BBC Strictly doesn't need babysitters - it needs to realise it can't work in a woke world, analysis by Alex Davies
BBC Strictly: The Graziano and Giovanni scandals have rocked the dance competition lately
BBC
"So much of my Strictly experience was everything I could have dreamt of... However, my experience inside the training room was very different."
These were just a few of the words expressed by 2023 BBC Strictly contestant Zara McDermott this week after her former dance partner Graziano Di Prima was axed from the show.
A mere weeks after fellow Italian taskmaster Giovanni Pernice, 33, was omitted from the line-up pending an investigation into his own "misconduct" while working with Amanda Abbington, the BBC had another scandal on its hands.
Di Prima - who has since admitted "intense passion and determination to win might have affected my training regime" - has faced claims of "physical and verbal" abuse, with reports in The Sun claiming it went as far as "kicking, hitting and spitting" towards McDermott.
Of course, in typical BBC style, fans were completely in the dark at the time with the two fawning over each other in their final televised interview.
But it's now come to light Di Prima may have been less the charming, Italian hearth-throb and more abusive, disciplinarian and, to be fair to the Beeb, they've acted swiftly in response to the allegations.
BBC Strictly: Graziano Di Prima and Zara McDermott were voted off the show last year
BBC
I wrote previously that Pernice has become a victim of cancel culture and I stand by that, purely because his dismissal arose before a verdict into his investigation had come to light.
With Di Prima, complaints were raised recently, evidence was examined and the BBC decided it was time to send him packing with a concrete ruling before tabloids were able to mull over what would be next, a-la Pernice.
We don't know the specifics of Pernice nor Di Prima's behaviour in the rehearsal room and it has become a matter of debate as to whether they could really have overstepped the mark so badly that they deserved to be axed or not.
But, for better or worse, that does not matter nowadays. We can no longer hold one's standards for overstepping the mark to anybody's but the victim at hand.
BBC Strictly: Amanda Abbington quit the show early after being paired with Giovanni Pernice
BBCThis isn't an indictment on solely Strictly though, and whether it's a good thing is the subject of contentious debate.
But for me, the fact victims of abuse or wrongdoing now feel empowered to speak out - no matter how it's perceived by critics - should be a good thing.
That is, of course, if there is substantial evidence to back up the claims. Baseless allegations ruining people's lives without anything credible seeing the light of day is not what I'm advocating.
Only McDermott and Abbington experienced their time as novices in the Strictly rehearsal room and in today's age, they should be allowed to speak out if they feel wronged.
We shouldn't be cancelling people left, right and centre - we should be taking a breath before jumping to conclusions, examining the claims and understanding what happened on both sides before bursting a blood vessel to scream that one side is "too soft" or the other side "never deserves to work again".
But now, in a desperate attempt to avoid any scandal of this ilk in the future, the BBC has decided a chaperone while Strictly stars train is what's needed.
A statement from the BBC said: "The BBC is today announcing additional steps to strengthen welfare and support on Strictly Come Dancing.
"Concerns that have arisen in recent months have been fundamentally about training and rehearsals. The actions we announce today are designed to address that."
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
The move has been implemented as some sort of measure to offer more protection to celebrity contestants. In reality, it suffocates all manner of creative freedom among its professionals who've spent a lifetime honing their craft.
What does one chaperone deem to be "too far" compared to another? Will a chaperone deem any semblance of a firm word as cancel-worthy? Does a chaperone know the intricacies of a Charleston or Argentine Tango? Will a lift during Jive be twisted into a dancer attempting to fling their celebrity out of a third-story window?
Pernice and Di Prima clearly pushed the limits of their regimes to an extreme deemed as potentially abusive and the argument of "tough love" doesn't hold up nowadays, but for that to have diminished all trust with the rest of the professional cast is bizarre.
Several of the pros have been part of the Strictly makeup without any whiff of a scandal for years but now they'll have a babysitter lurking over their shoulder to ensure any misstep can't be deemed an intentional attempt to amputate their partner from the knee down.
Graziano Di Prima (right) was axed from Strictly earlier this month
PAWhat happened to two adults being able to communicate effectively to explain their differences so the other can understand?
The professional dancers are professional dancers because of the rigorous training they've been through, who is it for the Beeb to put a cap on how they impart that wisdom if it's nowhere near the realm of abuse?
It appears they employed a handful of bad apples in Pernice and Di Prima so perhaps the Beeb should spend less time looking for creche workers and put more focus into its hiring processes.
Routines and relationships will become so anodyne that Craig Revel Horwood's 10 paddle will gather more dust than Gareth Southgate's trophy cabinet and, at the end of the day, it is viewers who'll suffer the most as one of UK TV's most memorable and successful series waltzes into realms of insipidness.
Introducing chaperones will only serve to suffocate the professionals and it's licence fee payers who'll suffer. It's time Strictly realised it cannot work in a woke world.
You may like
