Strictly Come Dancing has long been considered the jewel of British television. Known for its laughter, dazzling performances, and heartwarming celebrity journeys, it has consistently drawn millions of loyal viewers since its premiere in 2005.
However, the once-golden BBC series is now battling waves of controversy that have forced fans to question the truth behind the smiles.
As the show heads into its 21st season, returning on 20 September, internal tensions and scandalous allegations have started to surface.
The BBC’s beloved ballroom program, previously celebrated as a family-friendly spectacle, faces accusations ranging from bullying and harassment to inappropriate behavior and substance abuse. Well-known faces have been dropped, and previously admired professionals have become central figures in investigations.
The chain of events has transformed Strictly’s backstage environment into one dominated by scrutiny and criticism. It is no longer only about who lifts the glitterball trophy but about how the production manages an unfolding string of damaging headlines.
Giovanni Pernice Axed After Bullying Allegations
One of the first major blows came when professional dancer Giovanni Pernice was accused of bullying by his 2023 celebrity partner, Sherlock actor Amanda Abbington.
After only a few weeks on the show, Abbington withdrew, citing personal reasons, but later claimed that her exit was due to “inappropriate and mean behavior” from Pernice during training.
Following an extensive investigation, the BBC upheld her complaints, confirming evidence of verbal bullying and harassment, although it ruled out claims of physical aggression. Pernice was officially removed from the Strictly lineup in June 2024.
Abbington described the findings as a “vindication” and thanked the BBC for acknowledging her experience. Pernice, through his spokesperson, denied any malicious intent, expressing relief that the inquiry did not find evidence of violent behavior.
Despite this, the scandal significantly impacted his public image. Pernice, once a fan favorite known for his passionate choreography, became synonymous with toxic workplace rumors and controversy.
His case also reopened broader questions about the pressure, discipline, and power imbalance between celebrity contestants and seasoned professional dancers.
Graziano Di Prima and the Zara McDermott Incident
Just when the dust began to settle, another controversy erupted. Weeks after Pernice’s removal, dancer Graziano Di Prima was dropped from Strictly following disturbing allegations made by 2023 contestant Zara McDermott. Reports revealed that during one rehearsal, Di Prima had kicked McDermott, leaving her deeply shaken.
Di Prima publicly apologized, admitting that his excessive competitiveness might have unintentionally crossed boundaries. He emphasized that the incident was not reflective of his character but a mistake made during an intense period of training. The BBC, however, took decisive action and removed him from the professional cast.
Strictly Come Dancing (Credit: BBC)
McDermott later shared her emotional turmoil, revealing that she had feared public backlash and “victim-blaming” before going public. Videos of certain training room incidents reportedly surfaced, confirming parts of her account. Her courage encouraged others to speak about the stress and physical demands behind the dazzling televised routines.
The case prompted the BBC to introduce new welfare protocols, including assigning chaperones to training rooms and deploying specialized producers to monitor interactions between professionals and celebrities during rehearsals.
Former Contestants Speak Out About Rehearsal Pressure
As allegations spread, more former contestants began revisiting their own Strictly experiences. Paralympian Will Bayley, who competed in 2019, shared that relentless rehearsal demands left him with a severe knee injury.
He stated that his partner, Janette Manrara, was supportive but described immense production pressure to perform high-risk choreography repeatedly, even through pain.
Bayley’s career-threatening injury forced him to withdraw from the competition six weeks in. “It’s something I will never fully recover from,” he said, expressing that the show’s quest for perfection sometimes ignored physical limits.
Former Love Island presenter Laura Whitmore also broke her silence, claiming she felt “gaslit” when she raised concerns about Pernice’s behavior during her 2016 season. She said she was dismissed at the time, but the later incidents validated her feelings.
In response, the BBC implemented mandatory conduct and sensitivity workshops for all professional dancers and producers, in an effort to rebuild public trust and ensure a safer environment for everyone involved in the show.
Wynne Evans and Jamie Borthwick: Scandal on Tour
The live Strictly Come Dancing tour, once an extension of the show’s festive spectacle, was not immune from headlines either. Welsh opera singer Wynne Evans, famed for his Go Compare commercials, came under fire for inappropriate conduct during the 2024 tour.
Footage from live shows depicted him touching his partner Katya Jones uncomfortably, leading fans to question his professionalism.
