Each year on the BBC’s Strictly Come Dancing, a consistent trend has emerged in the results from the public vote: black and minority ethnic celebrities are voted off much sooner than white contestants. The current series is no exception, with Melvin Odoom and Tameka Empson both making early exits.
A common response to the suggestion that black and minority ethnic celebrities leave the competition early is to point out that both Alesha Dixon (of Jamaican and English descent) and Mark Ramprakash (of Indian-Caribbean and English descent) won the contest in 2007 and 2006 respectively; indeed, Ore Oduba is still in this year’s finals, despite being twice in the bottom two. But these arguments run contrary to the data.
Our analysis (which has yet to be published) of past results supports the claim that white celebrities are more likely to remain in the competition, keeping other factors constant. Estimates from previous series suggest that, after controlling for where the couple have come in the judges’ scoring, an ethnic minority celebrity is statistically significantly more likely to be in the bottom two and therefore to have received a lower public vote.
The odds of this occurring increase by 71% compared to a white celebrity, all else being constant. The analysis also suggests that being a woman increases the odds of being in the bottom two by 66%, and being both black and female by 83%.
Strictly is a primetime, family-friendly show which is in its 14th series in the UK, has been exported to 40 other countries and has won a number of major TV awards. It is designed to promote family values and a sense of British national identity, which is largely constructed through a prism of whiteness. This is an insidious process and not always something of which we are conscious (although there are also specific examples: Anton Du Beke, the nation’s favourite pro-dancer, referred to his celebrity partner as a “Paki” off screen in 2009).
The recent proliferation of The Great British … TV shows (The Great British Bake Off, The Great British Menu, The Great British Sewing Bee) is an example of how this construction of national identity takes place. These are shows that represent both British and traditionally white, middle class values, and they are designed for enjoyment and escapism. While some might argue that race shouldn’t be brought into discussion of these popular TV shows, the point is that our enjoyment of them is only possible if we indulge in a kind of colonial amnesia.
This amnesia is enabled by a thin veneer of multiculturalism. So, for instance, when Nadiya Hussain won The Great British Bake Off, the country rushed to congratulate her and all involved, because this suggested we had finally overcome our long struggles with racial integration. Ironically though, it demonstrated the opposite. A fuss was made precisely because it is not the norm for a Bangladeshi Briton, born in Luton, to be seen as a baker, or to win a (Great British) cookery show.
Hussain’s win allowed people to celebrate their own tolerance at someone from an ethnic minority being welcomed in to the white establishment, which is what, in our view, these shows represent. The ballroom, of course, is traditionally a white space in British history, associated with well-recognised hierarchies of gender and class.
How can we interpret the results? It is clearly not possible to say for certain that Strictly’s voting patterns are because of racist British attitudes. But what we can say is that, perhaps surprisingly, in neither the US nor Australia (two countries that have most successfully imported the show outside the UK), were similar results found with regards to race. Although being a woman did increase the chances of being voted out early in Australia (to a lesser extent than in the UK), being of black or minority ethnic background had no impact on the popularity of a contestant in the US or Australia. So this does seem to be a peculiarity of Britain.
We would suggest that Strictly and this genre of programming reflect a distinctly “British” race narrative; a narrative that is at odds with multiculturalism and ethnic diversity. The public’s voting in the contest, and the results from this voting behaviour, reflect modern-day Britain: presenting a veneer of inclusivity to hide the more troubling racial undertones.