On the up side, the BBC could save money by getting rid of the spray tan equipment.

yes then there is no manipulation or fixing for one of their own to win the show simple

Why this sudden suggestion to ban BBC staff?

They'v been in it since the first series. It's a BBC show, of course they will include their people. It's all about promoting an improved public perception of "their people."

Doesn't always work. Naga for example,.

So with ITV banning their starts from it, and you banning BBC talent, then SCD has no contestants and ends.

12 million viewers will be very upset.


There is No manipulation or fixing, there is no evidence to support that whatsoever.

Hate to ruin a good argument with facts but that's just plain wrong. Geraldo Rivera of Fox News appeared in the Spring season this year, for example. DWTS is very much channel blind when it comes to TV celebrities and has had representatives of hit shows from across the broadcasting spectrum. Obviously that doesn't mean it never has ABC stars but it's by no means exclusive.

BIB - the theme of this and many other anti-Ore threads … and, indeed, of this year as a whole.

Yes. Also, no Brits allowed on Britain's Got Talent.

That wouldn't work. They've already got a ban on people with talent!

Ha! Very good

Wise words Merry Xmas

I doubt it, she would be a freelance contracted just for that series.

Please don't act like the Forum Police it is not your Job.

Including Tameka this year.

Some people really just need to find a better hobby and stop making up allegations that just don't have any factual basis whatsoever...

You can insult me all you like I will not change my mind that the show was manipulated.

Did I want Ore to win?
No.

Do I think he should have been prevented from taking part?
No.

Fair enough, that's your prerogative. I prefer to think better of people than that until I have concrete proof to the contrary, makes life much more pleasant in my experience.

The purpose of the Forum Police would be to stop forum members from behaving badly to other forum members. You were not doing anything of the kind.

On the other hand, she herself might have transgressed - though not really, as I'm sure it was said in jest!

Wasn't it?

Just to confirm

The BBC does not allow any of its employees to take part. The ones who do stuff for the BBC on other shows are freelance that is self employed. I am sorry the OP feels the way he/she does but the whole basis of this thread is incorrect.

BTW I thought of applying to go on Eggheads and the terms and conditions exclude anyone who either is or has been an employee of the BBC.

Bias like beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. We all have our favourites and opinions. The Judges at the quarter final stage placed Ore in the bottom two a position confirmed by viewers in the public vote as for the second time he figured in the Dance Off.

Could I respectfully request that the OP at least considers that a majority of viewers thought that on the night Ore was the best and voted accordingly.

Hmm..

Name me one known BBC regular who isn't a limited company and sells their services to the BBC.
It's a tax dodge historically condoned by the BBC.

If they appear on BBC in a BBC show, they are BBC people, lets not get into semantics.

So, does that make all the Strictly cast BBC people?

As a Danny fan who wish he'd won... no, of course not! What a ridiculous suggestion. Do you know how many BBC employees haven't won? A lot.

Didn't they make most/all of their camera operators redundant about 25 years ago, hiring them back on a freelance basis only? Pretty much all their technical and creative people are on freelance contracts. Which isn't semantics. They're not on the staff.

You know exactly what I meant.
Or you're easily confused.


Stop changing the subject. It's got nothing to do with camera operators.

How simply do I have to explain it?

If they are regularly appearing on a BBC show, or have recently been in one, or are likely be going to be in a further programme, they are or have been employed by the BBC, regardless of what sort of contract arrangements are made, so they are BBC People.

zomg, it's another thread about bOre the watOreworks, in disguise

No.

Incorrect.

People like say Claire Balding a freelance so she can work for BBC C4 etc.

Not a tax dodge, there is no such thing!

In the past the BBC had more sports rights, so had staff on exclusive contracts, those days are long long gone, another example, Gary Lineker works for BT sport as well and took a pay cut at the BBC.

Tax wise a few mention tax dodge but are confused, there is tax management, that's legal, and tax avoidance or a dodge that's illegal. The HMRC allows tax management but will take tax evaders to court. This is where those who do not know the difference get muddled up. Or deliberately mislead.

If you are say a freelancer like Claire Balding they agree what they will cover with the BBC and C4, and it typically is paid into a limited company. This is " legal" not a dodge.

They have more than one employer the income is gross profit, and they have costs, ( expenses) to come off, that's net profit, the company pays taxes on that, at company rates, then Claire will pay taxes on her drawings, dividends or salary anything drawn out of it. So they pay taxes, maybe twice!

It's quite frustrating that a few deliberately mislead to try to get their personal opinions across, rather than actually post facts, i.e. The truth.

So the point trying to be made incorrectly is if they appear on a BBC show they are BBC people, Claire also works for C4 so she has a freelancer and not BBC people, technically Gary Lineker is no longer BBC people as his income is more at BT and has advertising income from a brand of crisps.

Not semantics, facts.

Meaning.

the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. The two main areas are logical semantics, concerned with matters such as sense and reference and presupposition and implication, and lexical semantics, concerned with the analysis of word meanings and relations between them.