Wogan = Children in Need

Joined
16 Apr 2004
Messages
3,938
Reaction score
26
Location
Cornwall
Country
United Kingdom
Wogan gets paid '£1,300 an hour' for Children in Need.
I've never been a big supporter of this charity(yes I do support a charity) but this story has really done it for me, I don't blame 'tel boy' but the bbc for paying it, here's the story, what do you think?
The BBC paid Sir Terry Wogan £1,300 an hour to front the 2005 Children in Need charity appeal, it has emerged.

Documents obtained by the Mail on Sunday under the Freedom of Information Act show that the veteran television and radio broadcaster is the only celebrity to be paid for the annual charity event.

Sir Terry, who has hosted Children in Need every year since its inception in 1980, earned £9,065 for the seven hours worth of television programming during 2005's appeal.

But co-presenters Natasha Kaplinsky, Eamonn Holmes and Fearne Cotton did not receive any money.

'The BBC considered it appropriate to pay Sir Terry a non-commercial fee,' a letter to the Sunday tabloid from the corporation says.

'The BBC has made an adjustment to this fee every year to reflect inflation. This fee has never been subject to negotiation. It is paid by the BBC and does not come from the funds of the BBC Children in Need appeal charity.

'No other BBC presenters or personalities were paid.'

Sir Terry, 68, reportedly earns £800,000 a year presenting his Radio 2 show.

He told the Mail on Sunday: 'I've never asked for a fee and would quite happily do it for nothing.'

Last year the Irishman said that television stars, specifically those employed by the BBC, were being paid too much for presenting duties.
 
Sponsored Links
People who head charities earn huge amounts of dosh. Why don't they work for nothing? Wogan can earn £20K for a two hour after dinner speech - so what's the problem?
 
The BBC has said it is "not ashamed" of paying Sir Terry Wogan a fee for hosting the annual Children In Need charity fund-raising gala.

Well bloody Wogan should be ashamed to accept it.

"He told the Mail on Sunday: 'I've never asked for a fee and would quite happily do it for nothing.' "

It didn't occur to him to pay it back or donate it to the charity?

I bet it will occur to him now its out in the open.

Money grubbing arsehole.
 
joe-90 said:
People who head charities earn huge amounts of dosh. Why don't they work for nothing?
I know people who head charities that are local to me, and they don't earn very much.

They don't work for nothing because they do a job. :rolleyes:
 
Sponsored Links
At the end of the day, these people are doing a job. Just like most tradespeople, they have a daily rate. Whilst many will give up a certain number of days per year for charity work, I feel it's only right they should be paid their going rate, regardless of the cause.

Why? Well, where do you draw the line. There are so many charities with so many needs and if celebrities were to do it for nowt then they'd never earn a living. Also, Wogan is an incredibly popular presenter and it's quite likely that there will be many folk who will tune in, not to watch Comic Relief but to watch Wogan. If he attracted say, 100,000 extra viewers and 25% of those viewers each donated £10 to the cause, then that's an additional £250,000 raised, much much more than his fee for the night.

In most cases where people appear for a charity event (be it televised or not), a fee is paid. What the celeb does with that fee is their choice.

As a plumber, builder, plasterer, kitchen fitter, joiner etc, if you were asked to do some work for a charity, would you do it for free? I doubt it. You've gotta earn a living. Granted, you or I can't afford to work for nothing whilst most celebs are fortunate enough to have huge bank balances but it's the principle of the fact that one works, one gets paid.

Just my opinion.

Regards

Fred.
 
Fred, the powers that be on here don't like us responding to those spam posts (psychic reading). Something to do with an auto filter that could possibly ban your account.
 
FredFlintstone said:
As a plumber, builder, plasterer, kitchen fitter, joiner etc, if you were asked to do some work for a charity, would you do it for free? I doubt it. You've gotta earn a living.
True but others don't need the money, for example, Cherie Blair a couple of year ago nicked £100,000 from the children cancer charity fund. These types of people don't care. I have helped a lot of poor elderly people free of charge if the job is not too big to do.
 
Softus said:
joe-90 said:
People who head charities earn huge amounts of dosh. Why don't they work for nothing?
I know people who head charities that are local to me, and they don't earn very much.

They don't work for nothing because they do a job. :rolleyes:

I'm talking Red Cross and Cancer Research. How much do their CEO earn?
 
joe-90 said:
Softus said:
joe-90 said:
People who head charities earn huge amounts of dosh. Why don't they work for nothing?
I know people who head charities that are local to me, and they don't earn very much.

They don't work for nothing because they do a job. :rolleyes:

I'm talking Red Cross and Cancer Research. How much do their CEO earn?
How can you claim one moment that they earn "huge amounts of dosh", and the next ask how much they earn?

Do you ever think through anything you post before clicking on the Submit button? :rolleyes:
 
What I can't understand is they get knighted for doing a job that they get well paid for.I would much like to see people get Knighted who do a good in helping people for nothing.Near me There is a doctor who oes out to the poorer countries with a medical aid charity,sometimes in war zones.
This guy does not get a penny for doing it.He has been doing it for years.These people should be Knighted in my view.Some of you might disagree and say that Wogan does a good job and is woth every penny he get.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top