Friday, April 19, 2024
HomeReaders CommentsReaders’ comments: Shoddy for Snoddy

Readers’ comments: Shoddy for Snoddy


In response to Gary Oliver: What about Snoddy’s shoddy treatment, Samira?

Royinsouthwest wrote:

Plymouth Argyle’s football players spend just as long at work on match day as those of Manchester City, Liverpool, Manchester United, Chelsea etc. I don’t know how much Plymouth Argyle’s players are paid but I suspect that is a bit less than what the players at those other clubs get. Why is nobody doing anything about this discrimination?

Furthermore, even in the case of the clubs whose players are rolling in money (enough to make BBC stars look impoverished) there are marked inequalities. One player in a team might only earn half of what another player in the same team gets.

What we need, in the immortal words of Ash Sarkar, is Luxury communism now!

Oaknash wrote:

Just another storm in another progressive BBC tea cup, but all paid for with licence fee-payers’ money.

Remember the main reason why this whole guys vs gals BBC pay disparity issue really rose to prominence was due to the publishing of the disgusting salaries that all the BBC ‘talent’ gets.

The BBC was in a total panic about this and decided (correctly as it would seem) to shift the emphasis and media anger away from the amount of licence payers’ money that they throw at all these sock puppets to instead ‘outing’ themselves as paying the BBC ‘wimmin’ too little, thus diluting the directed criticism and giving the impression that the Corporation accepts it has been naughty in the past but would now try harder.

The fact that there are many people who work outside in all weathers, often undertaking hazardous work, for less than a tenner an hour means that I don’t really give a monkey’s whether Samira Ahmed is given fifty, a hundred or even a ten thousand pound pay rise for presenting. To me she is just another BBC cohort of indulged and greedy talking mouths, comprised of both men and women, who have found that by getting on to the payroll one of the most profligate, hypocritical, arrogant and culturally destructive organisations this country has ever seen, that they will never need to worry about another bill and only worry about their own petty jealousies.

This is all just another utterly pathetic side issue, from just another con trick that the BBC has been allowed to get away with.

Bruce Mills wrote:

A pity Samira elected to join in with the doleful feminista harpies of late: Dignified of mien, I thought she was way above the herd.

I’m rather fond of Samira, didn’t she distinguish herself by getting the sack from Ch4 News when she was the best thing going for it amidst the arch attack-dogs Snow, Guru-Murthy and Newman? She evinced a more gentle, thoughtful and mannered approach in her deliveries to camera. Good to look at too.

As for the comparison of her with the dripping-wet and oily Vine, it demonstrates where the BBC holds its values these days: the more trite and shallow the presenter is, the better their prospects for long-term employment. Don’t know when the BBC’s Reithian ethos was dumped, but such is the way of the world these days.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.