Saturday, October 23, 2010

Daily Mail: Why Are We Giving Rooney So Much Money?

The Daily Mail are expressing their horror at the wage deal being offered by Manchester United to Wayne Rooney. In an article entitled, "A Victory for Greed", they lament:

Rooney, who will celebrate his 25th birthday tomorrow with a party at his £4.5million home, apologised to fans for the ugly spat with Sir Alex, but made no excuses for his £200,000-a-week salary - double his previous pay.

The agent who negotiated it, Paul Stretford, will himself receive up to £10million for a deal finalised as child benefit was axed for many families and the coalition announced that 500,000 public-sector jobs would go.
I've never heard the Daily Mail express shock at banker's exorbitant wages, or at their bonuses. Indeed, usually we could be accused of starting a class war for even bringing such things to people's attention.

Why is it that this working class man receiving such recompense disgusts them to such a degree?

Don't get me wrong, I have always thought that Rooney was motivated by greed and that the excuses he gave - concern that his club lacked ambition etc. - were merely pathetic attempts to pretend that he had some high moral purpose instead of an overwhelming desire for even more cash than he already has.

But The Daily Mail - of all newspapers - could normally be expected to applaud someone demanding that they receive the market value for their services.

I honestly can't help but think that they are appalled that someone of his class is receiving that kind of recompense. They find it rather vulgar when that kind of money is paid out to someone they find common.

It's okay to lash out millions a year to city gents, indeed, it's "common sense" as they would otherwise flee our shores and deprive us of their business acumen. (The same acumen which led to the financial collapse which has crippled our economy.)

But giving such funds to a young working class lad simply appals them. They can see greed when it is being practised by Rooney, but they applaud that same greed when it is practised by people in the City of London.

It's such snobbery.

Click here for Mail article.


daveawayfromhome said...

Sounds like typical support by the conservative press in favor of the owner-class over the workers. In this case, the worker gets an outrageous sum of money, but it still applies.

I also have no doubt that if they could replace football players with machines, they would do so in a heartbeat.

Kel said...

It's true Dave. I personally have no objection to footballers being highly paid as they are the workers who generate the enormous wealth which clubs like Manchester United enjoy. That money is either going to go to the owners or the shareholders, so I think it is only fair that a large share of that wealth should go to the workers who generate it.

The Daily Mail finds this repulsive because it goes to young working class males who spend it in ways they find gauche; fast cars, expensive watches, gigantic houses etc.

The bankers are more discreet, and, in The Daily Mail's mind, that makes them more deserving.

As I say, it's simply the worst kind of snobbery. And it's the proof that, for all their talk of an aspirational society, some people should, in their view, know their place.