Rather more worrying is the news that a bidding war is about to break out over the future of Neighbours. Its contract with the BBC runs out next year and ITV and Channel 5 are both bidding for it. (Whoops, just spilled water on my keyboard - does that matter, do you think?) If either of BBC's rivals get it you know what that will mean: adverts.
I'm currently watching Pie in the Sky repeats on ITV3 or 4. Originally shown on BBC, the fifty minute programme now has at least 3, and possibly 4, commercial breaks. It's enough to drive you around the bend. I am becoming very curmudgeonly and refuse to watch ITV unless it's something I really really want to see. (Pie in the Sky is pleasantly entertaining and something to cwch up in front of.)
If they do that to Neighbours, it'll be the end for this viewer. Ridiculous plots, bad acting, and chronic storylines are one thing; adverts something entirely unbearable.
Which sums up most of the characters in The Apprentice. If you haven't seen this, it's described as a 'job interview with a difference'. Sir Alan Sugar, businessman worth approximately £800,000,000, sets tasks for a group of hopeful entrepreneurs who all want the chance to become his apprentice, with a six-figure salary. The applicants live in a house together and are divided into two teams. At the end of each week the losing team - the one that makes the least money - has to face Sir Alan and one of them is fired.
This is the third or fourth series of the show and is strangely addictive.
Thinking about it after last night's show, I decided there are a number of things that disturb me.
1) The applicants have all given up good jobs and are supposed to be la creme de la creme. Heaven help British business if that is the case.
2) The ease with which every one of them is willing to stab their so-called partners is scary. There seems to be no limit to what they will do to get the job. Which leads me to ...
3) Last night the girls decided to sell kisses to raise money. A few in the team weren't happy about it; one of the others said it was a struggle between her morals and the money. The money won.
The back-stabbing and bitching I can understand: if it looked as if I were being made the scapegoat when I didn't think it was my fault, I would undoubtedly do the same thing. (The only difference is that I wouldn't go on the show and do it in view of millions of people: I don't want people to know how horrid I really am!)
I suppose I was more disappointed that the girls resorted to the oldest profession to try to raise more money than the other team. Am I taking it too seriously? I don't know.
It's obvious that Sir Alan, in his decision about whom to sack, will be aware of audience figures, and that the 'characters', the ones the viewers will feel strongly about, will be kept in as long as possible. Last series he ended up with the best person in my opinion. Although she went on to resign within the year. Though, really, why anyone would want to work for him is a mystery to me.
Oh, and now it's time for Neighbours.
