What Lisa Wilkinson’s departure means for junior women in media
As Lisa Wilkinson steps down from her role on The Today Show over an alleged pay dispute, Bold Media’s Emilie Sharp considers what it all means for the industry’s junior females.
Lisa Wilkinson’s departure from The Today Show has sent a tremor through the nation. Both her co-hosts and viewers were shocked to see her depart so abruptly, and the alleged reason why is nothing short of jaw dropping.
It’s hard enough being a small fry in the ‘man’s world’ that is media, but this puts it in a whole new light.
Wilkinson with Today co-host Karl Stefanovic
Nine has stormed the ratings this year with The Block and Ninja Warrior, along with recently announcing they’re bringing Love Island Down Under, so it’s safe to say they’re not short of a bob of two. This begs the question: why is one of Australia’s leading journalists at one of Australia’s leading networks still fighting for equal pay?
Thanks for the great read Emilie. As you said, if Lisa was editor of a magazine at 21 and still has to put up with this nonsense, what chance do the rest of us have.
“…but surely we’re not this backwards”
Hate to break it to you but as a Canadian living in Melbourne for 3 years in the ad industry, you are more behind than I thought too. It’s one of the reasons I left the country to move back home. The sexism, even in ads was surprising. Ads that would never go to Air in Canada, almost to easily are shown here. Think of the Footy Show and the crap that has been said in recent years about women, and in front of them. Only in 2017 they brought on a female panelist. Why is domestic violence SUCH a huge problem in such a developed country?! I won’t touch on gay marriage as you already did. Australian women need to take a step back and be critical of how they are treated at work – if you’ve only ever known something, you probably don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.
Good article and I hope more and more women will be inspired to challenge those who don’t give them a fair go because of their gender!
“While I’m not privy to her contract with Nine or Stefanovic’s JD, the situation in general paints a bleak outlook for juniors entering the industry”
If you are not privy to her contract, how can you come to that conclusion other than speculating? From what we know it’s a fair guess that it’s about equal pay but
your whole angle here is at best speculative until Lisa releases a statement saying it spefically.
It has a lot to do with greed. Neither hosts is worth the money. It could also be that the agent of Ms. Wilkinson didn’t actually help; agents don’t always assist.
There’s always the possibility that Ms. Wilkinson was “over” Channel Nine, and Ten provided a conscious (or sub-conscious) escape. It’s actually only television…….
You don’t know what Lisa’s contract says. You don’t know what Carl’s contract says. You don’t know what the negotiations or disagreements were about.
You know NOTHING.
Yet that dos not stop you from ASSUMING, based on your extremely limited knowledge about the world, that it’s about equal pay, just so that you too can get your 15 minutes of virtue signaling.
“We still have a long way to go”. Haven’t heard that one before.
Why, cause Ch 9 didn’t meet her demands? Think this never happened to a white man? Could it be she simply demanded too much? That they couldn’t compete with the $2m paycheck she was offered at Channel Ten? Could it be she now makes more than Stefanovic?
Not only does your baseless accusations reveal your ideological blindness and pathetic narcissism; it demeans and infantilises Lisa Wilkinson herself. In what was most likely a tough and complex negotiation between two equal parties, you portray her as a victim and a loser. A powerful and independent woman rejects an offer that 99% of Australian men would find pretty damn generous, yet you, Ms. Knows-absolutely-nothing have the arrogance to rob her of her agency and autonomy and achievements and reduce her to a child, at the mercy of the mean white men, helplessly begging for more.
Well, at least you know a little bit more now. You’re welcome!
Well said.
You can play the devil’s advocate and disagree with her perspective, without having to belittle her.
It was only recently that Channel 9 came out and said there is more to the contract negotiations than was reported in the media on Monday. Originally it was reported that the likely story was that she left because Ch 9 wouldn’t pay her the same amount as her male co-host. If that is true (and it’s likely we will never really know if it is), you can understand how that might be disheartening for a young female just starting out in the industry.
Hi, ‘A Devil’s Advocate’
I’d say that online abuse of a young woman trying to share a point of view might be a great deal worse than making assumptions based on news coverage?
Ms Sharp was only voicing her opinion (see the header on this section)
I’d be very surprised if history turned out to be on your side when it comes to personal attacks on those who feel they might not be on the side of the powerful few.
@The Devil’s Advocate
I hope you read this. Or if not you, then any other keyboard warriors who like to belittle people.
Who do you think you are? What gives you the right to make someone feel bad about themselves?
You’ve taken the time out of your pathetic little life to abuse the author of this article. And to what end? Does it give meaning to your sad existence?
Are us mere mortals now expected to praise your incredible intellect and conform with your “ideologies”?
You are in fact a coward.
You’re welcome!
