BBC searches for 50-plus female newsreader

By Anita Singh, Showbusiness Editor 

5:57PM BST 24 Sep 2009

The BBC is at the centre of a fresh ageism row after announcing plans to hire a female newsreader aged 50-plus, only to be warned it would be breaching employment law.

Mark Thompson, the BBC director general, has asked news bosses to contact talent agents who have older women on their books. The recruitment drive follows the public backlash against the sacking of Arlene Phillips, the Strictly Come Dancing judge.

The BBC was heavily criticised for dispensing with female newsreaders Anna Ford, 65, and Moira Stuart, 60.


Moira Stuart was dropped by the BBC in 2007 

Ford left in 2006, saying that she feared "being shovelled off to a graveyard shift" if she remained.


Stuart was dropped in 2007 and Thompson was forced to defend the decision, saying it had nothing to do with ageism and arguing that the traditional newsreader role was dying out.


Dame Joan Bakewell, the broadcaster and government advisor on age issues, met with Thompson recently and said she was "really gratified" by the BBC's decision.


"I said there was a conspicuous absence of older women - of all the segments in society - that isn't seen. We get lots of jowly, white-haired men - that's no inhibitor of employment for them - but [age] seems to have been an eliminator for women until now."

However, employment lawyers said the new policy flouted age and sex discrimination laws. Jill Andrew of Dawsons LLP said: "The BBC seems to have got itself in a real pickle over this. Employers cannot specify that they are looking for someone of a particular gender or age. A young, up-and-coming male newsreader could have every right to feel aggrieved.

"Age discrimination applies to younger people being treated less favourably than older people, just as it does the other way around.

"The BBC is trying to redress an imbalance but you cannot correct an injustice by creating another injustice. It seems like a blatant attempt by the BBC to close the stable door after the horse has bolted.

"There is no compensation ceiling for discrimination cases. Should the BBC find itself in front of an employment tribunal, they and ultimately the taxpayer could face a hefty bill."

It is unlikely that the recruitment drive will herald a return for Ford or Stuart, as neither have been approached by the BBC. It is thought bosses will look to radio or local television news for a new star.

Agents were sceptical about the announcement. Sue Ayton, who represents a number of current and former news presenters, said: "If the BBC are really doing this I am absolutely delighted, but if it's not a stunt then the BBC will have to change some of their views across the board.

"They say they are reaching out to find people, but they have the likes of Angela Rippon and Jennie Bond right under their noses. Both are journalists with years of experience and they are doing programmes for BBC daytime. If the BBC means what it says, why not put them back in primetime?"

A BBC spokesman said there were a number of 50-plus female presenters at the corporation, citing Kirsty Wark, the Newsnight presenter, Martha Kearney, host of Radio 4's The World at One, and Maxine Mawhinney, who presents the BBC One weekend bulletins.

"We are always looking to make sure we have the best presenters on BBC News representing a wide range of ages and backgrounds, including older women," the spokesman said.

"News has a pretty good story to tell with Kirsty Wark, Martha Kearney and Maxine Mawhinney all flourishing, as well as highly experienced women out in the field like Bridget Kendall, Caroline Wyatt and Orla Guerin.

"However, we'd be the first to say that it's important not to rest on our laurels in this area and ensure we reflect the public we serve. And of course this isn't an issue just for the BBC - other broadcasters face the same challenges."

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6228087/BBC-searches-for-50-plus-female-newsreader.html

RELATED ARTICLES
BBC ignores the needs of older people 22 Oct 2009

BBC promises more older women on television 19 Sep 2009

BBC accused of ageism and sexism after Stuart is axed 04 Apr 2007

Anna Ford attacks 'ageist BBC' 27 Aug 2007

Guidelines for Sleeping at all ages

How Much Sleep Do Children Need?

The amount of sleep a child needs varies depending on the individual and certain factors, including the age of the child. Following are some general guidelines:

1-4 Weeks Old: 15 - 16 hours per day

Newborns typically sleep about 15 to 18 hours a day, but only in short periods of two to four hours. Premature babies may sleep longer andcolicky ones shorter.

Since newborns do not yet have an internal biological clock, or circadian rhythm, their sleep patterns are not related to the daylight and nighttime cycles. In fact, they tend not to have much of a pattern at all.

