Democracy Is Not In the Voting It Is In The Counting

Right so let's get this straight.

You are a racist if you don't vote for Barry.

And now you are a racist if you don't vote for the black contestants on Strictly Come Dancing?

According to John Regis - who apparently is an athlete - who knew? - the voting on Strictly Come Dancing demonstrates that racism festers in the middle classes, because they vote out the black crap contestants before the white crap ones - and it is a middle class kind of show.

Oh really? That is news to me John?

So how come Mark Ramprakash was loved? And how come Alesha Dixon won last year?

Apparently the BBC fiddled the rules back when DJ Spoony (does anyone actually like him? He's awful on 606. And I did happen to see him on Strictly and frankly he can't dance, and could do with loosing a few stone - which is nbot to say that you have to be skinny to be a dancer, but let's be honest if you have a bit of gut then you are best to stick to Dad Dancing with your thumbs in the air, than to try gyrating your hips for the ladies - as John Seargeant proves enthusiasm and knowing your limits goes a long way when showing off a lady on the dance floor) got voted off and they will seemingly be at it again if these quotes from a BBC spokesperson are anything to go by:

"There were a lot of people at the BBC who watched in horror on Sunday night, like viewers did.

“Having two black people in the bottom two who hadn’t even performed badly was a very bad look for us."

Ummmmm..... excuse me, for stating the bleeding obvious here but the reason Come Dancing lost it's popularity was because no one could understand the voting. And so they rejig the format, involve the audience and because the results don't match the PC image the BBC wants to project, they start fiddling about with the rules.

Isn't that how broadcasters got into such terrible toruble with rigged quizes and voting scams? And isn't that the reason the BBC banned such innocous competitions as Challenge Lauro on their website?

Even funnier is that the Human Rights Commision people say that they will be looking at the matter to see if there is racism going on.

So let's assume they do find there is racsim - because they are bound to, if only to keep themselves in well paid jobs. What exactly do they propose doing about? Checking on every person who voted to ensure that they have passed some sort of anti-racism exam? Setting a quota? Monitoring the voting to see if their is a pattern devloping of 'racists' in Tunbridge Wells and pulling the plug on the exchange? Or maybe they could just declare the winner, selected by a panel of non whites and white liberals at the beginning of the series, and then run the show as normal on the grounds that the money is going to charity.

Here's a thing - instead of wasting their time on this - why don't the Human Rights Commision do some real work - like for instance enforcing the Disability Discrimination Act so it actually applies to the mentally ill, or dealing with discrimination in social housing, or tackling the BBC on why it persists with Woman's Hour, when there is not a correspondending Men's Hour? You know? The sort of pointless bullshit that this tossers are actually supposed to be dealing with.

No actually even funnier than this piece of nonsense is the quote from an unnamed friend of Heather Small - a close pal no less - who said:

“There’s definitely something in this. There may be institutional racism at work in the public vote.”

If this person wanted to use fashionable meaningless buzz words - why didn't they say 'not fit for purpose'? Or 'global economy'? Or 'I never did any favours for a Russian billionaire?

Is there any proof? Is this person accusing the BBC? Or whoever is running the voting?

Because forgive me, but the public is not an institution - the public is the public - so clearly they are accusing an organsiation and that organistion can only be the BBC. And they have already said that this is not good for their PC image, so it is highly doubtful if they are the ones rigging the competition.

But let's face it there isn't racism at work here - well not in the sense that a nobody like John Regis means (and it is ironic that he comes from athletics which has practically no competitors who aren't black, so is there racism at work there? Using his logic the balck athletes should have their shoe laces tied together - or perhaps there could be a graded system in which in the 100 metres the white run 92, the Chinese 89 etc).

The racism lies in the promotion of people beyond their popularity for the sake of quotas, and because those booking the acts have believed the hype of hopeful agents desperate to relaunch a fading stars career - none of these people are exactly on the up - it's this or Children in Need for most of them.

Yes Don Warrington probably is a better dancer than John Sergeant. But people will vote for John Seargeant because his is funny, not pretending to be something that he is not, and seems to be enjoying himself. He will not get anywhere near the final, for the very simple reaosn that as the weeks go on the moves get more spectacular and I somehow doubt he will be up to throwing the woman round his shoulders and through his legs - bless him.

And Don Warrington may be a very successful actor - or so the publicity would have you believe - but the time he was at his peek of popularity was back in the seventies when he was playing Philip in Rising Damp - and the John Regis' of the world have long since consigned his perfomance to the dustbin of history because they disapproved of that too - for idiotic reasons, seeing as Rising Damp was one of the most brilliant comedy shows ever to be shown on television, a classic of comedia-del-Arte, brilliantly acted, coupled with the savage love of the great comedies like Steptoe and Son or Reginald Perrin - and to a lesser extent Only Fools and Horses.