Mumbrella should have pulled this original comment down. This should not be a forum for online bullying
You’re revolting
“a situation such as this doesn’t do much to inspire the future generation of media folk.”
A situation whereby a woman turns down a (reported) offer of $1.8m? What a shocking state of affairs. How is a 21 year old to drag herself out of bed with such bleak prospects awaiting her.
Wake up to yourself. This is why it’s hard to take millennials seriously.
While I don’t agree fully with the above two comments, the notion that this article is pure speculation and absolutely nothing else is correct. Why is equal pay being talked about when the author, the general public and anybody other than Nine and Wilkinson’s parties had anything to do with it?
Doesn’t karl have like 3 extra shows that he is part of?
So they aren’t doing the same job.
stay strong, Lisa. You have a right to run your career how you please. Don’t apologise, don’t explain.
Here’s the thing – I am a huge fan of Lisa and have been for years. But the fact here is they ARE NOT DOING THE SAME JOB.
Aside from Today, Karl also hosts that awful Same Time Next Year and files reports for 60 Minutes.
So with that extra workload, isn’t it just commonsense that he gets paid more than Lisa whose sole gig is Today and the Xmas Carols? He’s doing more work.
So before this gets drowned in the ‘sexist and ‘unfair’ discussions going on, can we please look at the facts of this story and get the debate right.
Good on you, Emilie. You say that you’re not in a position to change things, but I would argue that you’ve given voice to an issue that young women are facing across the country, and I will be forever grateful for that. Equality has a long way to go in Australia, but in the media industry young females are more often than not subjected to inequality. Equal pay, equal opportunity and let’s not forget the sexual harassment which is so prevalent in Australian Media towards young women.
We’re not privy to the inner workings of the deal, but the argument is still a valid one at that.
There was a lot of nonsense written first up. As one of similar vintage to Lisa – and who regularly rose, in my 30s, at 3am for the ABC – I’d reckon she was maybe just tired of those brutal early starts and demanded a salary level she decided was necessary for her to continue “dragging herself out of bed [early, daily]” for another year.
Nice spin on the situation concocted though.
How about, as a junior woman in media who wants to be taken seriously, you do some research on your topic before jumping to conclusions and writing a self-serving puff piece of editorial…
Commenting on the pay specifics, Marks added:
“I went to an incredible amount of trouble to build a $1.8 million package for her. She wanted $2.3 million. It wasn’t a $200,000 shortfall to Karl’s $2 million magic number. It was $500,000.”
“She has a number of commercial rights with other parties. Her arrangement with The Huffington Post restricts our ability to engage with her digitally… we are restricted from engaging with her also on social media,”
“… a tremor through the nation……nothing short of jaw dropping.”
“….we still have a long way to go. And that’s terrifying.”
What a wonderfully sheltered life, perhaps a role as a sub on the Tele beckons.
Anyone who has read a WGEA report from the media players cannot reasonably dispute there is a diversity issue – unless ignoring facts is your thing. Many of the big players don’t even have diversity policies.
No one knows but Lisa, Nine and their teams what really occurred and really that has become secondary…
This incident has given diversity advocates and in particular women an opportunity (and courage) to speak up about discrimination and concerns about the industry we work in.
As an industry and country we have a diversity problem. Fewer women run top Australian companies than men named John, or Peter, or David (google it!).
To me this article was about a young women expressing concerns and opening a dialogue about diversity, equality and the challenges for young females in the industry.
The people with negative comments here seem to want to shut that conversation down.
When i see comments such as @The Devil’s Advocate “You know NOTHING” I am reminded of the phrase: “when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression”… after all if the author doesn’t know all the facts on the topic that initiated the conversation how dare she express an opinion on a related topic!
Finally! A rational and measured comment. Only took five minutes to scroll through to it ?♂️
Hmmm. I wonder who would know the contractual details.
Let’s see. Ahh, Hugh Marks would.
Now go and have a read of what Hugh has said. I’ve gone from horrified to ‘well that makes sense’.
That’s not to say that the media – and TV in particular – is not rampantly sexist, because it is. But this story seems to have much more to it than pay equality.
A well-written article coming from a young woman trying to make it in a male-dominated industry.
All of the males commenting on here about not knowing the specifics of Lisa’s contract, that is besides the point. The point being made in this article is that women should have pay equality.
Do we agree? Or should we shut down that conversation by belittling the author?
Well done Emilie, keep up the good work.
Hey Max, please let me know where you base your claim that media is a ‘male-dominated’ industry? As someone (50-something male) who has worked in media for 32 years – across newspapers, mags, TV, online and radio – 90% of my bosses have been women. Most brilliant, some not. So want to try that ‘male dominated’ line again?
Hi Who Dominates,
Google. I base my claim on Google. And on the Australian government’s Workplace Gender Equality Agency which gives media a 62.4% male composition.