Evans dismissed the clips as a “misinterpreted joke” and described the online stories as exaggerated. However, matters worsened when he made an “inappropriate remark” during a promotional event, leading the BBC to remove him from the official tour.
Adding to the chaos, a leaked backstage video showed EastEnders actor Jamie Borthwick joking about a sex toy allegedly sent by Evans. The footage spread across private chat groups before reaching BBC executives. Both Evans and Borthwick faced disciplinary actions, and Evans’s BBC Radio Wales contract was not renewed.
Borthwick’s troubles deepened after he was accused of using an ableist slur during filming in Blackpool. The BBC immediately suspended him, citing “unacceptable language” contrary to its values. He later apologized and was permanently removed from EastEnders, ending his 19-year run on the show.
Drug Allegations and Criminal Investigations
As Strictly’s reputation faltered, the BBC confirmed in August 2025 that it was investigating allegations of drug use among two unnamed participants. The case was referred by the legal representatives of a former contestant. Law firm Pinsent Masons was hired to lead the inquiry, though details remain confidential.
Compounding the show’s problems, reports surfaced weeks later of a former Strictly star’s arrest on suspicion of rape and non-consensual photo sharing.
Metropolitan Police officials confirmed the arrest of a man in his thirties but withheld his identity while the investigation continued. The news drew outrage and concern from fans and cast members alike, increasing the pressure on the BBC to ensure accountability and transparency.
Can the Show Rebuild Its Image?
For nearly two decades, Strictly Come Dancing represented joy, inclusion, and community all wrapped in music, sparkle, and storytelling through dance.
Yet, the past two years have forced the BBC to confront serious cultural problems within its production model. The 2023 and 2024 scandals marked a turning point, exposing a side of the show the audience never saw.
Despite the adversity, the BBC remains determined to restore credibility. With stricter HR oversight, counseling support for participants, and revised contracts emphasizing mental health, the network aims to regain public trust before Season 21 premieres.
Whether viewers will separate the sensational from the celebratory remains to be seen. What is certain, however, is that behind every glittering samba and smiling judge, Strictly is now a production under the brightest, and possibly harshest, spotlight it has ever faced.
Few films this year have generated the kind of global attention that The Voice of Hind Rajab has. Directed by Tunisian filmmaker Kaouther Ben Hania, the Arabic-language feature earned the Silver Lion at the Venice Film Festival and shattered records with an unprecedented 23-minute standing ovation.
Critics hailed it as one of the most powerful cinematic portrayals of the Gaza tragedy, calling it “essential viewing” for its emotional weight and artistic brilliance.
The film follows the true story of six-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab, whose desperate phone call to emergency responders from a bombed car shocked the world in early 2024. Hind and her family were trying to flee Gaza City when their car was shelled, killing her relatives.
Hind initially survived and spoke with the Palestinian Red Crescent Society for over an hour before being killed along with the paramedics who tried to rescue her.
Ben Hania’s film skillfully weaves together documentary realism and dramatization, including audio from Hind’s haunting final call. Viewers described the experience as devastating, yet profoundly human.
Global critics celebrated the film as a landmark of political cinema. Tunisia selected it as its official entry for the 2026 Oscars, and it has since performed strongly in several international markets.
Yet, despite its critical acclaim and support from industry titans such as Brad Pitt, Joaquin Phoenix, Rooney Mara, Alfonso Cuaron, and Jonathan Glazer, The Voice of Hind Rajab still lacks a U.S. distributor.
Why Hollywood Is Hesitating
Under normal circumstances, such an acclaimed film would be snatched up within days. It has star producers, glowing reviews, festival prestige, and commercial promise. Yet, weeks after its Venice triumph, it remains unsold in the U.S. According to insiders, distributors and streaming platforms are shying away out of fear of political backlash.
One prominent U.S. distributor admitted privately that “buyers are passing out of fear and politics.” Another described the situation as “unprecedented for a film of this caliber.”
These hesitations are rooted less in economics and more in optics. In a climate charged by political polarization and media scrutiny, few companies want to handle a movie centered around Palestinian suffering.
This reluctance speaks to a broader industry issue. Streamers and studios are increasingly reluctant to back projects that could be construed as politically volatile. Even with growing international interest in Middle Eastern cinema, U.S. distributors worry about social media storms and accusations of bias.
One arthouse executive expressed frustration: “We loved the film, but we realized that positioning it properly during awards season would be nearly impossible without massive backlash.”
