A few thoughts to mull over on the happenings this week ....

Matt Baker has now got the gig on The One Show, he is not going to be doing the live tour now ..... will this affect the BBC's interest him actually winning SCD? By that I mean the extensive plugging they seem to give the couple that they favour? The winning couple must give the public the incentive to go to see the Tour, although they have called up the likes of John Barrowman to bolster ticket sales.


Pamela and James have appeared on Breakfast and Daybreak this week, endlessly plugging the fact that she has lost weight.:yawn: The only other couple I have noticed being bandied about are Anton and Ann, well at least they do have a talking point I suppose.


Mel Smith expressed his disliking of Pamela Stephenson in the papers this week ..... funny how some of us have felt similarly about her all series.


Kara and Artem are obviously the best dancers in the competition, however they are conspicuous by their absence on any other programme to highlight the fact. Kara is the most artistic and graceful of dancers, surely the media are interested in actually how good she is rather than the likes of Pamela :yawn: and possibly Ann now, as we have had plenty of her and Anton talking about their 'dancing'.


Weighing all this up I do feel that the Beeb are trying to get Pamela and James as winners ..... I hope this will not be the case, as this will be the second year in succession that the best dancer will not have won the competition. Although it is an entertainment show, otherwise why would they put Kara and Ann on the same programme, it is always a good feeling to have the very best succeed eventually.

There are some good thoughts on your post, even though I might disagree with some of them.

I agree that the BBC is painting Pamela in a very positive light and more so recently. It even said on the website that Pamela was the favourite to win, which struck me as a bit odd, since I didn't think this was the case. She's not my favourite, but I wouldn't mind if she won, tbh, as she has worked bloody hard, put in some good dances and has clearly had the time of her life. I wouldn't take any notice of Mel Smith, though, who is fairly well-known as a miserable old fart and pretty much dislikes everybody - or at least falls out with most people he has worked with!

I agree that Kara has had less publicity, although they did promote her pretty well on ITT yesterday - not that it means much, since ITT is probably a show watched only by afficionados. But the publicity for her very much confirms the view that she is the best technical dancer - which is the story arc that they are using for her, much as the BBC did for Ali and Rachel.

I don't actually believe that the BBC promotes one couple over another - what I think they do is create a story arc for each one which might appeal to the public. It is then up to the public to decide which storyline most appeals - the best dancer, the sleb with the greatest j******, the boy next door, the sports hunk, the soap star or the pantomime dame.

Personally I will vote for the best dancer - Kara.

I don't begrudge Pamela and James a bit of air time, Pamela is one of my remaining favourites on Strictly Come Dancing and she is an inspiration to many.

Agree with you there.

She is naturally the most talented dancer they have had since the one and only Aleesha Dixon, but somehow she is not getting the same accolades.

There has been so little coverage of Kara and Artem that I'm not sick to the back teeth of them yet and welcome any news. However the ramblings over and over about Pam and Ann, I dread seeing another item with them droning on and on saying exactly the same as they said in the previous interview.

btw... I get the feeling that James will be glad when the series ends. I do think it is more of a 'job' than a delight this year for him.

BIB - sorry, but the BBC has relentlessly promoted Ann over all the other contestants. One BBC Breakfast presenter even referred to SCD as 'Strictly with Ann and Anton'. The media coverage has been far from evenly distributed - even when other couples are interviewed, they are always asked about Ann (and never anyone else ... :yawn.

I am baffled as to where the notion of Pamela and James being 'favourites to win' has come as there's no evidence to support this. If anything, Matt is the favourite to win. I can therefore only assume that the BBC is trying to create more artificial 'drama' so if and when Pamela gets knocked out, there'll be some 'controversy'. So, OP, I'd stop taking the bitterness pills. It's all carefully stage-managed hype.

As for what will happen this weekend: it all depends on what happens on the night, but I'd say Gavin is the most obviously vulnerable to go - unless he can ace his foxtrot and Scott mucks up his paso. I'm sure the BBC want Ann to reach the semis at least - that way they can generate more media coverage in a week which will in any case be dominated by The X Factor final ...