I don’t base it on one person’s experience.
You must be one of those males who don’t agree in pay equality?
Max
How on earth do you jump to the conclusion that this person is against pay equality? And one you say “one of these males”, who else is actually against pay equality?
It’s a completely dishonest way of tarnishing your opponent and does nothing but making you look like a complete and utter fool.
You obviously think your ability to use Google means the debate has been settled (“Google. I based my claim Google”), but personally, I don’t even trust you to get a stat right.
Well does it really matter. Lisa had a choice and she made a decision. I am confident the Nine Network did all they could to keep her. That said it’s proberly not going to get too much interest either way given the large amounts of money being portrayed. It’s out of most people’s imagination. I do agree in equal pay for the same job. But the two jobs weren’t equal.
Shock, horror, surprise. All you come back with is how mean I am and how well-meaning she is. You’re like a bunch of helpless children.
Equal pay exists in Australia. It’s in the law! If it didn’t, how come there hasn’t been a single (to my knowledge, but please enlighten me) court-case about this over the last few years? Despite the enormous amount of attention on this. And I think I’m safe in assuming that with mass-media pushing the unequal pay narrative, they’d jump on, and make high profile, ANY case that came up.
@anon
You mean the way I, as a white male, is being belittled virtually every time I open my mouth in this forum? Did you come to my rescue then? Or should we treat people differently based on their gender and skin colour?
It doesn’t matter what the facts turn out to be. The only thing that matters is what was known at the time of writing. And that goes for both white men and young women.
Was I belittling her? I don’t know. It’s a fine line. I was certainly not abusing her, as some predictably calls it (“words are violence”, eh?)
Ironically, she is the one belittling Lisa Wilkinson with her condescending, self-serving article on the front page of a decreasingly reputable online publication, so I figure she should be able to get as good as she gives. Or are we playing the different-standards-game again?
And, hilariously ironically, you are all belittling her:
She promotes a discriminatory worldview. She makes serious accusations based on zero facts, and she does it all to further her own career. Rather than judging her article on its own merits, treating her like the journalist she purports to be, you let her off because she’s young and female and means well.
Now THAT’S belittling. So why don’t one of you respond to that accusation.
@notjohnpeterordavid
You say “To me this article was about…”. Well, to those of us who can read that’s actually not what it was about. To me your comment is about signaling your utter stupidity.
@Max
Everyone’s for equal pay, Max, it’s just that the grownups have moved on.
@Jesus
You big softie. Is making someone feel bad about themselves such a big deal? Toughen up big fella.
For all of y’all’s information: the above post is by The Devil’s Advocate himself.
“She promotes a discriminatory worldview. She makes serious accusations based on zero facts, and she does it all to further her own career.”
Sounds like an ASSUMPTION to me. Shock horror.
As mentioned above, even if you did have valid points, abusing and belittling someone for writing an article that ultimately is trying to make peoples’ lives better and comes from a good place is more of an indication on your life than anyone else’s. There definitely is a more constructive way to criticise someones arguments than ad hominem attacks like the ones strewn through your posts.
Of course you won’t care what anyone says – arguing with stubborn privileged folk is like banging your head into a brick wall, as they completely lack any perspective or desire to see what life might be like in someone else’s shoes.
Just know that the tide is turning, people like you will soon be the vast minority.
Equal pay is in the law? Clearly you don’t work in media if you’re saying this. Overtime, subsidised meals if you work overtime, and days in lieu are all set out in award agreements. However, it’s incredibly rare to be granted these things. And if you do get given them – where do you work because I want to work there.
Could now be a good time to remind ourselves what serious journalism really looks like and what reporting the news that really makes a difference actually does cost in human terms? Sad and troubling to read yet another tragic story of a journalist apparently murdered in the line of duty. “Malta car bomb kills Panama Papers journalist” was reported in The Guardian a few days ago.
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/16/malta-car-bomb-kills-panama-papers-journalist
When you include Lisa’s external deals, which Karl doesn’t have, it sounds like they earn about the same.
Both earn crazy amounts of money for what they do – we should all question why this is so.
So the focus here is totally in the wrong area – this is not about equality; more about egos and personal greed.
I am enjoying how people are falling into line with what Hugh Marks said as if he doesn’t have an agenda to present his side of the story in the best possible light. He may well be 100% truthful in the content of what he says. But the implication is that the reason Lisa was doing HuffPo and other commercial arrangements was because she wasn’t getting them out of Nine, as Karl obviously is. Karl asks for a prime time show so he gets one. Where was Lisa’s? This is where the disparity lies. She clearly wanted more opportunity but was having to look elsewhere to get it.
However, Emelie, rather than be distressed I think you should take heart.
