1. Joined
    27 Dec '05
    Moves
    143878
    31 Jan '16 13:30
    Originally posted by Startreader
    How did you find out? Did a newspaper dig that up, one I don't read, and make a big thing of it? Daily Mail? Sun?

    I'd never heard that piece of information before. I don't think it surprising or actually reprehensible, as I'm quite sure most of those involved in the show also get paid. Do you feel the same about all those running big charities like Oxfam? About those signing up donors on the streets?
    I could understand claiming expenses, travel fare ,food maybe but to charge a fee for presenting Children in need when every one's makes a real effort to donate money ,nah ! he didn't need the money he could of donated it to Children in need .
    Lovely man but in my eyes let himself down through greed .
  2. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    116758
    31 Jan '16 13:32
    Originally posted by phil3000
    I could understand claiming expenses, travel fare ,food maybe but to charge a fee for presenting Children in need when every one's makes a real effort to donate money ,nah ! he didn't need the money he could of donated it to Children in need .
    Lovely man but in my eyes let himself down through greed .
    I don't get this at all. He was salaried by the BBC and one of his jobs, which he was paid for, was to host the programme. Why should he give away all of his pay for doing a top job and drawing in millions of viewers and income for the charity?
  3. Joined
    29 Nov '15
    Moves
    1842
    31 Jan '16 13:57
    Originally posted by divegeester
    I don't get this at all. He was salaried by the BBC and one of his jobs, which he was paid for, was to host the programme. Why should he give away all of his pay for doing a top job and drawing in millions of viewers and income for the charity?
    got to agree with you there, a huge outcry was made at the time about him getting paid to host the children in need programme.
    the tabloids do not care, it was "part" of his salary or just hosting it would bring more donations. wogan was well known for charity work again the media ignored the fact.
    i give to charity what i can afford, a friend of mine runs a great one, the hours he puts in is fantastic, snide comments are made about him, like "he must be getting something"
    really out of line.
    i give to charity in the small hope i might help someone have a better life, i dont care if someone gives more or less, some want to make a song and dance about it.
    sad to see wogan die, was not a fan but he always came across as nice and no scandal compered to some bbc presenters
    rip terry wogan
  4. Standard memberSteve45
    Mozart
    liverpool
    Joined
    24 May '12
    Moves
    30766
    31 Jan '16 14:30
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Don't be silly. It was his job to present the show. How do you know he didn't give to the charity separately?
    Im afraid your the one being silly. He was asking the population, the majority of whom are alot less better off than him, to give to Children in Need, while at the same time, he is taking a salary. You are the one who just dosn't get it.
  5. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    116758
    31 Jan '16 15:54
    Originally posted by Steve45
    Im afraid your the one being silly. He was asking the population, the majority of whom are alot less better off than him, to give to Children in Need, while at the same time, he is taking a salary. You are the one who just dosn't get it.
    He wasn't asking the population to give up their salary was he. He probably gave to the charity through the regular channels, the same as everyone else. Why should he have to give up being paid as well?
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree