I can't help thinking that there is a significant amount of political correctness about the contestant line up on the show.

I don't believe that some of the contestants are genuinely there on merit, and am fairly certain that there's a lot of tokenism going on.

The BBC are well known for being left leaning, and unfortunately, the Apprentice is clearly being affected by political correctness because of this.

When will a straight, white, middle class male win a series?

Yes, I do think it reflects reality. What makes you think it doesn't? Why don't you get right down to it and state who you don't think deserves to be there.

And what makes you think a white, straight, middle-class male is more deserving of job anyway?

I've found that most black and asian families really push their kids to do well at school and instill a strong work ethic. They don't expect handouts or think the world owes them a living as much as white kids.

You seem to be of the mind that only straight white middle class men have talent. That's extremely racist and sexist.

No, you've misunderstood my post. I just find it interesting that we've yet to have a winner who fits that profile, not that only someone fitting that profile deserves to win.

You appear very keen to pervert things, and I suggest that you withdraw your outrageous slur.

Yes, from my own experience I'd certainly agree with that.

One of my colleagues (who is also a friend), is from an indian family, and he works incredibly hard. This is reflected in the fact that in the last calendar year he earnt approximately £120k.

Don't forget homophobic.

If I could bet on the Apprentice I would put the house on Simon so you could get your wish: straight, middle class, white and male !!!!!!

Alan Sugar is colour blind. He only sees the colour green - the colour of money .

Why should we have a winner that fits the profile - and hell there's only been two series - come back and complain when there's been ten where straight white men have been ignored. But surely it's the person who performs the best who should win?

I don't understand your insistence that straight, white, men must be the talented ones whilst everybody else is there for some other reason.

I think there was a kind of synergy between people like, eg Rory who was a bankrupt and so finding it hard to get a job by conventional means, and the needs of the BBC who thought the audience would like to see how well a bankrupt did. Likewise with Natalie who was struggling with conventional routes because she was a mother. It was good to see someone young like Ghazal, partly to see if youth was an issue. And so forth.

I doubt if racism or inverse racism had much to do with it, though.

Why don't you try reading my post?

Do you understand what the word merit means?

Or maybe they went on their CVs and performance in front of the camera. Sugar had an input into picking the contestants this series, because he wasn't happy about the quality of the previous contenstants. He also objected to people who "wanted to be on telly", ironic considering he's the star of one of the BBC's biggest shows. But maybe it doesn't count when he does it.

Do you understand what the word bigot means?

Yes I understand the word merit but you're the one arguing about skin colour, sex and sexual orientation. Apparently there are lots of straight white middle class men out there who would be on the show if all those black people, gay people, working class people and women hadn't clogged it up with their lack of "merit".

Or you know maybe they got on it because they were good.

Yes, it's a word that's thrown around like confetti by people who use it entirely out of context simply because they can't consider anything outside of their tiny little politically correct minds.

Yes, you may be right. However, it will be interesting to see who the winners are in future series as I suspect that there is a fair amount of meddling by the BBC in the selection of the candidates.

It's precisely this possibility that detracts from my overall enjoyment of the show, because I suspect that not everyone is there strictly on merit.

I also think that some people got on the show because of their interesting job titles: Bankrupt entrepreneur/Waiter, housewife with an MBA, Army Officer, Quantum Physicist!!!

Interestingly, none of these people were in the top half of contestants!

The insinuation that the presence of a diverse and eclectic selection of candidates means that their MUST be a dumbing down of talent suggests that it is YOU who has the narrow-mind, not me.......

And, as for your great desire to see a white, middle-class male win the show, as if they are inately more deserving of the position..... Well, I'm sorry, but your entire thread reeks of bigotry, and I don't use that word lightly.

The straight white men on this show have been almost uniformly crap. That posh army officer hadn't a clue, neither did that guy whose name i can't even remember who designed that ridiculous dog bag and Simon is a bit of an idiot who is severely lacking in the business skills department.

I would agree with your descriptions.

Paul, the army officer was a complete idiot.

Perhaps this just goes to show how the BBC are manipulating the selection process of the candidates.

I think what KingCanute means is that .. in his opinion.. the BBC is too keen to make the lineup a represenation of most sectors of the society. Therefore, the BBC firstly divides the applicants into sectors: blacks, whites, Asian, single mothers, etc. let them compete within these sectors and then choose a representation for the sector on merit. In this way, some might miss the opportunity even if they more capable because they don't represent a sector, i.e. if for example a "straight white male man", as KingCanute, puts it might miss the final lineup for a less capable white (To take the ethnic background out of the picture) single mother because simply they don't compete with each other.

KingCanute also seems to suggest that SAS chooses the winner based on background and merit and not on merit only.

Is this what you meant KingCanute?!

My opinion is this: There is a large number of applications is submitted each year. So statistically, the final line up can be a true representation of the society any way. Also, looking at who won the previous two series, I find that SAS chooses an apprentice that will get along with him. So his choice is based on character and business merits .. IMO

I am also interested to know who in your opinion should not have made the final 16 this year.

Why single out white, straight, middle-class males then? Surely that logic would apply to everyone ie. "We don't need any more gays this year, we've already got Lohit, all you other gays can go home. There's no room left for you now......." Or, "we don't need any more single mothers" etc etc.

It's a very simplistic way of looking at it. I mean, there's never been an openly gay contestant before Lohit, for example, so I don't see the selection of a "non-straight" contestant as being part of the remit for the show. Just like I don't see there being any kind of criteria put in place for any other 'social groups' either. Lohit is there based on talent and nothing else.

The cast is only diverse in the same way that Britian itself is diverse. It's only a reflection of the country we live in.

Yes, this is pretty much what I mean. I think that the BBC is very keen to tick boxes when it comes to selecting the contestants, rather than selecting them exclusively on merit.

To make an analogy, Kevin Pieterson the cricketer decided to play for England rather than South Africa because they have a quota system in place in South Africa which stopped him from playing top level domestic cricket. Clearly the man has extraordinary talent, but became frustrated with being excluded from the side because of the quota regulations. This meant that whilst he wasn't allowed to play, there were players in the side who were of a much lower ability than him. A totally farcical situation.

Alan Sugar can only select from the people put in front of him, and yes, on merit and "best fit" for the company.

I really don't get what you are saying Canute. Are you arguing that the only way to prove that the BBC weren't manipulating the selection would be to have a row of straight white male middle class men competing and *that* wouldn't be biased? That's crazy. WMMC Men dominating everything is exactly down to the racism, sexism and homophobia that exists in our country.

It seems more like the BBC left their prejudices at the door and picked candidates with the right experience who could also perform in front of cameras.

Do you actually know anything about the programme. Somewhere else you said that someone must have had "a word" with Jadine about her behaviour. Well yes - ALAN SUGAR DID IN THE BOARDROOM AND WE ALL SAW IT.

You also seem to be unaware that Sugar had input into the selection of the candidates this time because he didn't like the previous selections.

You seem to be basing your arguments on your prejudices rather than any actual knowledge of the show.