1-4 Months Old: 14 - 15 hours per day

By 6 weeks of age your baby is beginning to settle down a bit, and you may notice more regular sleep patterns emerging. The longest periods of sleep run four to six hours and now tends to occur more regularly in the evening. Day-night confusion ends.

4-12 Months Old: 14 - 15 hours per day

While up to 15 hours is ideal, most infants up to 11 months old get only about 12 hours sleep. Establishing healthy sleep habits is a primary goal during this period, as your baby is now much more social, and his sleep patterns are more adult-like.

Babies typically have three naps and drop to two at around 6 months old, at which time (or earlier) they are physically capable of sleeping through the night. Establishing regular naps generally happens at the latter part of this time frame, as his biological rhythms mature. The midmorning nap usually starts at 9 a.m. and lasts about an hour. The early afternoon nap starts from 12 to 2 p.m. and lasts an hour or two. And the late afternoon nap may start from 3 to 5 p.m. and is variable in duration.

1-3 Years Old: 12 - 14 hours per day

As your child moves past the first year toward 18-21 months of age he will likely lose his morning nap and nap only once a day. While toddlers need up to 14 hours a day of sleep, they typically get only about 10.

Most children from about 21 to 36 months of age still need one nap a day, which may range from one to three and a half hours long. They typically go to bed between 7 and 9 p.m. and wake up between 6 and 8 a.m.

3-6 Years Old: 10 - 12 hours per day

Children at this age typically go to bed between 7 and 9 p.m. and wake up around 6 and 8 a.m., just as they did when they were younger. At 3, most children are still napping while at 5, most are not. Naps gradually become shorter as well. New sleep problems do not usually develop after 3 years of age.

7-12 Years Old: 10 - 11 hours per day

At these ages, with social, school, and family activities, bedtimes gradually become later and later, with most 12-years-olds going to bed at about 9 p.m. There is still a wide range of bedtimes, from 7:30 to 10 p.m., as well as total sleep times, from 9 to 12 hours, although the average is only about 9 hours.

12-18 Years Old: 8 - 9 hours per day

Sleep needs remain just as vital to health and well-being for teenagers as when they were younger. It turns out that many teenagers actually may need more sleep than in previous years. Now, however, social pressures conspire against getting the proper amount and quality of sleep.

Source: http://www.webmd.com/parenting/guide/sleep-children

* * * * * *

Sleep-deprived? You may need less as you age

Many do well even without 8 hours of shut-eye a night, study finds

by Robert Roy Britt
updated 2/1/2010 9:30:20 AM ET

How much sleep we need is largely a mystery, and sleep seems tougher to come by as we age. Many studies — often funded by the pharmaceutical industry — have suggested that we're all sleep-deprived zombies, risking our health for lack of shut-eye.

But new research in the U.K. confirms previous indications that older people need less sleep. It also suggests that variations in sleep hours needed are normal and healthy — so long as one is not overly sleepy during the day.

"Healthy aging appears to be associated with reductions in the sleep duration and depth required to maintain daytime alertness," the scientists said in a statement.

Still, researchers warn that many people in modern society suffer from sleep deprivation, and that it can lead to plenty of woes from accidents on the job to higher risk of falls and even death in elderly people.

The study, announced today, involved 110 healthy adults who did not have any sleep disorders and didn't complain about lack of sleep. They went through various rounds of sleep and wake periods under varying conditions, and were tested for sleepiness during the wake periods.

During the first night with eight hours in bed, the resulting average sleep time, by age group:

• Age 20-30: 433.5 minutes (7.23 hours) 
• Age 40-55: 409.9 minutes (6.83 hours) 
• Age 66-83: 390.4 minutes (6.51 hours)

The researchers do not suggest that these times, achieved during lab conditions much different from real life, are normal. But the comparison between groups is what's interesting, with the oldest group snoozing about 20 minutes less than the middle-agers, who in turn slept about 23 minutes less than the youngest group. The amount of time spent in deep sleep, measured as "slow-wave sleep," was also less in the older groups.

