistic career like shutting a newspaper,
:05:39. > :05:41.I was thinking to myself, what is the is the line the BBC
:05:42. > :05:46.I am conscious that they feel they have a decent story to tell
:05:47. > :06:02.If you find out at base that Chris Evans is paid ?2.2 million, that is
:06:03. > :06:04.a big number. Not just gender but other issues revealed, like
:06:05. > :06:10.diversity and class. Many of those who contacted
:06:11. > :06:14.Newswatch expressed their dismay and disgust about the levels
:06:15. > :06:17.of salary if you are finding out that Chris Evans
:06:18. > :06:22.is paid ?2.2 million, Many of those who contacted
:06:23. > :06:24.Newswatch expressed their dismay And there was also concern
:06:25. > :06:28.about the gender disparities in pay, with the top seven on the list
:06:29. > :06:31.all men and on the issue of race, John Rick Warren had a similar
:06:32. > :06:36.are paid partly according one might assume that people are paid partly
:06:37. > :07:00.according to show is presented. One might assume that people
:07:01. > :07:02.are paid partly according For instance, John Humphrys
:07:03. > :07:06.and Jeremy Vine by present TV quiz shows, which contribute
:07:07. > :07:15.to their wage bills, are how replaceable each
:07:16. > :07:18.person is and how much That cuts no ice with
:07:19. > :07:29.David Goodchild, who told us: The BBC's director-general Lord Hall
:07:30. > :07:40.responded to all these points in an interview
:07:41. > :07:43.he gave on Wednesday. He said the gender pay gap was lower
:07:44. > :07:46.at the BBC than it was nationally, and pledged equal pay on the air
:07:47. > :07:49.between men by 2020. He pointed to the increased
:07:50. > :07:58.competition to the BBC not just domestically,
:07:59. > :08:00.but from companeis such as Apple and Amazon,
:08:01. > :08:05.and he said We are constantly working
:08:06. > :08:24.at ensuring that we get the balance right between our public,
:08:25. > :08:26.who want to have great shows presented by stars and great
:08:27. > :08:29.presenters, and them also wanting to know that their money,
:08:30. > :08:31.and it's their money, public money, Well, Mark Damazer worked
:08:32. > :08:36.at the BBC for many years, including as Deputy Director of BBC
:08:37. > :08:39.News, and he was later a BBC trustee and is now master
:08:40. > :08:42.of St Peter's College Oxford. You used to be management and make
:08:43. > :08:47.these kind of pay decisions. Were you surprised by
:08:48. > :08:49.the numbers revealed? I thought there would be a gender
:08:50. > :08:53.gap, but it was considerably more embarrassing and bigger
:08:54. > :08:55.than I had anticipated. Some of the individual figures,
:08:56. > :08:57.of course, caused some surprise. Not necessarily new,
:08:58. > :08:59.sometimes outside. I can see entirely from the point
:09:00. > :09:03.of view from an average licence payer that they would have
:09:04. > :09:05.looked, on average, high. But in terms of negotiating
:09:06. > :09:08.these one by one, no, Because several viewers have
:09:09. > :09:11.described some of these salaries as obscene,
:09:12. > :09:12.and they are eye-watering, Well, it's a truth and it's not
:09:13. > :09:16.necessarily a happy truth that the way people get paid
:09:17. > :09:19.across the economy is not a reflection of moral virtue
:09:20. > :09:21.or moral value. It would be hard to say that a nurse
:09:22. > :09:25.or a police woman or a fire officer isn't worth more by way of moral
:09:26. > :09:27.value than they stand You have to take that
:09:28. > :09:32.to one side and look And once you get to that and strip
:09:33. > :09:37.out the notion that these people are intrinsically more
:09:38. > :09:38.virtuous, then the figures People still thinking the BBC
:09:39. > :09:43.is a public organisation and, in the end, there is no
:09:44. > :09:46.justification for a newsreader to be The problem with that is, if other
:09:47. > :09:51.people are paying a great deal more, I'm afraid the BBC has to operate
:09:52. > :09:54.by trying to get the best talent that they can for a price
:09:55. > :09:57.that is always likely to be discounted to what
:09:58. > :09:58.everybody else is paying. But it has to be reasonable enough
:09:59. > :10:02.to get people into those jobs, And it isn't always happy and this
:10:03. > :10:07.is difficult and embarrassing, but I think the BBC is right
:10:08. > :10:10.to have a policy that says - we need talent and we're
:10:11. > :10:14.going to have to pay. A lot of viewers and a lot
:10:15. > :10:16.of BBC staff, women, people from minority backgrounds,
:10:17. > :10:19.have been quite pleased to see these Transparency's quite
:10:20. > :10:22.revealing, isn't it? Yeah, so I was on the BBC Trust
:10:23. > :10:26.for a couple of years and I was not an enthusiast for this,
:10:27. > :10:28.I was perfectly happy about bands in which you could locate
:10:29. > :10:31.the numbers of people but not I was absolutely, and am
:10:32. > :10:36.happy, that the gender That's not the same
:10:37. > :10:42.as individual salaries Although I think that some good,
:10:43. > :10:46.because of the pressure that will now be on the BBC management
:10:47. > :10:49.has come out of this, because the gender gap
:10:50. > :10:51.will have to be sorted. I think it will be
:10:52. > :10:54.extremely difficult. In some cases, I think,
:10:55. > :10:57.it is likely to lead to inflation. I don't think that Tony Hall can
:10:58. > :11:01.admit to that, but it's going to be very hard to do this if you don't
:11:02. > :11:03.inflate some people's salaries, And that may not be good
:11:04. > :11:08.for the BBC's total pay bill and it may not be good for people worrying
:11:09. > :11:10.about overpayment in general, if they think everybody's
:11:11. > :11:13.being paid too much, but I think women are going to have
:11:14. > :11:16.to be paid more, on average. One of the things that's likely
:11:17. > :11:20.to happen over a period of time is that some of the better paid men,
:11:21. > :11:24.not that I wish ill on any of them, but some of the better paid men
:11:25. > :11:27.may leave and it may be they will be replaced by other,
:11:28. > :11:30.dare I say it, cheaper men or women. That will, in some way,
:11:31. > :11:33.compress the gap between But I think the BBC
:11:34. > :11:39.can't go on like this, even if it is true that the BBC,
:11:40. > :11:42.and I think it almost certainly is true, that the BBC's record
:11:43. > :11:49.is more defensible than most, if not all other broadcasters
:11:50. > :11:51.and many other big corporations Thank you very much.
:11:52. > :11:54.Pleasure. Thank you for all your
:11:55. > :11:56.comments this week. We're off the air for a few weeks
:11:57. > :12:00.now over the summer, but do please still share your opinions on BBC
:12:01. > :12:03.news and current affairs by calling You can find us on twitter,
:12:04. > :12:10.@NewswatchBBC, and do have a look We'll be back to hear your thoughts
:12:11. > :12:20.about BBC news coverage