Rita Panahi: Lisa Wilkinson leaving ‘Today’ show shines a light on industry inequity
LISA Wilkinson deserves respect if she took a principled stand because she was refused the same salary package as her co-host. But the reality may be different, writes Rita Panahi.
Rita Panahi
Don't miss out on the headlines from Rita Panahi. Followed categories will be added to My News.
IT SAYS something about how absurdly removed from reality the TV world is when the co-host of a program consistently trailing its only real competitor in the ratings walks out on a $1.8 million dollar a year pay offer … because it isn’t enough.
CARRIE BICKMORE $5 FAVOURITE TO REPLACE LISA WILKINSON ON ‘TODAY’
LISA WILKINSON LEAVES CHANNEL 9 OVER PAY DISPUTE
WENDY TUOHY: PAY GAP CLAIMS HIGH-PROFILE VICTIM
One can only respect Lisa Wilkinson if she did indeed take a principled stand and broke up with Today because Channel Nine refused to give her the same salary package as co-host Karl Stefanovic.
However, the reality may be somewhat different from what Wilkinson’s media cheersquad is claiming. More on that later.
Let’s first wrap our heads around the fact that Stefanovic is reportedly paid $2 million a year with the potential to earn even more if rating KPIs are met, ostensibly for hosting a program that trails Channel Seven’s Sunrise in the ratings. That’s about five times more than the highest paid medical specialists, neurosurgeons, earn in Australia. It’s six times more than an oncologist and eight times more than a paediatric surgeon. It’s certainly a lot more than the $500,000-odd the prime minister earns.
The salaries may be ridiculous but it’s just as ridiculous to think that Wilkinson isn’t worth as much as Stefanovic, particularly given the latter’s recent personal woes.
Nine has been deeply concerned by the way Stefanovic’s loveable larrikin image has been tarnished by the breakup of his 21-year marriage to Cassandra Thorburn and his new relationship with a younger woman, 33-year-old model and shoe designer Jasmine Yarbrough. Many female viewers have judged the father of three harshly and it’s worth noting that when Stefanovic took a week off in April, Today’s ratings increased with Ben Fordham co-hosting the program with Wilkinson.
You can argue Stefanovic’s personal life is nobody’s business but his own but the reality is that likability and trustworthiness have real currency in the entertainment industry, particularly when it comes to family-friendly television.
Which brings me to the question of how Karl, or Lisa for that matter, can be worth so much more in the eyes of TV executives than Tracy Grimshaw. The veteran A Current Affair host is reportedly on a package of $650,000 per year for single-handedly hosting a program that is consistently in the top 10 and attracts a significantly higher audience than Today.
Why is she receiving a fraction of what Wilkinson was offered and Stefanovic earns? Certainly Grimshaw keeps a lower profile and is not a regular on the red carpet scene but that hasn’t dented ACA’s ratings success despite its lacklustre content. Wilkinson will be in competition with Grimshaw when she appears on Channel Ten’s The Project, a program much loved by the Left that manages to be simultaneously asinine and smug.
You won’t find much robust debate on The Project given it’s populated by like-minded “progressives” and Wilkinson certainly won’t be adding that diversity of thought. She may, however, be valuable in attracting a different demographic.
Depending on who you believe — and there is plenty of misinformation surrounding this story, particularly from Wilkinson’s fangirls in the media — Wilkinson either took a brave stand for feminism and was rewarded by a record breaking deal or Nine refused to meet her demands and ceased negotiations, meaning she had to settle for far less money at Ten.
According to the Daily Telegraph’s Annette Sharp: “Wilkinson is now poised to sign a contract with the Ten Network that will make her the highest-paid PERSON, not woman, not man, on Australian television. It must be satisfying to know someone has at last recognised she is indeed worth more than Karl.”
That assessment is at odds with entertainment reporter Peter Ford’s who states: “I don’t know that this is really interpreted as a victory for feminism because a) it was Channel 9 who ended the negotiations and said let’s part ways and secondly, she’s gone to the third rating network, for less money and a vague role.”
Sources at Nine and Ten on Tuesday told the Herald Sun that it would be unlikely that Wilkinson would be on the sort of money she rejected at Nine, given Ten’s financial position.
It’s disingenuous to say that Wilkinson would’ve been a victim of the “gender wage gap” if she accepted the $1.8 million Nine were offering.
Yes, it’s $200,000 less than Stefanovic but he doesn’t only appear on Today — he also files regular reports for 60 Minutes and more importantly hosts a top-rating prime time program, This Time Next Year, for the network.
Much of what you read about the gender wage gap from feminist columnists has been comprehensively debunked. Strangely, though, in the media and entertainment industry, which is dominated by progressives, gender based pay disparity is real and significant.
Male Hollywood stars often earn substantially more than female leads. In television, too, men tend to earn more for doing the same role. Wilkinson’s move may not be a triumph for the sisterhood, particularly if she is settling for far less money at Ten, but it has shone a light on the inequities in the industry.
Rita Panahi is a Herald Sun columnist
Human cost of pandemic goes much further than virus
Whether you are pro or anti-lockdown the grim, unintended consequences of the fixation on coronavirus are undeniable, as other diseases — including cancer and heart disease — go unchecked, and despair from joblessness, poverty and financial stress rises, writes Rita Panahi.
Will buck really stop with Dan after disastrous decisions?
While Daniel Andrews repeats the “we’re all in this together” mantra, the reality is only the private sector is making huge financial sacrifices as he refuses to face up to scrutiny over the hotel quarantine fiasco and contact tracing chaos, writes Rita Panahi.