ChatterBank7 mins ago
Vote Now
42 Answers
Yes or no ,will you be watching Children in need .Worthy cause but the awful cringe worthy show by talentless so called celebs I will be giving it a pass .The beeb have went to great lengths to promote the celeb side of it already I see.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by weecalf. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I won't be watching it.
Sobathons make me very uncomfortable, and I don'e enjoy seeing 'celebrities' doing odd things for charideee.
Is that dreadful Wogan man still fronting it?
I still find it abominable that he remains the only BBC employee to be paid for his appearence.
He jusitifes it by saying that the fee is paid out of BBC funds, and says he would do it for free and has never asked for a fee.
Fine - so what's wrong with donating his fee to Children In Need - which he manages not to do.
Scandalous.
Sobathons make me very uncomfortable, and I don'e enjoy seeing 'celebrities' doing odd things for charideee.
Is that dreadful Wogan man still fronting it?
I still find it abominable that he remains the only BBC employee to be paid for his appearence.
He jusitifes it by saying that the fee is paid out of BBC funds, and says he would do it for free and has never asked for a fee.
Fine - so what's wrong with donating his fee to Children In Need - which he manages not to do.
Scandalous.
Seems like doesn't, even if he did in the distant past.
http://
http://
Ric.roar - "Fine - so what's wrong with donating his fee to Children In Need - which he manages not to do.
How do you know he doesn't?"
Extract from Wogan's Wikkipeida entry -
'He is reported to be the only celebrity paid for his participation in Children in Need, having received a fee every year since 1980 (£9,065 in 2005). Wogan, however, has stated that he would "quite happily do it for nothing" and that he "never asked for a fee". The BBC stated that the fee had "never been negotiated". Wogan's fee has been paid from BBC resources and not from the Children in Need charity fund.[20] There is no record, however, of Wogan ever having repaid his fee from previous years'
I believe he may present the show now without a fee, but as advised, he has never paid his previous fees back, or donated them.
What gets my goat is working out who is more sancitmonious - the BBC for paying him in the first place, and then defending that payment by saying it doesn't come out of CIN donations, or Wogan, saying he'd 'do it for nothing', and has 'never negotiated a fee' but was quite happy to trouser eight grand for an evening's work for several years, without thinking it might be nice to pop it in the pot he is busy urging people with far less money than him to contribute to.
The man is a disgrace.
How do you know he doesn't?"
Extract from Wogan's Wikkipeida entry -
'He is reported to be the only celebrity paid for his participation in Children in Need, having received a fee every year since 1980 (£9,065 in 2005). Wogan, however, has stated that he would "quite happily do it for nothing" and that he "never asked for a fee". The BBC stated that the fee had "never been negotiated". Wogan's fee has been paid from BBC resources and not from the Children in Need charity fund.[20] There is no record, however, of Wogan ever having repaid his fee from previous years'
I believe he may present the show now without a fee, but as advised, he has never paid his previous fees back, or donated them.
What gets my goat is working out who is more sancitmonious - the BBC for paying him in the first place, and then defending that payment by saying it doesn't come out of CIN donations, or Wogan, saying he'd 'do it for nothing', and has 'never negotiated a fee' but was quite happy to trouser eight grand for an evening's work for several years, without thinking it might be nice to pop it in the pot he is busy urging people with far less money than him to contribute to.
The man is a disgrace.
-- answer removed --
From the Daily mail in 2007 - "Terry Wogan has waived his Children In Need fee after being slated for being the only presenter to be paid for the charity BBC show.
he broadcasting legend is already thought to earn £800,000 a year for his Wake Up To Wogan breakfast show on Radio 2 and is thought to collect a further £10,000 for the one-night show.
Last year he received £10,340 for anchoring the annual appeal, up from the £9,065 he made from the 2005 programme.
Sir Terry said at the time his payment came to light that he had "never asked for a fee and would quite happily do it for nothing".
The veteran presenter, who has in the past accused his employer of wasting money on overpaid presenters, had been receiving a fee since 1980".
The gall of the man - he talks as though he has just discovered that this money dropped out of the sky into his bank account, and he knew nothing at all about it.
He didn;t even have the decency to refund all those years of fees, but made out it was out of his own generosity that he was 'waiving' his fee, when all that did was bring him into line with all the other BBC presenters, who were not paid anyway.
he broadcasting legend is already thought to earn £800,000 a year for his Wake Up To Wogan breakfast show on Radio 2 and is thought to collect a further £10,000 for the one-night show.
Last year he received £10,340 for anchoring the annual appeal, up from the £9,065 he made from the 2005 programme.
Sir Terry said at the time his payment came to light that he had "never asked for a fee and would quite happily do it for nothing".
The veteran presenter, who has in the past accused his employer of wasting money on overpaid presenters, had been receiving a fee since 1980".
The gall of the man - he talks as though he has just discovered that this money dropped out of the sky into his bank account, and he knew nothing at all about it.
He didn;t even have the decency to refund all those years of fees, but made out it was out of his own generosity that he was 'waiving' his fee, when all that did was bring him into line with all the other BBC presenters, who were not paid anyway.
-- answer removed --
roopower - "I' ll be watching some of it - goes on way past my bedtime. Sorry folks, but I enjoy parts of it."
No problem there roo - i think you are in the national majority there.
My issue is with chartiy shows generally, I don't like them - CIN which I specifically don't like because it goes on for so long, and Wogan, who, as you may have gained a hint from my previous posts, I do not have a lot of time for.
No problem there roo - i think you are in the national majority there.
My issue is with chartiy shows generally, I don't like them - CIN which I specifically don't like because it goes on for so long, and Wogan, who, as you may have gained a hint from my previous posts, I do not have a lot of time for.
have a go at Terry taking wages if you like Andy but at least that's up front, Most of the money they collect gets skimmed off by middle men down the line anyway, very little gets near "children in need". Still chief mumbo jumbo of the fekawi tribe gets another roller for his collection". No weecalf I won't be watching, total boreathon in my view.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank52 mins ago
Animals & Nature68 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles68 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles123 mins ago
