Jeremy Vine has found himself at the centre of controversy after being booked to host a charity awards show.
The TV presenter provoked furious backlash when he was announced as the host of the Carers UK Awards, an event that seeks to ‘shine a spotlight’ on the contribution of unpaid carers.
Commenters accused Vine, 61, of ‘stoking hatred against disabled people’ on his Channel 5 show and using intentionally ‘provocative questions’ to allow guest panellists to ‘spread misinformation’.
Others said he was a poor choice because he platforms ‘lies’ about those on benefits, which go ‘unchecked’, and encourages ‘debates’ around disability and people’s lives.
The criticism was so strong that Vine had no choice but to issue a statement, confirming he would be stepping down from the gig.
Taking to X, the broadcaster began: ‘Because I host debates about welfare, benefits etc I see I was a controversial choice to be the (obviously unpaid) host of the prestigious @CarersUK awards so I’m very happy to stand aside and give someone else the honour of doing it.’
He added that he ‘originally said yes to support a friend who watched her husband die in a long and painful process’, as he ‘didn’t want to let her down’.
‘I see her as a heroine,’ he praised.
‘I’m not a campaigner, and guests on my shows know I have to be impartial, but I’m very much aware of the vital role unpaid carers play,’ Vine continued.
‘I believe we’ve only ever covered them sympathetically.’
He signed off by wishing the ‘excellent event’ well, saying he will ‘cheer for the winners from a distance’.
However, Vine’s statement seemed to only fuel further disapproval, as the replies alleged that he is not ‘impartial’ in his hosting.
‘I’m sure he really believes he’s impartial. Why can’t he see that having the “should we cut benefits” discussions over and over again just feeds into the negative narrative? He’s not stupid, he must know’, wrote @cfs_jo.
‘He may support carers and his friend, but he allows members of the panel on his TV show to spout absolute lies, completely unchecked about other benefits & their claimants’, wrote @kagsy_karen.
@Salliepops also vented: ‘You, on your show, debate our lives as if we’re a problem to be solved. You fuel hostility, abuse & harassment towards disabled people, while advocating for cuts to the support we rely on to live independently. Its not supporting carers. It’s harming the very community they serve’.
Meanwhile, @Grraarrgh argued that Vine was a ‘controversial’ choice for the hosting position because he ‘makes a living’ by ‘profiting off people’s pain’ when they are already ‘vulnerable’.
@SpinaBifidaScot urged Vine to ‘reflect’ on how, while he believes his stance is impartial on-screen, the show itself ‘is not’, adding that soundbites shared on social media only ‘create hostility’.
‘He is the last person who should be presenting these awards with his constant ragebaiting against the disabled’, echoed @CulhamAndy1, saying Vine stepping down was the ‘best news’.
Some were supportive towards Vine, though, with the likes of @TiggyWalker, a Carers UK patron, declaring ‘no other media presenter has been as supportive’, which Vine responded to with: ‘This means more to me than I can say.’
The Carers charity issued its own response after Vine’s post, confirming he was ‘stepping down following discussions’.
They were originally ‘delighted’ to announce him as the host on Monday, but soon received comments calling the move ‘insulting’ and ‘disgusting’.
‘Jeremy has been incredibly supportive of Carers UK including through his radio show, and we’re grateful for that support,’ the organisation said.
‘But after listening carefully to our community over the past couple of days we’ve agreed with Jeremy that the focus of the evening should stay entirely on celebrating carers and the individuals and organisations that support them.’
In additional posts, Carers UK penned: ‘We recognise the strength of feeling around how disability & benefits claimants are sometimes portrayed in the media, inc on daytime television. Many of the carers we support are disabled themselves/care for someone who is and rely on a benefits system that too often fails them.
‘That’s exactly why we’ve campaigned consistently for reform of the benefits system, including through our #ProtectCarersBenefits campaign.’
They, too, were criticised for not directly addressing the backlash to Vine’s hiring.
Vine is known for chairing hard-hitting debates on his talk show. Just this week on August 16, the programme ran a segment titled: ‘Reform right to call for cuts to disability benefits?’
Then, the day after, a Facebook post from the show shared: ‘Also on the show, we’re asking if we should cut disability benefits and give people help in kind instead.
‘Half of disability benefit claimants would swap a thousand pounds of their benefits for things such as therapy, healthy meals and workplace support.
‘Would it be a good idea to make cuts here…’
This is far from the first time benefits have been the topic of conversation. In March last year, he was criticised for saying benefits should be ‘slashed’ when debating spending on social security and for failing to challenge false claims about the matter.
‘You’ve going to have to cut the benefits first and then expect them to get out the front door and work,’ he said, going on to claim: ‘There’s something fishy going on… we’ve had a massive increase since Covid, 25% increase, in people who are too ill to work.’
Then, in November, during a debate on whether Britain should ‘spend billions more on benefits’, he asked when income tax was brought up: ‘Why don’t you cut welfare?’
Finally, in May this year, he also did not dispute a guest’s comments that the ‘benefits bill is out of control’ and ‘spiralling’.
Just last month, Disability News Service (DNS) challenged BBC News, Sky News, and then Channel 5 over why presenters were not pushing back on inaccurate claims of ‘spiralling welfare’, which is actually stable.
DNS said the broadcasters did not accept their suggestions that the hosts were failing on the matter, but instead Sky issued a statement reiterating its commitment to ‘impartial, rigorous journalism’, while BBC said it covers ‘a wide range of perspectives on welfare’.