The BBC Seems To Hate White People…

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The corporation that lectures Britain about “fair” pay has published its own wage numbers.

In six of its seven career bands, white staff took home a lower median wage than black, Asian, mixed and other ethnic minority colleagues.

The figures come from the BBC’s own 2025/26 pay-gap tables. Black, Asian, mixed and other ethnic minority employees received 13.2 per cent higher median pay than white workers in the lowest band, and 5.3 per cent more in the senior-leader band. White median pay was higher in just one of seven scales.

‘If this was the other way around you’d have to call this racist discrimination.’

@PatrickChristys is shocked as figures reveal white BBC employees are paid less on average than their minority colleagues. https://t.co/uIHesgPCyq

— GB News (@GBNEWS) October 7, 2026

The corporation’s report is blunt about what a negative gap means. It states that a negative figure shows the minority average is higher than the majority average, and that “the average pay for our Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff is higher than or close to the average for white staff at all Bands.”

Across the whole workforce the BBC can still point to a 0.7 per cent median ethnicity gap in favour of white staff, and a 7.6 per cent gap in favour of men. That headline exists because white employees still hold a larger share of the best-paid jobs, which pulls the aggregate up.

The corporation itself says the proportion of ethnic minority staff in higher-paying roles rose last year, producing what it called the largest year-on-year movement in the figures.

The overall median ethnicity gap has already fallen from 1.8 per cent to 0.7 per cent. Eighteen per cent of staff covered by the report are black, Asian or from another minority ethnic group.

The same tables show the pattern is not confined to race. Women in senior leadership were paid 1.4 per cent more than senior men. Disabled managers were paid 7.5 per cent more than non-disabled colleagues. The highest-paid LGBTQ+ employees earned 8.8 per cent more than “non LGBTQ+” colleagues.

At the top of the publicly funded broadcaster, several of the characteristics the diversity bureaucracy treats as disadvantaged are the ones drawing the higher median.

On GB News, Patrick Christys put the double standard in one line. “If this was the other way around you would have to call this racist discrimination, wouldn’t you?”

He then asked whether ethnic minority staff at the BBC would “stand in solidarity with their white colleagues and demand higher pay for them.”

A guest on the same segment said that if the story were reversed and had appeared in The Guardian, “there would be outrage, there’d be strikes,” and that the corporation could “get away with it because it’s our money.”

The BBC’s stated line is that pay is “fair, clear and competitive.” A spokesman stated: “The BBC is committed to fair and equal pay for all. We continue to monitor our pay gaps closely and do expect to see small fluctuations year-on-year.”

A 13.2 per cent median gap in the lowest band is not a fluctuation. Nor is a reverse gap in six bands out of seven. The corporation also runs mentoring and career schemes aimed at black, Asian and minority ethnic staff, inside a “Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging” strategy: 50 per cent women, 20 per cent ethnic minority, 14 per cent deaf, disabled or neurodivergent, 25 per cent from working-class backgrounds.

It insists these are goals, not quotas, and that they have no bearing on pay.

Sir John Whittingdale, the former culture secretary who drew up the BBC’s last charter in 2016, told The Telegraph the BBC “ought to be paying staff entirely on the basis of the value and merit they contribute for the job they are doing.”

He added: “The BBC quite rightly put this discrepancy right, but I would expect the same principle of fair pay to apply to all characteristics, be it race, sexuality, or indeed gender.”

He was referring to the earlier gender gap at the top, which the corporation moved to close. The same principle has not been applied with anything like the same urgency here.

None of this arrived in a vacuum. In January 2024 internal recruitment guidance told BBC staff not to hire candidates who were “dismissive or derisory of diversity and inclusion.” Applicants were to be asked what diversity meant to them and how they would promote it.

A BBC source said the place “currently feels captured by Left-wing activists and is unable to deliver on our core principle of impartiality.”

Former BBC journalist Robin Aitken put it plainly: “These guidelines illustrate just how embedded DEI ideology is in the BBC. The rules act as a mechanism to maintain groupthink and screen out anyone who is sceptical of this novel doctrine of diversity and inclusion.”

Days later, a senior BBC Three scheduling coordinator, Dawn Queva, was reported to have described white people on Facebook as a “barbaric bloodthirsty rapacious murderous genocidal thieving parasitical deviant breed” and “a virus, barbaric & bloodthirsty.”

The posts also included anti-Jewish material, including “Nazi parasites” and “holohoax.” The corporation that screens applicants for insufficient enthusiasm about diversity had a scheduler on the books whose published views about white people read like a tract.

The same instinct runs through the output licence-fee payers are compelled to fund. Last month the BBC pulled an entire episode of the CBBC series Horrible Histories from iPlayer, plus at least seven other sketches, because the episode dealt with slavery, Victorian child labour, chimney sweeps, poverty, disease and the First World War.

Further cuts removed scenes in which white cast members wore darkened makeup to play ancient Egyptians or Incas. Uncut versions remain on Amazon Prime. Historian Guy Walters called it “an insane decision” and said: “The BBC has absolutely no idea what children like. Children love horrible things. The entire career of Roald Dahl is based on that.”

The BBC said the edits were made seven years ago, with the programme makers, “to ensure the series meets our editorial guidelines for children’s programmes.” It would not say which guidelines.

A week earlier it had removed 11 sketches from the 2006 series That Mitchell and Webb Look, including pieces that satirised racist thinking rather than endorsing it. A spokesman said: “This is a 20-year-old sketch show; in consultation with the programme makers, we have included the ones that still work today and not the ones that don’t.”

Comedian Geoff Norcott called it “retrospective moral pruning,” adding that the sketches “were literally satirising the thought processes behind racism.” Dom Joly called it “classic BBC overkill” and “hysterical censorship.” A separate review this year found audiences already felt diversity was being “shoe-horned” into programming.

Hiring filters. Pay tables that run against white staff in almost every band. An archive quietly trimmed of anything they deem no longer “works”. And while compelling people to pay for it, the BBC claims it is free from institutional bias.