What has the world come to when the top news story in the UK is John Sergeant quitting Strictly Come Dancing?

If you don't know, it would be a massive understatement to say that John isn't the best dancer in the world. He has consistently come bottom of the judges' leader board for the last nine weeks, only to be saved by the public. 

OK, that's all well and good. The public adores him, and it's not hard to see why: he's different, quirky, and he takes the judges' harsh comments dignity. Every sane person knows these 'reality' TV shows are little more than popularity contests and that the people of the UK love the underdog, but COME ON, it's a DANCE / Entertainment contest on BBC. Just like the ridiculously overblown incident with Ross and Brand, this has been blown out of all proportions. And turned into something unpleasant.

Sure, it's a dance contest, but John with his unique style has made me laugh week on week. His routines are incredibly amusing and, like so many others, I'm sure he brings a smile to the face of the nine million who watches the show (OK six million, the other few million are the ones raving about it being a dance contest).

There's no reason I can think of why there would be so much vitriol in the press that would force anyone to step down. If he won the show it would be because he's popular. Sure that's probably wrong as so many of the other contestants are working so very hard to perfect their routines, but if the system isn't working, then change it next year! You can't have a popularity show where the public phone in to vote and then BLAME the public when you don't agree with the results. You just make it so the public's vote has diminished impact.

I can see why people might say 'but it's a dance contest, so the best dancers should be in the final', but these shows never reflect reality. Had Will Young not spoken out at Simon Cowell, he'd never have been heard of again - he would have faded into the background and been forgotten.

And it's exactly the same with John Sergeant. It makes me furious that a simple dance show gets top news billing, has derogatory remarks posted across the newspapers, and basically vilifies and accuses John of being unfortunate / popular enough to be still in a dance contest when a less popular dancer would have been sent packing weeks before. It's like they're trying to blame him or make it somehow his fault! 

I think we're turning into a nation of hysterical over reactionaries - with the war being instigated by the newspapers that seem to revel in stirring up contention, even on the most innocuous of television shows. It happened with the ultra brainless Jade Goody; it happened again with Ross and Brand, and I'm sure we'll only need to wait until the furore dies down before the tabloids will find their next victim when it'll start all over again...

Because the cast list for this year's I'm a Celebrity (Get Me Out of Here) is in! The show is a crummy reality-esque TV show in the UK that puts celebrities in ridiculously icky situations in the jungle. It's a bit like Fear Factor (without the fear factor).

But while there's no fear factor, there might be a warp factor, because, of interest to geeks everywhere is that George Takei (Mr. Sulu) from Star Trek will be among the ten celebrities subjected to various indignities in the jungle. 

I've never really watched this show, but I might tune in to see how George handles the transition from the Enterprise, to Heroes, to eating kangaroo penises (I'd say it wouldn't be the first time, but that would be crass and WAY beneath me).

The full line up this year is: Esther Rantzen, Robert Kilroy-Silk, Simon Webbe (from boy band Blue), Carly Zucker (WAG), Martina Navratilova; TV presenter Dani Behr; ex-EastEnder Joe Swash, Deputy Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Brian Paddick, and glamour model Nicola McLean.

So there you go, another year of Z-List celebs and just barely somebodies...

I've been going on about how utterly dire the new season of Knight Rider is with its non-existent storyline and shallower than shallow - well - everything else. And now we find that the show has been commissioned for a full season, but they are dumping the whole 'Terrorist of the Week' plot and going for simpler (as if that's even possible) stories involving Mike and Kitt helping regular people.

I can just see it now - high octane action adventure in mediocresville:

Old Woman: Dearie me. My cat is stuck up that tree.

Mike: No problem, old woman. Kitt, turbo boost! Fire lazers - let's get those bad guys!

Yep. That's a sure fire way to boost the ratings... Mike helping school kids with their maths homework (with a backstory that their teacher is Asian, so they MUST be a terrorist).

If there was a huge woosh and cat, tree, and old lady, were crushed under Kitt's clumsy turbo boost, there might be hope for the show yet for pure (evil) comedy value.

I do wonder WHO commissions these shows? They obviously cost millions per episode, so why don't they check out the scripts  beforehand, or, better still, get someone who can actually write and who has vision, on board before they lay down their cash? It all seems incredible to me that this show has managed some seven episodes, never mind twenty two. There's just not enough story to fill one 45 minute slot.

They're also 'rebooting' the show (again after that dismal pilot) and this time getting rid of the "bird at the base" (Sydney Poitier, who did approximately bugger all, anyway) and the two tech-heads (the sexy Asian and the geeky one).

But unless this show majorly changes direction, it will continue to see ratings plummet (I know, again). It needs a stronger storyline, some decent acting, and some fresh diesel in its engine, but, judging from past experience, the writers will use unleaded and the same old plotlines, which is a sure fire way to condemn this show from the fast lane and onto the used car forecourt.