I would also point out that Matt hasn't got the One Show gig yet, hasn't quit Countryfile and there's absolutely no sign that he's quit the tour either for the time being.

The news article last week seemed, at worst, simply wrong or at best, jumping the gun a little.

I'm not bitter, I'm just pointing out my opinions on what I have seen over this week.

If bitterness is seeing the judges giving 10's for the routine by Pamela, which was by no means 'perfect', and then giving Scott 9's when he clearly messed up throughout the dance, then ok call me bitter, but these judges are 'supposed' to know what they are talking about. If they gave Ann 7's for entertainment then we would know that the judges were merely having a laugh with their marking, but they pretend to have stiff upper lip professional critique then give Mickey Mouse marks like that.

Every show on tv is stage managed to create interest, but I'm not sure the BBC need to go down the X Factor route to create obsessive hype over certain contestants.

I read it on DS .... I believe everything I read on here!!

I stand corrected.

I know it's easy to speculate on the BBC's motives, but I've always considered that they often really only have one thought that determines their actions.

"What's the best for ratings?"

I often accuse the BBC of many things, but never that they are "daft."

The inclusion of the "popular plank" (that term was first coined by a poster on here during the first series) is evidence of their concern for ratings.
Whether that inclusion the first time was intentional or not, they saw how it generated a lot of controversy in the press, thus bringing attention to the programme and likely, more viewers and we've had one ever since.

I don't think the producers care whether Anne goes out or stays in right up to the final. They know when it comes down to the final, there will be enough voters among the supporters of the other contestants to see she doesn't win. But as long as she’s there, the show will attract media attention. Real dance fans might complain but they are probably now in the minority, “this is show business!”
The show, from a ballroom dance perspective is now a shadow of what it once was, but as long as the ratings keep up, the changes made to “improve” it in the minds of the producers will stay and there may be more yet to come next year.

As I've said elsewhere, "TV is all smoke and mirrors" so they can manipulate the VT shown on ITT to show any particular contestant in any way be it in ability or temperament.
Remember all the positive ITT footage of Emma Bunton before the CIN show where she sang her charity single accompanied by the pro dancers? They even dragged French and Saunders into one of her training sessions just to add a bit of positive "spin." Immediately after CIN night they "dropped her like a stone" well... far less positive VT and she soon went out.

At the moment Matt Baker is "flavour of the month" at the BBC, shortly to take over "The One Show" I expect him to continue to continue to get "favourable treatment."

I've no idea what financial involvement in the tour has the BBC, if any at all, but it is nowhere near as important as "ratings."

Much as I like Matt, as a dancer, a person and a presenter, I don't think he's suited to The One Show and he'd be with another unsuitable partner, I've seen not the slightest chemistry between that girl (not being insulting, I just can't remember her name) and any of her co-presenters But I suppose the money will win.

I'm getting as curmudgeonly as some of the Pam detractors.

Strictly history is littered with scoring fiascos and last week's did not result in the exit of a contestant who had huge public support and should have been in the final (unlike what happened in Series 6). So while I agree the scores were a little odd, the leader board was roughly in the right order and some of the postings I've read about it (not yours! ) have bordered on the hysterical. Sorry if the marking irked you but it's all been a bit of a storm in a teacup.

As far as Moira Ross is concerned, Strictly absolutely does need to compete with The X Factor in terms of profile. She may not have the tabloids in her back pocket like Simon Cowell does, but she wants to generate as much publicity as possible for her show. And if that means hyping up one contestant that subsequently has a 'shock' exit while Ann remains in the competition, then so be it. The ratings for SCD this year are very strong - whether or not some posters like what she's done - and that, at the end of the day, is what counts.

Since most of the coverage about Kara and Artem would inevitably be 'are they doing it?' I'm frankly thrilled they don't get more air time because I became sick of that in week one.

Showmances are thoroughly cringe worthy.

