Radio 4's Today programme could do just as well without highly-paid presenter John Humphrys says co-star Justin Webb

  • Justin Webb wrote the Today programme might thrive without John Humphrys
  • The Radio 4 man used fired US anchors as examples, as ratings were boosted
  • Webb said highly-paid, big-name presenters for programmes aren't needed
  • Webb joked that his script once read: 'Good morning and welcome to Today. With John Humphrys and John Humphrys'

Presenter Justin Webb has suggested that Radio 4's Today programme could thrive without his highly-paid co-star John Humphrys.

Webb said that the programme could do just as well without Humphrys' presence, he wrote in a column for the Radio Times.

Humphrys has been the star of the programme since 1987, and rakes in an annual salary between £600,000 and £649,999.

Webb mused that the idea of 'the public [wanting] a star to tell them things' may no exist, and could see highly-paid presenters being cleared out.

Presenter Justin Webb suggested that Radio 4's Today programme could do just as well without his highly-paid co-star John Humphrys (pictured)

Presenter Justin Webb suggested that Radio 4's Today programme could do just as well without his highly-paid co-star John Humphrys (pictured)

Webb, who makes between £150,000 to £199,990, poked fun at his colleague Humphrys, writing that even though he himself is a veteran on the show, he is outshone by the 74-year-old.

Proving his point, Webb said he once was given a script that read: 'Good morning and welcome to Today. With John Humphrys and John Humphrys.' 

Webb wrote: 'Oh yes, I know all about being airbrushed. About the power of the big beast anchor. Who sucks up all the attention. And the money.' 

But Webb's concern is that the previous notion of shows needing top brass presenters, who come with a high price tag, is outdated. 

Instead lesser-known figures, with smaller paychecks, can carry the shows just as well, he claims. 

Humphrys was embroiled in the BBC gender pay row over comments made about the corporation’s former China editor Carrie Gracie earlier this year. 

He was recorded in an off-air conversation with John Sopel, when he asked his fellow journalist how much salary he was willing to 'hand over' to Ms Gracie.

Webb (pictured) mused in his column for the Radio Times that the idea of 'the public [wanting] a star to tell them things' may no longer be the case, and could usher in a new future for programmes

Webb (pictured) mused in his column for the Radio Times that the idea of 'the public [wanting] a star to tell them things' may no longer be the case, and could usher in a new future for programmes

Humphrys told Sopel he himself had 'handed over already more than you f***ing earn'. 

Humphrys admitted in February that he apologised to Ms Gracie, saying: 'I did as a matter of fact, and she replied.' 

The publicly-funded BBC has been plunged into crisis in recent months after the sheer scale of the gender pay gap was exposed.

Ms Gracie quit as BBC China editor after she found out she was earning far less than her male counterparts.

She said the BBC was facing a 'crisis of trust', after it was revealed two-thirds of its stars earning more than £150,000 were male. 

In his column, Webb used fired American TV anchors Matt Lauer, Bill O'Reilly and Charlie Rose as examples for his theory. 

The millionaire heavyweights were sacked over allegations of sexual misconduct, but ratings for their respective shows not only held steady but flourished in their absence.

Humphrys was embroiled in the BBC gender pay row over comments made about the corporation¿s former China editor Carrie Gracie earlier this year

Humphrys was embroiled in the BBC gender pay row over comments made about the corporation’s former China editor Carrie Gracie earlier this year

Using US programme ratings with sacked hosts as examples, Webb wrote that has 'implications that go far further than the simpering, jollified world of American breakfast TV.'

Webb added: 'We have lazily assumed that although everything else about the modern media landscape has changed, there is something oddly immutable about the network anchor. 

'And so to us. Yes Huw, yes John: us.  

'And a serious point. British TV anchors are not like their US counterparts: they are paid a lot but not nearly as much and, crucially, they are not the bosses of their own programmes.

'But you still have to wonder. For all of us who call ourselves ''presenters'', what does the future hold?'