Video: Video: How do you know if you get enough sleep? Daytime sleepiness was measured by asking the subjects to nap, which count in tallying your overall sleep, said study leader Derk-Jan Dijk, professor of sleep and physiology at the University of Surrey in the U.K. (Previous research has shown that naps are good for you.)

"But, we need to be careful; naps very late in the day may make you feel better for the remainder of the waking day but also disrupt your subsequent night time sleep episode," Dijk told LiveScience.

When participants were asked to lie in bed and try to nap, here's how long it took on average for the members of each group to dose off:

• Age 20-30: 8.7 minutes 
• Age 40-55: 11.7 minutes 
• Age 66-83: 14.2 minutes

However, the researchers note in the Feb. 1 issue of the journal Sleep that if you're sleepy during the day, then you probably need more sleep.

"Our findings reaffirm the theory that it is not normal for older people to be sleepy during the daytime," Dijk said. "Whether you are young or old, if you are sleepy during the day you either don't get enough sleep or you may suffer from a sleep disorder."

Scientists admit that the role of sleep is not well understood and that they aren't sure how much sleep each person needs. A study last year indicated that some people are genetically programmed to need less sleep.

Video: Simple steps to better sleep Dijk also helped with a 2008 study reported in the journal Current Biology, in which participants stayed in bed for 16 hours in the dark each day for several days, to see how much they would sleep. Younger people slept an average of 9 hours while older people got 7.5 hours.

"The most parsimonious explanation for our results is that older people need less sleep," said Elizabeth Klerman of Brigham and Women's Hospital & Harvard Medical School. "It's also possible that they sleep less even when given the opportunity for more sleep because of age-related changes in the ability to fall asleep and remain asleep."

Again in that 2008 study, however, Dijk and Klerman found that most healthy people, and young people in particular, don't get as much sleep as they need.

If you chronically feel sleepy during the day, Dijk advises you see a doctor. But if you get just six or seven hours of snooze time and feel fine, "then that is OK," he said. But if you think you're okay and find yourself dozing during meetings or nodding off while watching TV, "there still may be a problem."

© 2011 LiveScience.com. All rights reserved

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35180414/ns/health-aging/t/sleep-deprived-you-may-need-less-you-age/#

Report: Surprise, being happy each day = longer life

Growing old happily adds longevity, study finds

GROWING OLD happily can lead to a longer life, new research has shown.

A five-year study of almost 4,000 middle-aged and elderly people found those who felt the most positive during the course of a single day tended to live longest.

Overall, the happiest and most content older people had a 35 per cent reduced risk of dying compared with the least cheerful. The scientists took account of factors such as age, gender, depression, health and lifestyle that might have influenced the results.

A total of 3,853 individuals aged 52-79 were recruited for the research, part of a long-running investigation called the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

Each was asked to rate his or her feelings of happiness, contentedness and excitement at four timed “moments” over the course of one day. These would then be scored. Researchers then monitored participants for five years, noting how many died during this time. Results have been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Higher scores were seen to coincide with a gradual increase in lifespan. People in the bottom third of the ratings had a death rate of 7.3 per cent compared with 4.6 per cent for those in the middle bracket and 3.6 per cent at the top. Initially, the most positive people seemed 50 per cent less likely to die. This figure was later reduced to 35 per cent.

The authors, led by Prof Andrew Steptoe from University College London, were unable to say whether happiness actually extended lifespan or was a marker for other factors that helped people live longer.

Source: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2011/1101/1224306841007.html

-----------------------------

Happy people have lower death rate, study finds

• 

In a study of older people in England, happy people were less likely to die… (Spencer Weiner / Los Angeles Times)

October 31, 2011|By Eryn Brown, Los Angeles Times / for the Booster Shots blog

Yet another study suggests that happiness is good for your health.

Epidemiologists at University College, London, reported their results Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academies of Science.

Andrew Steptoe and Jane Wardle examined data collected in a single day by the English Longitudinal Study of Aging, a large survey in England. A subset of 3,853 people, ages 52 to 79, were asked to record the extent to which they felt happy, excited, content, worried, anxious and fearful on a 1 to 4 scale at four times during the day: upon waking, 30 minutes after waking, at 7 p.m. and again upon going to bed.

Source: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/31/news/la-heb-happy-people-health-death-20111031