It, surely, can’t come as a surprise to many that BBC Radio 4 Today host, John Humphrys, holds less than progressive views on the gender pay gap. Only this week, as he spoke to colleague and former China editor, Carrie Gracie, about her decision to resign over the fact that she was paid less than male colleagues, he struggled not to make a jibe at her on air. When Carrie Gracie said she hoped she would be remembered for her work reporting on China and not as ‘the woman who complained about money’, he snarked ‘too late, too late’ as he laughed.
Now, this in and of itself could be dismissed as a harmless attempt to bring some humour to an otherwise serious story or, more generously, an attempt to diffuse the inevitable awkwardness of one BBC presenter talking to another, who has just resigned over her pay at, well, the BBC whilst on air on a BBC programme. It could, if it were not for the leaked audio transcript of a conversation Humphrys had with Jon Sopel, the BBC’s North American editor.
Sopel is paid between £200,000-£249,999 while Gracie was paid £135,000. They were both regional editors. Speaking to Sopel ahead of an on-air interview, Humprhys says:
‘Slight change of subject, the first question will be how much of your salary you are prepared to hand over to Carrie Gracie to keep her, and then a few comments about your other colleagues, you know, like our Middle East editor [Jeremy Bowen] and the other men who are earning too much’.
Sopel replies: ‘I mean, obviously if we are talking about the scope for the greatest redistribution I’ll have to come back and say well yes Mr Humphrys, but …’
Humphrys then says: ‘And I could save you the trouble as I could volunteer that I’ve handed over already more than you fucking earn but I’m still left with more than anybody else and that seems to me to be entirely just – something like that would do it?’
Sopel, seems to be reluctant to have the conversation Humphrys wants to have and says: ‘Don’t …’
Humphrys then interrupts him and says of Gracie’s resignation letter: ‘Oh dear God. She’s actually suggested that you should lose money – you know that, don’t you? You’ve read the thing properly have you?’
READ MORE: The Debrief Investigates: Hormonal Contraception And Mental Health
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
Debrief Mad About The Pill Stats
The BBC has said ‘this was an ill-advised off-air conversation which the presenter regrets’ and Humphrys himself has minimized its importance, speaking to The Times he said ‘this was what I thought was an exchange between two old friends who have known each other for 30 years and were taking the mickey out of each other. It was nothing to do with Carrie’s campaign’.
What have we learned here? This entire debacle is little more than a confirmation of what women everywhere already know: men who out earn us are not only defensive of their exorbitant salaries but dismissive of our complaints about them. In public, on air or in print, they might say the right things but, in private, they say what they really think.
What Humphrys, who earns more than £600,000 a year, said when he thought nobody was listening roughly translates as ‘you and I earn more because we’re worth more…isn’t it awkward and inconvenient that a silly woman is actually suggesting that we should give up some of our money so that things are more even…’
If we could bug boardrooms across the country, it would quickly become clear that behind closed doors in companies everywhere, views similar to those held by Humphrys are voiced. If they weren’t don’t you think we’d have done away with the gender pay gapby now? This is what inherent sexism and discrimination looks like and this is what it sounds like. It’s a man, often white and privileged with a bloated salary trying to justify himself instead of graciously recognising that he may have benefitted from structural inequality. And, when he is exposed, he hides behind the deflective shield of ‘banter’.
Humphrys has made it clear where he stands on the gender pay gap, he has belittled it and undermined the case for women and men to be paid the same so how can he still report impartially on the subject? Indeed, the BBC has banned _Woman’s Hou_r presenter Jane Garvey and Radio 4 presenter Winifred Robinson from reporting on it because of their views in favour of closing the gender pay gap, so surely, it’s high time they extend that ban to men who are obviously in favour of maintaining the status quo.
Follow Vicky on Twitter @Victoria_Spratt
This article originally appeared on The Debrief.