I think women of your age are in a much better position to influence your future. The majority of twenty-somethings in this business are better educated, have a better grip on issues like gender equality and diversity and know their rights and how to ensure they are delivered. The next generation of media execs will not be able to hide behind the male dominated networks they’ve created on the golf course to the exclusion of most women because the jig is up. The next generation is going to have far more diversity in decision-making roles and the role of women who gain from the hard yards others have put in before them will be to ensure the ladder remains in place for other groups who are seeking representation in leadership.
Godwin’s law says: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1”
I hereby propose Ricki’s law: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of somebody mentioning the ‘male network conspiring on the golf course’ approaches 1”
You’re welcome Ricky. You now have a law named after you.
Meanwhile, you should read my previous posts, you might learn something.
That’s two you owe me.
Totally agree with this. Regardless of the particulars of this one example, this is part of a much wider issue which you are right to take a stand on. As usual though, trolls will be trolls…
That’s the answer to everything, isn’t it? There’s a much broader issue, we’ve got a long way to go, bla bla bla.
No. Talk about specifics. The problem is you can’t. There aren’t any specific cases about unequal pay to talk about. So you have to conjure up ones like this.
You’ve won. We have equal pay in Australia. We should all celebrate this and you should stop whining.
I don’t agree with pay parity in entertainment. Karl is a better entertainer. The Logies that he’s won and been nominated for prove that. Lisa is a brilliant journalist, much better than Karl, but breakfast TV is about entertainment and not journalism. If it was sport, should the ball boy get paid as much as the tennis pro? NO! Pay parity should be reserved for jobs that we can make direct comparisons with. Managers doing the same job at the same company. Teachers/Nurses/Servers/Administrators/etc doing the same job at the same company should be paid the same. But not entertainers. Get funnier Lisa and you will earn the right to earn more. Oprah & Ellen are fine examples of brilliant entertainers that broke the mould. The glass ceiling has been broken, get over your ego. Your salary was probably more than $1m per year. Pass me the tissues.
Don’t listen to the trolls Emilie. You make a good case and make it well. Keep writing, keep fighting.
Whilst there are many injustices in the gender remuneration arena – this is not one of them.
Truth can be found here :
http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-.....018-gz3m3q
I haven’t seen any breakfast TV but I did see Lisa Wilkinson on Channel 9’s excellent Federal Election coverage in July last year. It seemed to me that Ms Wilkinson didn’t make much of a contribution to that program.
All things aside, I’ve never been a fan of Lisa, or Karl for that matter. The one show I do watch on 10 will be off my agenda come December, it’ll just ruin what is currently a bright spot in commercial free to air television in this country and I suggest I’m one of more than many in it’s current demographic.
Dear Emily,
Not everyone who disagrees with you are trolls.
Listen to arguments from both sides, then critically reassess your initial position, and be open to change your opinion. If you don’t, that’s perfectly fine.
The problem with all those who support you unconditionally, just because you’re young and female, is they were never open to change their minds in the first place. They’re ideologically blinded and argue based on emotions and pride. They’ve simply invested too much of their identity in their position, and now they’re stuck. It’s not too late for you.
You may not agree with me, but at least I’ve changed my mind several times over the years, and as far as I’m concerned that’s not a weakness, but a strength. After all, the facts keep changing constantly as we learn and gather information about the world.
I wish you all the best with your future endeavours!
I’ve read this developing thread over the last few days and it has progressively annoyed me. Before I start, I’ll make it clear that I use Bold PR – where Emilie works. But that is beside the point to what I want to say. And I’d like to say this.
1. There is no need to attack Emilie so personally – that is trolling and it’s both nasty and unnecessary.
2. Use your real name if you are going to have a go – don’t hide behind anonymous names. And don’t play the ‘devil’s advocate’ if you so obviously sit on one side.
3. Recognise that Emilie has the right to express her opinion – an opinion backed up by government statistics. There is a gender pay gap in this country and globally. This is not a personal fantasy – it’s a fact. https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/gender-pay-gap-statistics.pdf
4. The Lisa story might not have been the truest example – but that was the twist when this story broke. It might not be the only reason; nor is Emilie putting Lisa up as a champion of gender politics – but it was a good angle to write a piece.
5. Recognise also that we live in a male-dominated world – and that includes our industry. Percentages matter little – it’s who has the power that matters. Look at this thread!
6. And whilst we have an imbalance between the power of employers and employees; employees will lose out. We live in an age where it’s difficult to raise your hand and voice against inequality because people don’t have stable contracts, strong workplace laws, affordable housing – all things that matter hugely and are at risk if you ‘rock the boat’.
7. So yes, pay equality is one piece of a bigger agenda – and not one that most men responding on this thread (where they have been brave enough to share a name of course) will have at the forefront of their minds.
Keep writing Emilie; keep expressing your opinions and thoughts. Don’t be put off by the bullies.