• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Strictly Come Dancing
SCD judges to get 50% pay rise and receive three times as much as the pro dancers
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
devilmaycare
19-07-2008
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Well, it's two separate countries, two separate audiences, two separate broadcasting organisations. They schedule according to their respective (local) conditions and overall schedules. I doubt that the BBC has any influence.”

The programme is made by the same people, same format, same judges. I am sure they could schedule so the shows did not clash if they really wanted to, but hey, celebrities shouldn't have to care about silly inconveniences like climate change should they
mossy2103
19-07-2008
Originally Posted by devilmaycare:
“The programme is made by the same people, same format, same judges.”

Yes, some of the judges are the same, and yes the format is the same. But is it made by the same people? And remember that it's only the format which has been sold.

Quote:
“I am sure they could schedule so the shows did not clash if they really wanted to, but hey, celebrities shouldn't have to care about silly inconveniences like climate change should they ”

Sorry, but the schedules are in no way dictated by who makes the programme, or by way of its parentage. It's the broadcaster that decides. And if both broadcasters on each side of the Atlantic decide that Autumn to Christmas is the time that they want, there is little else that can be done. Neither broadcaster would be able to affect what the other is doing (unless there was some sort of restrictive clause when the format was sold, which would of course limit the attractiveness to the purchasing broadcaster). The fact that two judges are involved in both is up to those two judges. However, I doubt that they would be travelling on exclusive chartered aircraft. And many other people regualrly jet to and fro across the Atlantic (and some, like our PM, get jets flown empty from the States just so they can fly over to Japan)
KlootBlanx
19-07-2008
Originally Posted by devilmaycare:
“The programme is made by the same people, same format, same judges. I am sure they could schedule so the shows did not clash if they really wanted to, but hey, celebrities shouldn't have to care about silly inconveniences like climate change should they ”

They don't get a say. The broadcasters decided when they want it on.
Wiz Net
20-07-2008
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/strictly...te-claims.html

Apparently the BBC has denied the story in the Daily Mail and says the judges have agreed their salary package for the next show.
Jackpup
20-07-2008
Originally Posted by Wiz Net:
“http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/strictly...te-claims.html

Apparently the BBC has denied the story in the Daily Mail and says the judges have agreed their salary package for the next show.”

But they are both staffed by journalists, so it's hard to know which is telling the truth.

*apologises to any decent journalists who may be reading*
mossy2103
20-07-2008
Originally Posted by Jackpup:
“But they are both staffed by journalists, so it's hard to know which is telling the truth.

*apologises to any decent journalists who may be reading*”

Would you not believe the report which contains a report/statement from a BBC spokesman?
lynxmale
20-11-2008
I am not happy with the judges' role in this Johngate fiasco. If they are to receive such handsome fees for such easy work then I would like an embargo placed on them so that they cannot speak to the media outside the show. Their rentamouth "activism" has been a seed that has spoilt things.
teewoods
20-11-2008
Originally Posted by martyboy:
“That's something we often overlook.

Still, I suppose transatlantic air fares are going up all the time.

I wonder if they get their fares paid, on top of all that, as expenses. And what about housing costs for their LA seaview mansions.

The mind boggles.

Hardly "belt-tightening", is it.

[Though you can argue that BBC Worldwide makes an even bigger fortune through marketing the shows worldwide, and which helps fund the BBC]”

They get their fares paid and every other expense accomodation is covered. American networks dont hold back their cents everything is covered.
kevin finnerty
20-11-2008
Originally Posted by Wiz Net:
“What Arlene needs is for Anne Robinson to be asked to compete! OMG - can you imagine what would happen if she tried her acidic style on Anne? Now THAT would be good TV.

I do agree that the behaviour of the judges was pretty awful last year. I also resented the fact that Len lambasted the great British public for their voting.

One lesson the judges need to learn this year is that if they are unnecessarily cruel to competitors, people will vote for them!! It happened on SCD and it happened on Nancy.

I think the judges think that they are the celebrities and sadly this pay rise will make them think even more of themselves than they did last year!

There will be tears before bedtime!!!!”

How prophetic of you, the judges were ott last season and now are a disgrace to the ideal of fairness. Cherie was my favourite, but I have enjoyed John and Krystina enormously.
I did not turn off John because Cherie was out, but still enjoyed him. I believe that the whole sorry saga was a sad way to end so many peoples enjoyment of a light entertainment Saturday family show. The contestants and professionals are paid for the season.
So the only thing the winner gets over the others is the glitter ball and if that was worth all the upset that has been caused, well one has to ask if this is what life is all about?

The BBC must have no say in what goes on inside its own organisation and it's rather like the lunatics taking over the asylum!
The judges should keep their vitriol for themselves. It is neither clever or amusing to publicly humiliate a person in the name of entertainment.

If they had kept their nasty asides in their own heads this would never have happened. Because as the original poster said the more they pick on/bully/be nasty to a contestant the more the public will take notice of them.

As far as I am concerned a wonderful programme has been spoiled, and rather than having the guts to stand by the original comments they made the judges are now squirming in their seats and coming away from this self made mess with absolutely no face whatsoever. Disgusted and sad
pickledgherkin
20-11-2008
Originally Posted by lynxmale:
“I am not happy with the judges' role in this Johngate fiasco. If they are to receive such handsome fees for such easy work then I would like an embargo placed on them so that they cannot speak to the media outside the show. Their rentamouth "activism" has been a seed that has spoilt things.”

Yes. If they are not allowed to discuss individual contestants outside the show it will show a bit more integrity.

If they have agreed next year's salaries, looks like they are not going to be leaving.

I expect that they have learned some lessons from this fiasco. Not entirely their fault, the BBC obviously encourages controversy.
soulmate61
20-11-2008
Paying them £90K each to buzz off and never return would be money well spent.
lynxmale
20-11-2008
Mr. Flywheel: You know I’d buy you a parachute if it wouldn’t open.
Ravelli: I already got a pair o' shoes.
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map