The asking price, reportedly in the mid-six-figure range, is typical for a high-profile foreign film. Yet that alone cannot explain the hesitation.
The real obstacle appears to be Hollywood’s discomfort with the political ramifications. As one industry insider put it, “Art is supposed to challenge, but fear has replaced courage in today’s market.”
Artistic Courage and Political Context
The controversy surrounding The Voice of Hind Rajab underscores how art and politics often clash in today’s entertainment industry. Ben Hania, a two-time Oscar nominee known for The Man Who Sold His Skin and Four Daughters, drew international attention for addressing human stories from the Arab world with rare emotional precision.
The Voice of Hind Rajab (Credit: Mime Films and Tanit Films)
With this latest film, she channels the agony of Gaza through the innocence of a child’s voice and the silence that follows.
Critics credit the director for avoiding propaganda and instead focusing on individual human despair. The use of real recordings enhances the authenticity, turning the film into both a cinematic experience and a historical document.
Still, some critics have demanded that the film “contextualize” the events of October 7, 2023, the day Hamas launched its deadly attack on Israel.
Supporters of the film argue that such demands misunderstand the director’s intention. “The film is about one little girl’s tragic story,” a source close to the production said. “To insist that every Palestinian story must explain global politics is deeply unfair. The purpose is empathy, not explanation.”
Ben Hania herself has avoided making overt political statements about the film’s reception but has reiterated that her goal is to preserve Hind Rajab’s memory through truth, not ideology.
The director’s vision has resonated across Europe, Asia, and parts of the Middle East, where the film’s limited runs sold out and sparked emotional discussions about war, art, and responsibility.
Industry Reactions and Fear of Controversy
Despite its high profile, The Voice of Hind Rajab has exposed a deep divide within Hollywood regarding politically charged projects. Many executives and backers are wary of the backlash faced by productions that address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
With President Trump’s administration taking a firm pro-Israel stance, several studios have chosen silence over participation.
Former Lionsgate executive Patrick Wachsberger recently commented at a film industry panel that “today, a movie like Paradise Now would struggle to find theatrical release.” That remark reflects the atmosphere in which distributors operate, where creative decisions are often overshadowed by political caution.
One senior festival executive described the situation bluntly: “We’re back to an age of fear. Studios are terrified to offend the wrong people or attract political scrutiny. Even if the president doesn’t personally intervene, distributors prefer to stay neutral rather than become targets.”
Meanwhile, smaller distributors face their own dilemma. Acquiring the film would require not only financial commitment but also a willingness to withstand online abuse and organized pressure campaigns. “You don’t just need a marketing team,” said one European buyer. “You need an army to defend it.”
Some suggest that The Voice of Hind Rajab may follow in the footsteps of past political films that took the self-distribution route. If that happens, the team behind it may rely on grassroots campaigns, international solidarity movements, and university screenings to connect with audiences directly.
Global Praise and Hollywood Silence
While Hollywood hesitates, the rest of the world has embraced The Voice of Hind Rajab. Italian distributor I Wonder Pictures launched it locally, achieving an impressive $500,000 opening weekend and later crossing the $1 million mark. Critics labeled it “a rare union of moral weight and cinematic beauty.”
Audiences in Europe showed that even heavy material can draw attention when framed authentically. Meanwhile, in the U.S., cultural divisions and corporate fear continue to suppress risk-taking in storytelling.
The irony is glaring: a film that aims to amplify a silenced voice has itself been silenced by the very industry that prides itself on free expression.
At a time when independent filmmaking has become one of the last refuges for social commentary, the film’s rejection by major U.S. buyers highlights the uncomfortable truth about self-censorship in an era of political sensitivity.
Will Hind Rajab’s Voice Be Heard in America?
There remains hope that the film will eventually reach American audiences. A few independent distributors are reportedly in quiet talks to secure the rights. Others suggest a limited festival circuit run followed by a digital release.
Whether through self-distribution or a late acquisition, Ben Hania’s masterpiece has achieved something no marketing campaign could buy: global conversation. It has forced the industry and audiences alike to confront uncomfortable questions about what kinds of stories deserve to be told and who gets to decide.
Fear may be keeping The Voice of Hind Rajab out of U.S. theaters for now, but its impact continues to resonate far beyond borders. For those who have seen it, Hind’s story isn’t just a chapter in history, it’s a reminder that truth and compassion remain the most daring acts of all.