I'm not entirely sure what the BBC would have to gain out of Pamela winning. Matt I could understand but even then surely what the producers actually want is whoever the public favourite is to stay in?

Neither of those points have actually been confirmed - its still speculation atm

Well DS should know better than to publish People articles as fact! Not many people know that it isn't true - just a quick interview with Matt on sunday revealed the real situation, so I could understand why you posted it. [Of course things could have moved on by now with contracts, so you may very well be right anyway!]

But the BBC don't have to attract advertisers, so why should ratings matter so much?

Love the objectivity of K & A fans (!). Obviously the Beeb also needs to think about how well the couples will do at interviews in helping to promote the programme. For me Pamela's much more witty at interviews and that's preferable to having to listen to Kara's bland estuary drone for five minutes.

If the BBC doesn't attract sufficient viewers, the case for the Licence Fee diminishes substantially. If nobody watches its channels, why should the public be expected to pay for them?

While you are quite right that the BBC doesn't need to attract advertisers, it's therefore essential that the BBC retains a number of shows that bring in large audiences - so that it can be see to 'communicate with the nation' and, in doing so, help justify the Licence Fee. Strictly is an important part of that group of shows, not least because it's by far the Corporation's biggest entertainment brand.

The ratings obsession has led to the dumbing down of many programmes with a "one size fits all" attitude, because programme producers think that will attract the highest number of viewers.
"Horses for Courses" thinking is going rapidly "out of the window."

But it's no use complaining.
I always say; "the public get the quality of programmes they deserve."


If they stopped watching rubbish programmes, the standards would have to improve.

I don't think the BBC is ultimately that bothered who wins.

However if a contestant is deemed to generate publicity for the show like Ann then they do have a vested interest in keeping them in as long as possible. I also think that whilst they are not mega bothered if a BBC person wins i think the BBC person will always get a favourable edit & coverage on ITT. For example if a BBC contestant was filming in the North constantly like Ricky was last year I think they would have made much more effort to include him more on ITT.

And you're being objective about Pamela, I suppose.

Sorry, but that remark has made me peeved again. I'm a fan of Kara and Artem, and will no doubt be voting for them tonight, but I don't think there's a huge conspiracy going on to make any particular couple win. It is, as others (including Kartem fans) have said, all about the ratings.

As to the relative merits of the contestants' interviewing styles, I like Pamela a lot, but many forum members moan (at length) about her laughter, and accuse her of being false. I don't go along with that, but there will always be people who object to fun, as there will always be snobs who don't like Estuary English. I very much doubt the BBC factors our prejudices into their marketing strategy.

The way I see it, the current situation is win win for the BBC whoever wins out of Kara, Scott or Matt. Here's why:

1) With Matt taking over on the One show, if he wins there will be promotion for that show.

2) Scott and Kara are loyal to the BBC, both through EE and Kara has done a couple of bits for BBC3 of late.

3) As an aside, before last year is was much touted that Anton would take over as a presenter one day. Of course, there was all the hoo haa (for want of a better word) and both he and the BBC lost a lot of face. His partnership with the lovely Ann has raised his profile with the GBP, which, in my opinion, was the whole point of the whole shenanigans anyway. They won't win, it would make a mockery of the show (as it is already, but that's another thread), but they will be in for as long as they can be kept in, believe you me.

So, as you see, its win win for the Beeb. Unless Pamela wins, as she strikes me as someone who would not play along with what the BBC wanted.

I don't think Pamela will win but I don't see why the BBC would mind if she did. An older contestant triumphing would probably be viewed as being good for the show. i think the only one they wouldn't want to win is Ann. They would be perfectly happy for her to get to the final but if she were to win (which i seriously don't think will happen) it will create a lot of negative headlines and bring the credibility of the show into question in many people's minds.

I would hope he wouldn't quit the tour at all. If he has already signed for it, that would be most unprofessional.

Depending on if and when he is/will be contracted to start it would be impossible for him to do both, apart from him just doing the Friday,Sat,Sun SCD tour dates.

I really cannot see anyone else taking over .... I mean it should have been Matt rather than Manford.