But since then who has heard much of Don Warrington? (He does a lot in the theatre darling - I belive his Othello was a sight to behold) (Which is another thing that puzzles me, Othello is said to be a Moor, which means he is from North Africa - so why do they always have a black man playing the part? Not least because under the US definition of race, North Africans are fully entitled to self describe themselves as caucasian. And sure no doubt there are referances to balckness in the play, but equally Helena - or is it Hermia - in the Midsummer Night's Dream describes herself as an Ethiop but that is not a part that is automatically ring fences as a black woman by the censors at the Arts Council)

Or indeed Heather Small?

Is it any wonder that when people come to spend their hard earned money on bothering to vote they vote for people they actually know. John Seargeant is a regular face in the news and Have I Got News - and the other fella is on GMTV.

And what are we saying here anyway? That Black people have natural rythem? I thought that was one of the verbotten phrases/notions.

And something else should not be overlooked here.

Exactly the same row broke out over Big Brother. With claims that a black person could never win that show because the voters were white and white people are racist - forgive me here, but can anyone name a country in which the population is predominently black, which has anyone other than a black person running it? - But I digress - yes so Big Brother had the exact same row, and they then rigged the show so that Shilpa Shetty could win - before you say anything, I refer you back to an incident with Jade Goodie's mother shortly after the chicken incident, in which Shilpa Shetty gave a bravado performance of racism (ok there were none of the key-phrases that got Jade Goody evicted - but then the PC brigade haven't got any key-phases for non-white racism so how could there be?)

Anywho....

The point is that from the moment the debate broke out about black people can't win Big Brother, the show has lost viewers and has gone down the path of the freak show which is the recourse of all failing programs on television - either that or the format is sold to the BBC for a large sum of money, and the BBC is too stoopid to know that it is being sold damaged goods - a la Vanessa and Jonathon Ross.

The debate is totally pointless: a) because it isn't true, and b) because it totally overlooks the fact that reality television is a process of weeding out the person who you dislike the least. Oh sure the spin is that it is a popularity contest but let's face it, by the end of the run people are sick of the sight of all of them.

And here's a thing, if people like John Regis are so concerned about the subject, then why don't they spend Saturday evening redialling the number to make sure that their prefered candidate - based on the colour of their skin stay in - or ringing the number to vote out the person without their skin colour (I don't have a television so I don't know how the voting works - I tend to watch a few clips on Utube during the week - and funnily enough, despite the way the story is being spun, I thought Don Warrington was awful - his hands were limp, he moved like a sack of spuds and he looked like he was sucking a lemon - and as for Heather Small I can't say I have seen her because she falls into the catagory of 'who the fuck is that? Life's too short to bother' - which includes most of the women except for Cheri Lungi - who is getting worse imo (she's getting far too carried away with the success she had early on and getting the idea that she is a dancer) and a lot of the men).

Oh and I nearly forgot - didn't Denis Lewis come second in the first series? She's black. So someone must have been voting for her. I can't say I know who beat her, but I suspect it was a man - which is actually perhaps more of an issue. Because I suspect that a lot of the people who vote are women, and in a straight choice women will always pick a man over a woman (excuse the pun).

Actually I suspect that what really lies behind this whole thing is the publicity machine of the X-Factor - which I gather is slipping in the ratings and is desperate to kill off it's rival.

Last week there was the stories about how Bruce Forsyth is past it. This week it's racism. Next week it will be something else.

And all because ITV is stuck with a lame format - you can tell this by all the planted stories about Cheryl Cole - that used to be family viewing, but is now really only bait for teenagers and tone deaf.

The simple fact is that Strictly Come Dancing is proper family entertainment and ITV can't stand it. Compare the viewing figures with Dancing On Ice With The B-List Celebs - or whatever the show is called - and there is no comparison.

Of course the BBC will cave in, get rid of Bruce, bring in some 'multicultural faces' (Lenny Hanry springs to mind - but let's not get into the whole debate about when he was funny - because as we know Winston and condensed milk was racist stereotyping - despite it being funny because it drew on his own experience - whereas all that other stuff he does about Jamaican grandfathers is not funny because he hasn't got a clue what he is talking about), rig the voting, probably bring in some new 'culturally sensitive dances', and watch the viewing figures plummet. And then wonder why they are not getting an audience at that time on a Saturday.

At which point I happened to see Harry Hill on Utube the other day and witnessed the Hole in Wall show. And then there is the lottery. Or Casualty.

No doubt the Human Rights commision has approved all of these shows - and no doubt they are being slipped a back hander from Sky to do so - because if anything is an advertisment for two hours of the Simpsons it is shite like this.

peace:)