The Fallacy Of The Gender Pay Gap
It's a huge margin ...
POSTED BY JACQUI FROST ON 31/08/2017 @ 8:00AM
I was shocked to read the Forbes' Hollywood's Top Earners article the other day. The highest paid actor in 2017 is Mark Wahlberg with $68 million. And what about the A-list actresses? Well, that's where the gender pay gap becomes apparent ...
Dispite Emma Stone winning an Oscar for La La Land, the gender pay gap is still apparent!
The earnings of the top 10 actors were around $488 million over the past 12 months whereas, for the top 10 actresses, it was just $172 million. While only three actresses made more than the $20 million in 12 months, 16 actors broached the mark.
"That's absolutely appaling!"
It's something that is institutionalised around the world in almost every walk of life and, although we've always known it goes on, we didn't know to what extent and we never really talked about it.
Thanks to the BBC being forced to release a list of all the top earner's salaries a while back, the conversation has come into the mainstream and it's causing heated arguments in every home and office (and film/tv studio) around the world.
I won't comment on whether the top earners of film and TV are worth it, as obviously, your tastes are your own. But a point that is worth making is that the highest-paid actress in 2017 is Emma Stone and she earned $26 million. This means that she earned 40% of the amount paid to the highest-paid actor.
If you think it's simply about experience then, according to IMDB, Mark Wahlberg has 55 acting credits and Emma Stone has 41. That's not a 40% difference, so why is the salary so?
So it must be about the earning potential of the films that both Mark and Emma appear in? Well, no, not really. The last film Mark was in was Transformers and it returned 180% on its production budget. Emma's last film, La La Land not only returned 1,380% of its production costs and gained Emma an Oscar.
After subtracting production budgets, La La Land made around $28 million more than Mark Wahlberg's last movie did worldwide. Maybe they should have given that $28 million to Emma Stone?
Then she'd only be fourth on Hollywood's Top Earners list.
Until next time ...
If you want to read the Forbes Hollywood's Top Earners article for yourself then do click here to be as shocked as I was.
Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a005e'
Invalid use of Null: 'replace'
/V1/Func_Signature.asp, line 81