With reference to Libby Purves's article in which she suggests that there is now an obsession with racism, which is akin to being the new bigotry.
I see in the I today that she has also said the cost of gender pay disputes at the BBC "chokes creativity". She was referring to Samira Ahmed's successful claim for equal pay, saying she should not necessarily be paid as much as her male colleague. The BBC's argument for paying Jeremy Vine significantly more for doing a very similar job to Ahmed was that he had a "glint in his eye" when presenting. I think that was a feeble defence and so did the tribunal.
Purves states that the compensation awarded to Ahmed is "a lot of money". Yet, it is a lot of money and it could be argued that actors, sports people, broadcasters, entertainers, etc, etc, get too much money. I would probably agree with that. However, that is how capitalism works, and why should certain groups of people be singled out for different working conditions and pay than other people working in the same organisation?
It seems to me that Ms Purves has a bit of a bee in her bonnet about a lot of things.